Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
I would like all young players to have a better 2nd year than their 1st year.
Minnesota Wild General Discussion - 2023-24
- Thread starter TaLoN
- Start date
-
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
We have also had good years where we have exceeded all expectations, but maybe you don't recognize those years.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,207
- 19,347
No, I've been saying it as long as its been a topic of conversation. Even if you think Wallstedt is ready and you want to keep Fleury around to mentor him (which seems superfluous with Zuccarello around but whatever), Fleury is for sure 100% done after this season, and then you have to hand the reigns over to Wallstedt full time or go out and find another guy for the tandem.
We have an almost perfect succession plan in place here:
2024-25: Gus starter, Fleury backup, Wallstedt spot starts when they can (but they'll actually need to call him up and get him in)
2025-26: Gus starter, Wallstedt full time backup (can tandem if Wallstedt is good enough)
2026-27: Can determine if Wallstedt is good enough to take on the full time starter role, if not, re-sign Gus and Wallstedt stays as back up/tandem, if so, let Gus go and find a cheaper backup
It makes zero sense to move Gus before 2026 unless you're getting way more for him than it would cost to acquire an adequate replacement for the 2026-27 season. And remember, by 2026-27, that's going to be towards the beginning of our supposed contention window, so you'll need a good goaltender.
In short, the upside to trading Gus right now is almost zero, while the downside is potentially significant
JiricekSaveUs
Danila Yurov Fan Club Executive Assistant
- May 2, 2018
- 19,324
- 12,281
I was super fine rolling it back with Gus / Wallstedt but Guerin had to resign one of the worst goalies in the league last year to an expensive backup goalie deal for the culture
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
They’re still not as big of a deal as we sit currently. That leads me to believe Guerin will be dumping $4M+ in free agency.
The issue this team had last year was that middle aged players had their share of problems. Gus was bad for most of the year. Kaprizov was bad for the first 1/3 or 1/2 of the season. Boldy was injured early and took awhile to get going. Rossi tailed off at the end of the year, likely due to endurance for the long season. Even Faber wasn’t as great towards the end of the year with his injuries and endurance to play the ridiculous minutes he played.
The way I see it, if you can get better production at the 2LW (Ohgren) next to Rossi-Zucc and Gus averages his numbers overall between the last two years, this team will make the playoffs. And that’s with accounting for Spurgeon injury, Brodin injury, Foligno injury, etc.
Obvious Fabertism
Registered User
Its nearly impossible to justify demanding B bonuses unless you are a McDavid level 1st overall pick. How many ELC players in the last decade have been top 10 Forwards in the league? Its supremely selfish of a rookie to demand restricting a third of the overall bonus money available for the entire team on the extremely slim chance that they do accomplish that feat.
The NHL made them always a big deal after they were exploited for years, they affect daily cap accruals as if they are accomplished now. Its literally just adding $2MM AAV to our cap for no reason and Guerin would be a moron to have caved on that. That extra $2MM may not seem horrendous today, but at the trade deadline it is equivalent to an $8MM AAV player.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,207
- 19,347
We have like 5M in cap after signing Chisholm, and having Yurov would mean we don't need to sign a free agent this summer. Who cares about cap space lol. We have plenty of it and we're not a competitive team.
The most hilarious emerging trend right now is that players trying to maximize their career earnings by asking for B bonuses or asking to skip the AHL are selfish and those players are toxic, but teams trying to work the rules for their benefit aren't. 100% everyone reading this (and everyone not reading this) would be asking for the same things if they were a player. You'll notice teams still want these players, because they understand it's part of the business, and the players really aren't evil after all.
The most hilarious emerging trend right now is that players trying to maximize their career earnings by asking for B bonuses or asking to skip the AHL are selfish and those players are toxic, but teams trying to work the rules for their benefit aren't. 100% everyone reading this (and everyone not reading this) would be asking for the same things if they were a player. You'll notice teams still want these players, because they understand it's part of the business, and the players really aren't evil after all.
Last edited:
No it doesn't. The bonuses aren't paid out until after the season if they are met. They have no effect on the daily cap accrual. If it pushes the team over teh cap then it is carried over as dead money into the next season. This is a black and white in the CBA rule. GMBG just doesn't like to give any bonuses at all. This news from the front office is just spin to justify that.
