Minnesota Wild General Discussion X

[57special]

Coyle, and Fiala are examples of guys who are strong on the puck. Greenway, too. Guys like Crosby are extreme examples. It's not always about size...some big , strong guys like Chris Stewart(even Lucic, now)are weak on the puck, and smaller players like Fiala, and to a lesser extent, Zuccarello, are strong on it.

Donato just doesn't win enough fights for pucks, either. If a puck is chipped to the blue line and Donato and an opponent is there, I would not bet on Donato to win that puck. Some subscribe to the theory that hockey is merely a series of individual battles for pucks, and the team that wins most of those battles tends to win most of their games. It's a bit simplistic, but there's a truth in there somewhere.


Hey, if he starts playing on PP2(unlikely, Fiala is there) and starts potting goals then I'm all for keeping him, but as is, i don't see a lot of upside. He will be 24 yo this year....we are not talking about a weak'ish 19-20 yo boy/man, but a weak man.

 

[P10p]

Weak on the puck means when you are trying to go by a defender, you go into puck protection position (putting your body between the puck and the defender), but due to lack of strength, the defender knocks you off balance and is able to take the puck away more often than not.

That is what happens to Donato, causing frequent loss of possession.

Peter Forsberg was an extreme example of a player that was strong on the puck, this video is a great example of what that looks like when he has a defender draped all over him trying to knock him off the puck, but it's the defender that goes down while Forsberg continues skating and creates the goal.


I'm not asking him to be Peter Forsberg, but I'm asking him to not get knocked off the puck most every time he tries to puck protect. Help maintain possession instead of turning it over due to it.

Fiala is strong on the puck, Donato is not.

... I know what weak on the puck means. My point was that people can say "weak on the puck" all they want, but its objective and there are no stats to back it up. As mentioned above he is middle of the pack in giveaways. So he is stronger on the puck then half our roster?

 

[P10p]

When most posters here think something, it's fair to be skeptical. Even when it's a collection of voices who have watched hockey all their lives, written about it in a paid capacity, devoted countless hours of free-time to it. Maybe we're all just wrong?

But when that opinion is shared and carried out by an NHL coaching staff, maybe the fact is Donato just kind of sucks??? No matter how good of a guy... he's a player the Bruins were delighted to trade for a third-line center.

He doesn't play because he doesn't help the team as much as Victor Rask, 2020 Koivu, Hartman, et al. help the team. Donato is a tweener. His trade value is another Donato.

And for whoever stated that Rask plays more than Donato "because he helps the team more", forgot two important points. Firstly, Rask is a pure center so of course it makes sense to play him at center over Donato. Secondly, Donato has more games played this season so i'm not sure why you're piping up with your false facts to begin with...

And to the point about the trade, its pretty obvious that we were seeking out a trade to get rid of underwhelming but "strong on the puck" Charlie Coyle. Not the other way around.

 

[P10p]

They are both offensively gifted, but smaller players in the NHL. If Granlund didn't work on his game, he would have fizzled out. Saviour or not, Granlund had to get stronger and learn to adapt - something that Donato has not yet.

If Granlund wasn't GIVEN the chances he was at the NHL level, he would have fizzled out. Granlund rightfully was way more hyped than Donato. Doesn't change the fact that he was given more opportunity and ice time without proving anything at the NHL level.

 

[thestonedkoala]

Doesn't change the fact that he was given more opportunity and ice time without proving anything at the NHL level.

Granlund was also demoted mid-season to the AHL, because he couldn't cut it. Donato hasn't. He only played 27 (out of 48) games in the NHL and 63 and 68 the next two years.

Yes, he was given opportunities, but the Wild also lacked centers at the time.

 

[Saga of the Elk]

I wish we had better stats for giveaways and takeaways. Donato's pretty middle of the pack if you go by giveaways per minute of ice time, but those numbers are about as unreliable as it gets.

And you obviously can't give the puck away if you can't establish possession in the first place.

