Minnesota Wild General Discussion - 2023-24

[BagHead]

Didn't we have one of our highest point seasons, within the following 2 seasons of their departure? If that's not improvement, well then I don't know what to tell you.

Additionally, it's hard to say, "well the team hasn't been better since their departure" when we've had to deal with their cap restrictions. Do you honestly feel that the team would be as good, or better, if Suter was still in the top 2, and Parise still in the top 9 of the team this year? I feel they would have been a bigger detriment than anything they brought to the team - moreso Suter than Parise.

It was an improvement, yes, but does that mean they wouldn't have still had that improvement if they'd kept both players? The majority of the improvement came from Kaprizov, Hartman, and Fiala finding new gears, and a shockingly strong contribution from Gaudreau. I think it's possible Gaudreau doesn't get signed if Parise's still around, but I can't say for certain. It's hard to call any of this addition by subtraction.

In any case, I'm not convinced of the effect Suter, Parise, or both would have had on the Wild this year. For all I know, they may have been worse rather than better. It's just really unknowable, so I'm not sure it's worth worrying about.

Not directed at you, but more at @57special
I don't know that they were going to be easily managed. A manager only has so many tools to deal with problem employees. First you address it directly by talking to them, then you reprimand them (healthy scratch), and if they still don't shape up, you need to remove them. In the NHL that means assigning them to the AHL, or buying them out. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. That doesn't mean it couldn't have been handled differently, I just mean to point out that some people won't change their behavior, even if they are grown men.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

Parise didn't have a contract in place at the start of the season that's why he didn't play. Even if he did retire, recapture ($6.5m x 2) hit would have been less than his buyout ($7.3m x 2 and $833k x 4) hit. The recapture only would have hurt if he was traded and then retired.

The cap recapture penalties were lowered after the Wild had already bought each of them out. It is extremely likely that the league would not have lowered the penalty while the Wild still had each of the contracts on the books.

 

[Wabit]

The cap recapture penalties were lowered after the Wild had already bought each of them out. It is extremely likely that the league would not have lowered the penalty while the Wild still had each of the contracts on the books.

No, it's simple math. Recapture is just the amount they had been paid minus what the accumulated cap hit. Divied by the years left.

$7,538,462 x 11 = $83m
amount paid = $96m

$96-$83 = $13

$13/2=$6.5

 

[P10p]

I mean, how many workplaces have you been at where everyone loves one another? You make the best of what you've got, even though some employees have their faults. A good coach manages the situation...sometimes with understanding, sometimes with a kick in the butt(i.e. taken off special teams, moved down in the lineup) ... whatever motivates the overall team and gets them to produce.

Cause let's face it, the whole point of the NHL season is to win. Having a locker room where everyone loves one another, but finishes 22 overall in the league, just doesn't cut it.

I don't see any improvement in the team since the Suter and Parise buyouts, and would argue that we would've been a better team keeping them around, especially Suter. We've seen what teams like Vegas and TBL have accomplished by manipulating the LTIR... it doesn't take a lot of imagination to imagine us doing the same with Parise. Suter was fine... or at least, one hell of a lot better than Goligoski + 7M cap hit. You can't tell me that Suter wouldn't be better than what we are trotting out on our 3rd pairing, and could certainly have been a reasonable #4D option. The Stars are playing him with Heskainen, and they are a Cup contender - maybe the locker room down there is a little less sensitive, or a few of them told Suter to shutup when he said something out of line, or perhaps he never was much of a problem anyway, and the "problem" was blown up here in MN by those in management and those toadying up to those in management.

It's easy to blame the guys who aren't there, but it rings hollow when the results are the exact same afterwards.

Yeah and sometimes the employees that are a distraction are fired, regardless of their past performance. I've worked with people who think they can walk over everyone because of seniority and it is absolutely toxic and hurts growth of newer employees.

 

[AKL]

Along with Ohgren, it'd be nice to get Firstov and Bankier up here, and probably Milne too. I don't need to see Shaw, Lettieri, Lucchini, Gaudreau or Johansson for the rest of the season. Khusnutdinov doesn't need to play every game, he's not exactly making an impact. Zuccarello is probably injured. Let's see some prospects.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

No, it's simple math. Recapture is just the amount they had been paid minus what the accumulated cap hit. Divied by the years left.

$7,538,462 x 11 = $83m
amount paid = $96m

$96-$83 = $13

$13/2=$6.5

That is the math if both had been on the team up until this season so you are correct. But if either had been traded, the cap benefit gets locked in and the penalty would have been significantly higher depending on when they were traded.

I for one do not think either would have made it this far with the Wild, especially when they are being paid peanuts and below their market rate. Suter made an extra 8 digits for being bought out.

 

[57special]

The cap recapture penalties were lowered after the Wild had already bought each of them out. It is extremely likely that the league would not have lowered the penalty while the Wild still had each of the contracts on the books.

I think that they just adjusted the maximum amount of cap penalties in one year, as they realized that certain teams would be put in untenable cap positions(i.e. us)cap wise under the old system.

 

[AKL]

I think that they just adjusted the maximum amount of cap penalties in one year, as they realized that certain teams would be put in untenable cap positions(i.e. us)cap wise under the old system.

They made it so the penalty cannot exceed the AAV of the contract, so in our case, the recapture penalty wouldn't have been any worse than the buyout, and in fact it would have been for less term, as 19.5M/4 years means two years of 7.5M and one year of 4.5M, each. But you don't get the certainty of knowing which seasons you would have the penalty in.

 

[Obvious Fabertism]

I think that they just adjusted the maximum amount of cap penalties in one year, as they realized that certain teams would be put in untenable cap positions(i.e. us)cap wise under the old system.

They adjusted it because of Luongo, there is a zero percent chance they would have done the same for the Wild.

For anyone confused on why cap recapture happened, pretend you were just hired to be a GM at McDonalds, but corporate tells you that if two of your highest paid, oldest, but medium performing workers retire or quit in the next five years, your franchise forfeits 30% of the revenue. The employees are aware of this fact, and are also aware that competing franchises can also offer them higher pay. Do you expect to have a reasonable working relationship with these employees?

 

[AKL]

For anyone confused on why cap recapture happened, pretend you were just hired to be a GM at McDonalds, but corporate tells you that if two of your highest paid, oldest, but medium performing workers retire or quit in the next five years, your franchise forfeits 30% of the revenue. The employees are aware of this fact, and are also aware that competing franchises can also offer them higher pay. Do you expect to have a reasonable working relationship with these employees?

This analogy makes zero sense in the context of Suter and Parise

 

[Wabit]

That is the math if both had been on the team up until this season so you are correct. But if either had been traded, the cap benefit gets locked in and the penalty would have been significantly higher depending on when they were traded.

I for one do not think either would have made it this far with the Wild, especially when they are being paid peanuts and below their market rate. Suter made an extra 8 digits for being bought out.

Not being traded is a greater possibility than being traded to me. Both had full NMCs so they could kill any trade (no Staal to BUF deals for them). Good teams wouldn't have taken either of them at their full cap hits due to their own cap problems. Both are still playing this year and Suter is under contract for next year too.

Sure, Parise waited until later in the season to start playing, but he's chasing a Cup and he picked a team that can do that. If he was under contract then he would have been in camp to start the season. just like the previous 2 seasons in NY.

MN just riding out their contracts rather than the buyouts was what should have happened. Even if they had waited another 2 seasons to make the buyout decision the buyout hits would have been lower and less backend dead money too.

The doom and gloom scenario was recapture from a full cap hit trade the season they were bought out. It was the last season they had more pay than their AAVs. Parise trade to NYI was a rumored possibility during that TDL IIRC.

 

[Wabit]

They adjusted it because of Luongo, there is a zero percent chance they would have done the same for the Wild.

For anyone confused on why cap recapture happened, pretend you were just hired to be a GM at McDonalds, but corporate tells you that if two of your highest paid, oldest, but medium performing workers retire or quit in the next five years, your franchise forfeits 30% of the revenue. The employees are aware of this fact, and are also aware that competing franchises can also offer them higher pay. Do you expect to have a reasonable working relationship with these employees?

What? This makes no sense. The GM chose to fire the employees on his own and full well knowing the money consequences. Cooperate (the owner) didn't force him to do anything. The employees can't actually quit and go to another job in the same industry.

They could retire, sure, but the dead cap would have been evenly spaced as a $6.5m x 1, $6.5m x 2, $6.2m x 3, or $5m x 4.

The buyout dead cap hits are:
$2.4m
$6.4m
$7.4m
$7.4m
$800k x 4

So riding them out for one more season and forcing a mutual contract termination (or retire) would have meant less recapture than what the buyouts actually are.

 

[Minnewildsota]

What? This makes no sense. The GM chose to fire the employees on his own and full well knowing the money consequences. Cooperate (the owner) didn't force him to do anything. The employees can't actually quit and go to another job in the same industry.

