POLL: Would you trade for Parise?

I'm actually glad there's divide, I had the same issues when it got brought up the other day.

I said no. May have more to do with me not being as high on Parise as others, but until David Rundblad proves he can take Karlsson's place I wouldn't move Erik anyways.

I would definitely trade Karlsson straight-up for Parise, or as part of a package (depending on the other pieces). I'm surprised there's much of a debate. I'd rather try to replace a PMD than to try and find a legit 40 to 50 goal scorer.

I'm not sure it makes sense to trade for Parise now, unless his value is diminished due to him not having a contract. A smarter move might be to wait until his one-year deal expires (assuming he only gets a one-year deal from arbitration), and then throw lots of money at him during free agency (or trade a pick for his rights just prior to free agency).

I said no because I'd be worried about his RFA status and the potential of losing him after the arbitrator gives him a one-year deal. Parise is a fantastic player, but he's not worth Karlsson + the risk of having neither player in a year.

Karlsson for a signed Parise on a mid- or long-term deal that makes sense? In a second.

tim1_2 wrote:
I'm not sure it makes sense to trade for Parise now, unless his value is diminished due to him not having a contract. A smarter move might be to wait until his one-year deal expires (assuming he only gets a one-year deal from arbitration), and then throw lots of money at him during free agency (or trade a pick for his rights just prior to free agency).

Yeah Parise will most likely get a 1-year deal from arbitration and then with our cap space we can throw a big offer down when he's a UFA. Hopefully the team will be billed as an up and come like the Kings by then.

spader wrote:I said no because I'd be worried about his RFA status and the potential of losing him after the arbitrator gives him a one-year deal. Parise is a fantastic player, but he's not worth Karlsson + the risk of having neither player in a year.

Karlsson for a signed Parise on a mid- or long-term deal that makes sense? In a second.

I don't think there's any doubt that a trade would only happen if we had an agreement with Parise on a deal already.

I honestly can't even really believe this is being debated. You are talking about a guy who could walk on to about 27 teams and be the best player on that team.

WOuld you trade Malkin for Karlsson? Yes. It's the exact same question only I think PArise is a better player than Malkin.

NEELY wrote:
WOuld you trade Malkin for Karlsson? Yes. It's the exact same question only I think PArise is a better player than Malkin.

Yes because he's 24 (3 years til UFA), putting him closer in age with our up and coming players plus he's a Cup and Conn Smythe Winner.

Hoags wrote:

NEELY wrote:
WOuld you trade Malkin for Karlsson? Yes. It's the exact same question only I think PArise is a better player than Malkin.

Yes because he's 24 (3 years til UFA), putting him closer in age with our up and coming players plus he's a Cup and Conn Smythe Winner.

Parise is 26...you're really concerned about 2 extra years of age?

I'd rather have Malkin too, but I'd still take Parise for sure.

tim1_2 wrote:I would definitely trade Karlsson straight-up for Parise, or as part of a package (depending on the other pieces). I'm surprised there's much of a debate. I'd rather try to replace a PMD than to try and find a legit 40 to 50 goal scorer.

I'm not sure it makes sense to trade for Parise now, unless his value is diminished due to him not having a contract. A smarter move might be to wait until his one-year deal expires (assuming he only gets a one-year deal from arbitration), and then throw lots of money at him during free agency (or trade a pick for his rights just prior to free agency).

He's put up over 40 once in his career, so that's a stretch.

Obviously he's supremely talented, but I'm not sure moving Karlsson for a winger who is 7 years older is the right move at this point in the rebuild.

I actually believe Parise is a better all around player, but that's an opinion. Fact is both those guys are top 10 players in The NHL.

stempniaksen wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:I would definitely trade Karlsson straight-up for Parise, or as part of a package (depending on the other pieces). I'm surprised there's much of a debate. I'd rather try to replace a PMD than to try and find a legit 40 to 50 goal scorer.

I'm not sure it makes sense to trade for Parise now, unless his value is diminished due to him not having a contract. A smarter move might be to wait until his one-year deal expires (assuming he only gets a one-year deal from arbitration), and then throw lots of money at him during free agency (or trade a pick for his rights just prior to free agency).

He's put up over 40 once in his career, so that's a stretch.

Obviously he's supremely talented, but I'm not sure moving Karlsson for a winger who is 7 years older is the right move at this point in the rebuild.

40 in NJ is pretty impressive. He's a legti 35-40 goal guy, I think that's a fair statement. His all around game is one of the best in The NHL, if not the best.

NEELY wrote:I honestly can't even really believe this is being debated. You are talking about a guy who could walk on to about 27 teams and be the best player on that team.

WOuld you trade Malkin for Karlsson? Yes. It's the exact same question only I think PArise is a better player than Malkin.

It's not the exact same question though. Because Malkin is:

A) Younger
B) Better
C) A center (much more important position)
D) Locked into a deal, no contract worries

Parise is more consistent, it's about the only thing I can give him.

Big Ev wrote:
Parise is 26...you're really concerned about 2 extra years of age?

I'd rather have Malkin too, but I'd still take Parise for sure.

Malkin is a center. #2C problem solved for the forseeable future.

I'd put wingers as the least important category to fill, especially considering we got guys like Silfverberg in waiting.

Legit #1, #2C, top D-men, top PMD, top goalie are way more important.

Yeah I think the 2 year difference is big, the less guys we have in their UFA years the better.

Years down the road, our best players will hit UFA and there will be some hard decisions to be made and some big contracts handed out. Hopefully it won't be as bad as the Blackhawks dismantling(don't be late with your qualifying offers Murray !)

IIRC Parise is a natural centre. So no problem there.

stempniaksen wrote:

NEELY wrote:I honestly can't even really believe this is being debated. You are talking about a guy who could walk on to about 27 teams and be the best player on that team.

WOuld you trade Malkin for Karlsson? Yes. It's the exact same question only I think PArise is a better player than Malkin.

It's not the exact same question though. Because Malkin is:

A) Younger
B) Better
C) A center (much more important position)
D) Locked into a deal, no contract worries

Parise is more consistent, it's about the only thing I can give him.

Parise is a more natural goal scorer (which The Sens actually need), he plays the wing (which The Sens need in a bad way), he's a much more complete player, he gives a consistant effort every night.

Saying he's "older" is like saying Karlsson is older than Rundblad. If I was building a cup contending team I would take Parise before Malkin for sure.

Either I don't see the hype around Parise or Malkin is being underrated. I don't think it's all that close between the 2 to be honest.

I have to disagree with neely. we have yet to see what karlsson can do. he might beat the records Mike green set recently once we get a good team rolling. this IS a franchise PMD. not the kind that's available on july 1st. just like lidstrom this one will be resigned from now until eternity before he hits the FA market. would you trade weber for Parise? not the same kind of player but as important to their respective team. Runblad might be expendable but not karlsson. mark My (half in the tank, drinking) Words!