As for the Fenton thing... I mean, he also got a pick with Donato for Coyle...doesn't exactly scream top-sixer..

 

[Saga of the Elk]

And for whoever stated that Rask plays more than Donato "because he helps the team more", forgot two important points. Firstly, Rask is a pure center so of course it makes sense to play him at center over Donato. Secondly, Donato has more games played this season so i'm not sure why you're piping up with your false facts to begin with...

And to the point about the trade, its pretty obvious that we were seeking out a trade to get rid of underwhelming but "strong on the puck" Charlie Coyle. Not the other way around.

What false fact? Against the worst team by a mile in the league, going into the break... rather than get Donato a game where he could add to his goal totals.. he was a healthy scratch in favor of Victor Rask. Because the Wild had to win the game, not risk losing it due to a weak link. Donato seems like a great kid but ... facts are facts. He's not an everyday NHL player and contributes very little except a plus shot.

 

[Bazeek]

And you obviously can't give the puck away if you can't establish possession in the first place.

As for the Fenton thing... I mean, he also got a pick with Donato for Coyle...doesn't exactly scream top-sixer..

Do you mean that Boston adding the 5th implies that Fenton didn't think Donato was a top-6'er?

I'd have to dig up the quote but Boudreau's said that he was more or less told to play Donato in the top-6 last year. I was going more by that than the trade itself.

Edit: Found it, though I did misremember the top-6 part.

“I think he can score if he has confidence like he did in the beginning of his time with us,” Boudreau said. “But what he’s doing now, quite frankly, he’s learning how to play without the puck. And he’s doing a much better job. Defensive zone, he still has his hiccups. But at the end of the year last year, he had a ton of hiccups and I didn’t even care. I was just told to play him (by former GM Paul Fenton).

“So I played him despite the mistakes. But I think he’s gotten so much better of not trying to beat everybody one-on-one, coming back to his own zone and stopping, stuff like that. All those things, he’s gotten better.”

 

[57special]

Wait...are we arguing about who is better, Rask or Donato?

 

[Saga of the Elk]

Do you mean that Boston adding the 5th implies that Fenton didn't think Donato was a top-6'er?

I'd have to dig up the quote but Boudreau's said that he was more or less told to play Donato in the top-6 last year. I was going more by that than the trade itself.

Edit: Found it, though I did misremember the top-6 part.

Poor Bruce.

I think Fenton is not the talent-evaluating genius you are suggesting he is, perhaps rhetorically. In an appeal to authority, I do defer to Bruce's long record of winning hockey games. Fenton was part of a massive trade and deal for Kyle Turris, and traded Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen. He acquired Anthony Bitetto, Victor Rask (no salary retained), Pontus Aberg, and Ryan Donato. He signed Mats Zuccarello on a generous deal (I'm no Mats-hater) that said "we're ready for our Cup run!"

One of those is among the most toxic deals in the league. Another is also. Bitetto would almost definitely not be in the league if Winnipeg hadn't been cursed. Aberg basically isn't. Rask and Donato trade healthy scratches for a non-playoff squad.

I'm skeptical, I guess. It's like if a guy who was in a 12-team fantasy league with a few buddies from work suddenly joined a 30-team Gold Level keeper league. He'd look out of his depth, even though the basic mechanics of salary out/players out/ players in/salary cap management/firing your analytics group/hiring your own son were part of his basic competency.

 

[Bazeek]

Poor Bruce.

I think Fenton is not the talent-evaluating genius you are suggesting he is, perhaps rhetorically. In an appeal to authority, I do defer to Bruce's long record of winning hockey games. Fenton was part of a massive trade and deal for Kyle Turris, and traded Seth Jones for Ryan Johansen. He acquired Anthony Bitetto, Victor Rask (no salary retained), Pontus Aberg, and Ryan Donato. He signed Mats Zuccarello on a generous deal (I'm no Mats-hater) that said "we're ready for our Cup run!"

