Toggle sidebar

Minnesota Wild General Discussion - 2023-24

  • Work is still on-going to rebuild the site styling and features. Please report any issues you may experience so we can look into it. Click Here for Updates
Status
Not open for further replies.
MNRube said:
Amen.

The timing was also totally unnecessary. There was no reason to sign any of them so early. The odds of them playing themselves into oversized deals were slim.
Click to expand...
Yes there was a reason. Zuccarello, who was re-signed first, would get 5-6M as a UFA. He offered 2 yrs at 4M to get it done early. With his consistent production at a high level year after year, no GM would say no thanks there.

Then I guess Guerin thought he could get the Foligno and Hartman contracts done at the same time because he likes them. They're at market value, so I don't get why this is such a big problem. As the owner said, the Wild are not in a re-build.
 
Dr Jan Itor said:
Johansson makes $2M, people. It was worth it to see if whatever he, Boldy and Eriksson Ek had last year carried over.

Gaudreau, ignoring the years, consider it $1.1M for being a bottom 6 (or 3) player, and a $1M kicker for showing competence when forced into a top 6 role via injuries (also shootout specialist).

Fine with Zucc's, as long as he's no longer welded to Kaprizov.

Fine with Hartman's for similar reasons as Gaudreau, minus the shootout.

I think I've made my thoughts clear on Foligno already.
Click to expand...
The deals at their AAVs I get. It’s the term and control given up on the deals that make no sense.
 
What I said about our center depth being a credit to Guerin goes out the window if he decides to trade Rossi because he has Hartman, Gaudreau and Khusnutdinov on the roster.
 
DemidovSaveUs said:
The deals at their AAVs I get. It’s the term and control given up on the deals that make no sense.
Click to expand...
Zucc is a 35+ contract, the NMC is automatic according to the rules. I can understand why people question Foligno's 4 years, and the full trade protection to both him and Hartman. But again, Guerin wants to keep these players, Foligno is that leader and character guy he wants in the locker room.
 
Dr Jan Itor said:
Johansson makes $2M, people. It was worth it to see if whatever he, Boldy and Eriksson Ek had last year carried over.
Click to expand...
Johansson also didn't have a contract for this season like the others did. Guerin didn't jump the gun on that one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sweetnut
Webster said:
Zucc is a 35+ contract, the NMC is automatic according to the rules. I can understand why people question Foligno's 4 years, and the full trade protection to both him and Hartman. But again, Guerin wants to keep these players, Foligno is that leader and character guy he wants in the locker room.
Click to expand...
Ek is more of a character and leader than Foligno at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sweetnut
Webster said:
Zucc is a 35+ contract, the NMC is automatic according to the rules. I can understand why people question Foligno's 4 years, and the full trade protection to both him and Hartman. But again, Guerin wants to keep these players, Foligno is that leader and character guy he wants in the locker room.
Click to expand...
Zucc is not one of the contracts I have a problem with.

MuckOG said:
...and Foligno can be just as much of a leader for 2-3 years as he can for 4 years.
Click to expand...
Can’t be much of a leader if you can only be on the ice half of the games
 
  • Like
Reactions: NHL1674
NHL1674 said:
Can we take Billy's phone away from him till the deadline has passed?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty much only expecting Duhaime for a 4th or something like that. I think, with luck, they'll look at Khusnutdinov as their big deadline acquisition, and won't feel the need to go out and spend more. Maybe a bottom pair D to get Mermis or Merrill out of the lineup as much as they can. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they swap Duhaime for a bottom pair RD and call it a deadline. But other than that I'm not sure what else they can do with what we have. No one's worth anything and every guy you bring in is a guy you have to send out.
 
Sweetnut said:
Intervention needed. You can bring the duct tape and zip ties.
Click to expand...

1340603300249_8196738.png
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NHL1674 and Sweetnut
Webster said:
Zucc is a 35+ contract, the NMC is automatic according to the rules. I can understand why people question Foligno's 4 years, and the full trade protection to both him and Hartman. But again, Guerin wants to keep these players, Foligno is that leader and character guy he wants in the locker room.
Click to expand...
www.capfriendly.com

Thank You - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Thank you for the amazing 9 years
www.capfriendly.com www.capfriendly.com

What is a 35-plus contract?​

A contract is designated a 35+ contract if the players age on the first year of the contract is 35 or older (as of June 30 prior to the year of the effective contract).