Case and point Rossi last season. He was figured at an $863,333 cap hit as far as the daily accrual was concerned. If he his cap hit was figured with full bonuses all season that would have been a $1,713,333 cap hit. It would have put MN over the cap day 1 of the season.
As the team sits currently they have $6,256,412 in cap space with 20 players signed. They also have a possible $2,425,000 in bonuses. So that would be only leave $3,831,412 in cap space. This is without the RFAs (Chisholm and Shaw) being re-signed, and they are talking about signing a ~$4m vet FWD.
Obvious Fabertism
Registered User
You are right in that the league does not count them for daily cap accruals, but the NHL team does have to limit and track them. The bonuses do have to be accounted for in-season, if they cause you to exceed the standard cap limit, you get overage space to remain compliant during the season and any overage used by year end is then applied to reduce the next season's cap space. But if you exceed the overage limit at season end, it is equivalent to a cap violation and subject to punishment. So if we gave Yurov those bonuses, we would have to manage against the possibility of him hitting them and pushing us drastically over the upper limit, this means we would be limited in any players that we acquire during the season if they have performance bonuses as well.
The punishment is just the dead cap carries over into the next season. It's figured the same as dead cap from a buyout.
The bounes don't mean anything if they aren't met. The "B" bonuses are league wide type of things, so very hard to get. If a prospect hits them then they've more than earned them at that point. If the fear is a player actually hits them then you're basically saying we want you to a league top-10 player, but we want that quality play for (basically) free. If this was the a different job this would be the equivalent of an unpaid intern doing upper lelev work.
Obvious Fabertism
Registered User
The punishment if you use overage space is that you lose that space next season, but if you exceed the overage limit (7.5% of the cap I believe) by season end then you are deemed not cap compliant for the year and subject to additional fines, forfeiture of draft picks, and even forfeiture of games.
$2MM is a big swing to have to manage in the event that he did hit it, it would possibly prevent us from playing other rookies with A class bonuses, signing a 1 year UFA deal or taking on a deadline acquisition if they also sought performance bonuses that are actually obtainable. Wallstedt, Rossi, Faber, Ohgren, Khusnutdiov and any other rookies we play or acquire would all contribute to that bonus overage pool, adding a Patrick Kane or David Perron on bonus laden contracts would put us dangerously close to the overage limits if they all hit.
Dickie Dunn
Registered User
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,207
- 19,347
Dickie Dunn
Registered User
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,207
- 19,347
If the real Gus is somewhere in between that's still a better player than Fleury, and worth more than a 3rd or 4th round pick.
If the Wild skip signing Perron, they would have plenty of space to sign Yurov and account for bonuses
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
The exact middle is a .915 save %, which this year would've been top 10 in the league. You could go down to .910 and still be a top 16 goalie.
Last edited:
- Dec 10, 2012
- 41,207
- 19,347
I would rather have Yurov than Perron
I'm curious, if the reason he didn't sign this year is because of the B bonuses, why would Yurov not ask for them next year when he's a better player? And if that's a line too far for Guerin, why would that be different next year?
Now would have been the time to do it
Obvious Fabertism
Registered User
All that B Bonus hold up is just a contract negotiation distraction, its clear that Yurov intended to stay in the KHL another year, its was long rumored and expected, blaming it on the bonus structure and holding it against Guerin is not logical. He was not in the top 10 for KHL scoring leaders, to presume that he would accomplish that in the NHL next year and demand that bonus as the deciding factor is delusional and I don't think Yurov is that. The player wanted further development before coming over and is in a good situation for that. Staying home is perfectly reasonable, and our fans in particular should be receptive to that based on the extra years that Kaprizov, Faber, and even Boldy to an extent took.
I'm just saying it's not endless doom and gloom, unless that is where you want to be.
Dakota Sioux
Wild Time
This is just classic. Dallas buys out Suter; another team desperate enough to pay Suter to NOT play for them. Only the second player in NHL history to have his contract bought out TWICE! Woo Hoo!!!
- Status