They could retire, sure, but the dead cap would have been evenly spaced as a $6.5m x 1, $6.5m x 2, $6.2m x 3, or $5m x 4.

The buyout dead cap hits are:
$2.4m
$6.4m
$7.4m
$7.4m
$800k x 4

So riding them out for one more season and forcing a mutual contract termination (or retire) would have meant less recapture than what the buyouts actually are.

Do you really believe that would have happened? Really!?

A player could get fired for no money OR they could get fired for all their money. Which do you think they would take?

 

[north21]

I still think Parise and Suter would be on their way out. Even when winning, there was definitely hints that there was a huge locker room issue.

If they were still here most would be complaining about suter losing a few steps and Parise being old, broken and not worth the money. He would still be better than our 3rd or 4th line but not enough to make a difference. Would have been huge scapegoats.

 

[BagHead]

If they were still here most would be complaining about suter losing a few steps and Parise being old, broken and not worth the money. He would still be better than our 3rd or 4th line but not enough to make a difference. Would have been huge scapegoats.

If there's one thing we can probably all agree on, it's that someone's going to be the scapegoat.

 

[MNRube]

I look forward to the day we can stop talking about Parise & Suter as much as I look forward to the day the buyout penalties are gone

 

[Wabit]

Do you really believe that would have happened? Really!?

A player could get fired for no money OR they could get fired for all their money. Which do you think they would take?

I think they would have still been on the Wild playing this year if it wasn't for the buyouts. The other things trade, retire, contract termination are all just fantasy.

The doom and gloom ~$27m recapture scenario is just a boogieman used to justify bad money decision of the buyouts. The buyouts are another bad money decision made by the GM to add to the pile of Spurgeon, Foligno, Freddy G, Goli, etc. contracts.

I look forward to the day we can stop talking about Parise & Suter as much as I look forward to the day the buyout penalties are gone

5 years (and a few games this year) is a long time.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

There was an initial low cap benefit for the 1st year, I think turning a combined $15M cap hit to a combined $4.6M cap hit. Can't remember exactly what we did with the savings, but I think Goligoski was one.

 

[Wabit]

There was an initial low cap benefit for the 1st year, I think turning a combined $15M cap hit to a combined $4.6M cap hit. Can't remember exactly what we did with the savings, but I think Goligoski was one.

Goli for $5m x 1 was Suter's money. Talbot $3.6m, Kulikov $2.25m. They ended up buying MAF at the TDL, and retained $2m on Rask at some point. Fiala and Kap raises. They carried a lot of open cap space with a full roster for a lot of the season.

The math easily worked if they would have just paid a 2nd and dumped Rask before the season for the Parise buyout.

 

[DigitalBoldy]

There was an initial low cap benefit for the 1st year, I think turning a combined $15M cap hit to a combined $4.6M cap hit. Can't remember exactly what we did with the savings, but I think Goligoski was one.

Got an extra year out of Fiala.

Along with Ohgren, it'd be nice to get Firstov and Bankier up here, and probably Milne too. I don't need to see Shaw, Lettieri, Lucchini, Gaudreau or Johansson for the rest of the season. Khusnutdinov doesn't need to play every game, he's not exactly making an impact. Zuccarello is probably injured. Let's see some prospects.

Milne has been on a tear lately. 9 points in his last 7 games.

 

[Wonderful Tacos]

Just looked at what's left for teams the Wild could move ahead/below of in draft slot. If they somehow manage to lose all four remaining I could see them maybe drafting as low as #10 but i bet they stay at #13.

EDIT: actually #10 and #11 just seem really unlikely. think the range is realistically like #12 to #15.

 

[DigitalBoldy]

Is there any chance Guentzel would sign here? How about Teravainen?

There's actually a number of interesting free agents this summer.

 

[roon]

Is there any chance Guentzel would sign here? How about Teravainen?

There's actually a number of interesting free agents this summer.

I mean sure there is a chance - but is due a pretty big raise over his 6 million per.

 

[Minnewildsota]

Is there any chance Guentzel would sign here? How about Teravainen?

There's actually a number of interesting free agents this summer.

 

[DigitalBoldy]

I mean sure there is a chance - but is due a pretty big raise over his 6 million per.

Hear me out, what if we pay someone to take Spurgeon and then offer Guentzel a contract.

Kaprizov-Eriksson Ek-Guentzel
Boldy-Rossi-Yurov
Zucc-Khusnutdinov-Hartman
Foligno-Gaudreau-Lettieri

Middleton-Faber
Brodin-Chisholm
Hunt-Bogosian