35+ contracts that are two years in length or longer and:
1. Have a signing bonus in the 2nd or later year, OR
2. Are front-loaded
Will not benefit from a reduced cap hit regardless of the players location of play, termination, retired status, or a buyout. This rule was introduced by the NHL to prevent teams from backloading contracts past when the player was expected to retire. An exception to this rule is that a team will receive a $100,000 cap hit reduction if the player is on the 2nd or later year of the contract and assigned to the minors
Click to expand...
I've never heard of a "mandatory no move clause"
 
  • Like
Reactions: 57special
AKL said:
I'm pretty much only expecting Duhaime for a 4th or something like that. I think, with luck, they'll look at Khusnutdinov as their big deadline acquisition, and won't feel the need to go out and spend more. Maybe a bottom pair D to get Mermis or Merrill out of the lineup as much as they can. Honestly I wouldn't be surprised if they swap Duhaime for a bottom pair RD and call it a deadline. But other than that I'm not sure what else they can do with what we have. No one's worth anything and every guy you bring in is a guy you have to send out.
Click to expand...
I mean that’s it in a nutshell isn’t it? When 80% of the team can’t be moved and has negative value you have a complete failure from management. A competent GM has players that other teams covet on deals that make sense. A failure of a GM has half of his roster who nobody would question if they were bought out. Billy and whatever incoherent vision he had failed. Time to move on and if the Owner doesn’t see it the fans need to send the message.
 
f7ben said:
I mean that’s it in a nutshell isn’t it? When 80% of the team can’t be moved and has negative value you have a complete failure from management. A competent GM has players that other teams covet on deals that make sense. A failure of a GM has half of his roster who nobody would question if they were bought out. Billy and whatever incoherent vision he had failed. Time to move on and if the Owner doesn’t see it the fans need to send the message.
Click to expand...
Name one team that doesn't have a player on a contract that would be viewed as negative value. I'll wait.
 
Dr Jan Itor said:
We're not going to put 4 rookies in the lineup next year anyway.

Next year: Khusnuts (Duhaime let go)
Year after: Yurov (Johanssen let go)
Year after: Ohgren + Heidt (Zucc gone, Hartman in final year, Foligno 2 years left but no NMC)

If we pick a forward high this year, he'll fit in somewhere too hopefully. And we might have Kap's spot to fill too.
Click to expand...
I can’t imagine it’s going to take until the 26-27 season to see Ohgren & Heidt
 
Minnewildsota said:
Name one team that doesn't have a player on a contract that would be viewed as negative value. I'll wait.
Click to expand...
If we had "a" player on a contract with perceived negative value we'd be in better shape than most of the league. Even with the combined weight of last summer's UFA extensions we're not really in terrible shape.

It's the combination of those contracts, their associated trade restrictions, and the buyout penalties that could lead to a real problem in the near future. And I'm not freaking out about them imminently trading Rossi to solve it, but historically when the beat writers start repeating speculation about trading a particular player, that player ends up traded a few months later. So that's not nothing.

That plus it does seem like management is more comfortable making "hard decisions" about younger players, but demures from doing the same with veterans. That's also kind of endemic in the NHL so it's not a Guerin-specific problem. I just don't like the trend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MNRube
Guerin has shown pretty well in his trades so far, the scouting department seems pretty good at finding nice fits, I like Rossi, but if the right deal comes along I would be open to it, likely closer to next years deadline though.

I mean if Pittsburgh commits to a rebuild and the Wild are sitting in playoff position next season, I would not be mad at Guerin if he tried to pry away Crosby or something like that and used Rossi for it. Kap and JEE are in their primes, Rossi hasn’t quite shown that he’s a true difference maker when he is against the best players in the league IMO. He is going to continue improving, but until he hits that point, he’s not untouchable in my eyes.
 
Obvious Fabertism said:
Guerin has shown pretty well in his trades so far, the scouting department seems pretty good at finding nice fits, I like Rossi, but if the right deal comes along I would be open to it, likely closer to next years deadline though.

I mean if Pittsburgh commits to a rebuild and the Wild are sitting in playoff position next season, I would not be mad at Guerin if he tried to pry away Crosby or something like that and used Rossi for it. Kap and JEE are in their primes, Rossi hasn’t quite shown that he’s a true difference maker when he is against the best players in the league IMO. He is going to continue improving, but until he hits that point, he’s not untouchable in my eyes.
Click to expand...
I struggle to think of what the "right deal" would look like for Rossi, but I'll admit that that's probably because I've hardwired myself to hoard anything that even passingly resembles a top-6 center. If they're super confident in Yurov and Khusnutdinov it'd might change the math a little.

I'd take a pretty dim view of spending him on a rental, though.
 
Bazeek said:
I struggle to think of what the "right deal" would look like for Rossi, but I'll admit that that's probably because I've hardwired myself to hoard anything that even passingly resembles a top-6 center. If they're super confident in Yurov and Khusnutdinov it'd might change the math a little.

I'd take a pretty dim view of spending him on a rental, though.
Click to expand...
I would imagine that any acquisitions next year for rentals would come with a high likelihood of re-signing seeing as we have so much cap opening up. Crosby is obviously a big stretch, but a guy like that is probably only moving because of relationships on the receiving team, which we incidentally have.
 
If you trade Rossi then it's for a talented young winger or Dman. Hard to say who... the roster cannot take on a big. or even middling contract next year.

It's one thing to listen if someone is asking about Rossi, another to be shopping him. I suspect it is the former, and linking up a Rossi trade to the Hartman and Gaudreau signings makes no sense at all to me. Don't compound your mistakes, BG!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom