Poll: Where Will Heatley Go?

Like I said...don't be surprised if Heatley isn't moved before the fall.

Bryan Murray has said he is not going to let Dany go on Dany's terms...but on Bryan's terms.

asq2 wrote:

marakh wrote:Anaheim has arguably the best line in the league, why would they trade PErry who has way less cap hit?

Because we asked politely.

Can we ask Getzlaf politely too?

Where will Heatley go? Diddle himself?

I don't care where, as long as we get our pacakage.

davetherave wrote:Like I said...don't be surprised if Heatley isn't moved before the fall.

Bryan Murray has said he is not going to let Dany go on Dany's terms...but on Bryan's terms.

If it goes that long, I'd love to see Murray wait until the trade market is hot again....at the deadline. He'd fetch us the crown jewels then :D

hemlock wrote:

davetherave wrote:Like I said...don't be surprised if Heatley isn't moved before the fall.

Bryan Murray has said he is not going to let Dany go on Dany's terms...but on Bryan's terms.

If it goes that long, I'd love to see Murray wait until the trade market is hot again....at the deadline. He'd fetch us the crown jewels then :D

The problem is that the ultra-competitive teams are taking on a non-rental and will have to dismantle much of their team in the off-season to accomodate it, or deal him again.

Not that that isn't necessarily the case now. Certainly, Heatley would probably be going to lower seeded, upstart playoff teams. But would he waive for that or hold out for the contenders?

Just like I wish Heatley had let Murray know this before this year's deadline.

I still think it will be a strong prospect, a 1st round pick, and either a top player or another pick/prospect that Murray will turn into a top player.

I'd like to get minimal salary in return, but I suspect we may have to take some. Not necessarily Penner-esque salary dumps, but part of the package may need to be a more proven player so that the other team can fit Heatley in.

I've thought about this everyday and I honestly think it's going to be San Jose now. The teams with budgets lower then the actual cap are going to be hesitant about the 7.5M cap hit even though we are talking about a 50 goal scorer.

The more I think about it the more I think that it's going to be a competitive team looking for a bit of a change (ie. San Jose and possibly Calgary)

asq2 wrote:I'd like to get minimal salary in return, but I suspect we may have to take some. Not necessarily Penner-esque salary dumps, but part of the package may need to be a more proven player so that the other team can fit Heatley in.

I don't want to sound like a smart *** but I think it's guaranteed we are going to take back almost as much cap space as we are giving up.

Murray even mentioned it in his news conference the other day. That he could be looking a deal where he gets a defensemen and a forward back for that same 7.5M cap hit. We all hope to get blue chip prospects and a top 5 pick but reality says that's probably not going to happen even though I wish it would.

Urkie wrote:
I don't want to sound like a smart *** but I think it's guaranteed we are going to take back almost as much cap space as we are giving up.

Murray even mentioned it in his news conference the other day. That he could be looking a deal where he gets a defensemen and a forward back for that same 7.5M cap hit. We all hope to get blue chip prospects and a top 5 pick but reality says that's probably not going to happen even though I wish it would.

But who though? That's what's driving me nuts right now. :^^^^: Burns + Shultz. Make us take Shultz off their hands? Not that he's bad, but he's not worth what he's getting paid IMO.

Marleau?

Frustrating to wait...

SpezDispenser wrote:But who though? That's what's driving me nuts right now. :^^^^: Burns + Shultz. Make us take Shultz off their hands? Not that he's bad, but he's not worth what he's getting paid IMO.

Marleau?

Frustrating to wait...

It's interesting for sure and frustrating at the same time....urghhhh

My thought is that if we are dealing with San Jose then it's Michalek and not Marleau.

A good package for us would be something like Heatley and Picard/Lee for Michalek and Ehrhoff. That's the type of deal I think we're going to get.

SpezDispenser wrote:

Urkie wrote:
I don't want to sound like a smart *** but I think it's guaranteed we are going to take back almost as much cap space as we are giving up.

Murray even mentioned it in his news conference the other day. That he could be looking a deal where he gets a defensemen and a forward back for that same 7.5M cap hit. We all hope to get blue chip prospects and a top 5 pick but reality says that's probably not going to happen even though I wish it would.

But who though? That's what's driving me nuts right now. :^^^^: Burns + Shultz. Make us take Shultz off their hands? Not that he's bad, but he's not worth what he's getting paid IMO.

Marleau?

Frustrating to wait...

He said defenceman and forward back for $7.5M?

Brent Burns - Cap hit: $3.55 million
PM Bouchard - Cap hit: $4.08 million

Darn. We're 130K off there.

Seriously, make it so.

Heatley/Lee/2nd for Bouchard/Burns/1st.

asq2 wrote:He said defenceman and forward back for $7.5M?

Brent Burns - Cap hit: $3.55 million
PM Bouchard - Cap hit: $4.08 million

Darn. We're 130K off there.

Seriously, make it so.

Heatley/Lee/2nd for Bouchard/Burns/1st.

That's pretty good but I don't think the Wild would want to part with Burns. His contract is an absolute steal.

asq2 wrote:He said defenceman and forward back for $7.5M?

Brent Burns - Cap hit: $3.55 million
PM Bouchard - Cap hit: $4.08 million

Darn. We're 130K off there.

Seriously, make it so.

Heatley/Lee/2nd for Bouchard/Burns/1st.

I know, I thought about that earlier. I would prefer Columbus' 2nd rounder, but man, what a return that would be.

Here is the controversy about Burns that has been mentioned elsewhere. It stems more from his agent, who is also Gaborik's agent:

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wild/43188787.html

Ron Salcer, best known in these parts as the agent for free agent Marian Gaborik, accused the Wild of negligence Friday by allowing one of his other clients, defenseman Brent Burns, to play six weeks with a concussion.

Burns, 24, was injured in practice Jan. 26 but wasn't shut down until March 7. He is still affected with severe post-concussion syndrome.

"I met with Brent in L.A. [March 6]," Salcer said. "We're having lunch with him and [fellow client Derek Boogaard] and he's telling me about when he hit his head six weeks earlier. So I'm listening to him, and I'm incredulous listening to him.

"He's telling me how, 'Ronny, I'm an avid reader and I'm not able to read on the bus anymore. I get headaches that go all around my head. I'm can't sleep. During the game, I'm not focusing. I feel like everything is happening, but I'm reacting slow. I go, 'Brent, are you kidding me? You've got a concussion. You cannot play. You cannot play anymore!'

"He's so loyal to the team, he was afraid. He said, 'I don't want to tell them that. I don't want to burn a bridge.' I said, 'Burn a bridge? They just exploded one on you. You cannot play.'"

Burns was shut down the next day.

"They said he had sinusitis. I mean, come on," Salcer said. "I'm not a doctor, but I've been around the game for over 30 years. It took me three minutes to know that he had a concussion. How they cannot know for six weeks is amazing."

In fact, Salcer put Burns in touch with former North Stars defenseman Jim Johnson, who long suffered from post-concussion syndrome, to convince Burns what he had.

"Brent said, 'I've got that. I've got that. Yeah, I've got that,'" Salcer said.

Tom Lynn, the Wild's acting GM while owner Craig Leipold looks for fired-GM Doug Risebrough's replacement, said, "Burns' symptoms grew over a period of time and there was no initial big collision that would have clued anyone into a concussion. ... The fact Salcer may have pulled him out after Brent had already told us he did not feel up to playing [March 7] is not really relevant to the big picture, which is the Wild's desire for him to be healthy long-term. He is one of our young, core players."

Salcer wasn't pleased with his care even after diagnosis.

For instance, Johnson recommended a neurologist at the nearby Mayo Clinic. Instead, the Wild flew Burns to New England.

However, when a last-second, non-stop flight was more than $1,000, the team flew Burns through Chicago in a middle seat.

Asked if he's confident Burns will recover, Salcer said, "We don't have a crystal ball ... but the doctor said if he shuts her down for two or three months, doesn't think, doesn't read, eventually it'll heal."

Burns also played through and received injections for a shoulder injury that needs to be surgically repaired.

"I wasn't pleased with the whole order of events there," Salcer said. "I mean, you take a guy that's looked upon as the whole package, maybe a Norris Trophy, All-Star candidate after the year he had last year, and instead of growing him, you make him a mediocre forward. I never understood that. But Brent's a team guy. He's going to do whatever they ask him to do."

Salcer said this all comes back to Risebrough.

"It starts at the top. He's the manager, and he's got that old-school, you've got to play through everything [attitude]," Salcer said. "They did the same thing to Marian before he had hip surgery."

With Risebrough and coach Jacques Lemaire gone, Salcer was asked if this would sway Gaborik to returning.

"I called Tom Lynn personally in November, spoke with Tom and said, 'Would you be interested in reopening negotiations with Marian.' I'm still waiting for him to return that phone call. I never heard back ever," Salcer said.

"That's in November. And so, the season went. And now when you look at July 1 on the horizon where we can talk to every team in the league, certainly we have to take that opportunity very seriously and we will. Having said that, should the organization want to call me, we'll listen to and explore anything. But we certainly see July 1 in the landscape here."

Lynn said Salcer's "claim may be technically true but misleading." Lynn said he told Salcer that Risebrough would talk to Gaborik personally.

"Doug told Marian that until Marian was healthy and the economy became more stable, there was no use trying to establish a new value," Lynn said.

I am not sure we have to add Lee and the 2nd rounder myself...

I am not ready to give up on Lee myself... and a second. I thought we were looking for a top 6, a d-man and a first for Heater. Not package for package...

I am a big Burns guy, PMB.. not so much. But that is just personal I guess... I realize he is a talent.

You know I just looked at the options on the poll and was mildly surprised not to see '...to hell' as one of the options. Just thought I'd point that out.

I forgot how much (physical) baggage Burns has. That article was enough to make me wary of making a deal for him.

As for the topic at hand, I still feel Edmonton is the one. They have a relatively new owner who wants to show his fans just what he will do to ice a competitive team, they have so many assets, and have been looking for a player of his calibre since Pronger left. It would make a nice story for them that they be on the receiving end of some douchebag wanting out of a city. But hey, if he goes to LA, I will be just as happy, maybe more so.