One of those is among the most toxic deals in the league. Another is also. Bitetto would almost definitely not be in the league if Winnipeg hadn't been cursed. Aberg basically isn't. Rask and Donato trade healthy scratches for a non-playoff squad.

I'm skeptical, I guess. It's like if a guy who was in a 12-team fantasy league with a few buddies from work suddenly joined a 30-team Gold Level keeper league. He'd look out of his depth, even though the basic mechanics of salary out/players out/ players in/salary cap management/firing your analytics group/hiring your own son were part of his basic competency.

I mean he worked in Nashville for 20 years. I'm not sure what the final good/bad tally looks like but if we assume that he had his finger in everything Poile's done there he's been involved in quite a few successes as well. Going by his trades last year I think he probably had a better handle on the guys he gave up and the guys he was acquiring than much of the hockey world did at the time.

Regardless, I don't mean to to hang too much on Fenton or what he might've thought about Donato. I do think the plan was to eventually give him Zucker's spot, but who knows if he had much confidence in that working out. I'm mostly 50/50 on what I've seen from Donato this year: he's done a little with not a lot. I wouldn't hitch my wagon to him but turning him into glue seems hasty.

 

[TaLoN]

... I know what weak on the puck means. My point was that people can say "weak on the puck" all they want, but its objective and there are no stats to back it up. As mentioned above he is middle of the pack in giveaways. So he is stronger on the puck then half our roster?

It was also mentioned how suspect the giveaway and takeaways have always been as a stat.

I agree it's objective when analyzing players strengths and weaknesses. All we can do it judge what we see. Saying someone is a good passer or a terrible passer or a good puck handler or terrible puck handler etc is also objective, but we do that all the time.

We're just describing what we see. Everyone does it when it comes to analyzing players strengths and weaknesses in their skillsets/abilities.

 

[SupremeNachos]

It was also mentioned how suspect the giveaway and takeaways have always been as a stat.

I agree it's objective when analyzing players strengths and weaknesses. All we can do it judge what we see. Saying someone is a good passer or a terrible passer or a good puck handler or terrible puck handler etc is also objective, but we do that all the time.

We're just describing what we see. Everyone does it when it comes to analyzing players strengths and weaknesses in their skillsets/abilities.

Is someone a terrible passer if the receiver always fumbles the puck? I don't think there is any analytic that can show if that is the case.

 

[TaLoN]

Is someone a terrible passer if the receiver always fumbles the puck? I don't think there is any analytic that can show if that is the case.

The receiver fumbling pucks is a bad puck handler. That's a perfect example of Zucker on many nights.

 

[57special]

We don't play till Saturday? WTH?

 

[Wild11MN]

We don't play till Saturday? WTH?

Bye week.

 

[TaLoN]

We don't play till Saturday? WTH?

We came off all star weekend right into the bye week, then it's a mad dash to the finish.

 

[Saga of the Elk]

I know players and everyone needs a reset and rest from time to time but the scheduling rarely makes sense to me. Especially having the All-Star Game weekend coincide with the Pro Bowl.. the one day someone might be looking for something actually sports-adjacent to watch they're treated to floating names, car commercials and no-try hockey. Why not have an outdoor game then?

 

[Wabit]

I know players and everyone needs a reset and rest from time to time but the scheduling rarely makes sense to me. Especially having the All-Star Game weekend coincide with the Pro Bowl.. the one day someone might be looking for something actually sports-adjacent to watch they're treated to floating names, car commercials and no-try hockey. Why not have an outdoor game then?

They could just get rid of the ASGs in every sport and I probably wouldn't notice.

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

As of 1/30:
So... who are we picking at 11th? I’m down for Zary.

 

[AKL]

As of 1/30:
So... who are we picking at 11th? I’m down for Zary.

Yeah I guess it's Zary for me too. He's one of the few left with top 6 center upside.

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

Yeah I guess it's Zary for me too. He's one of the few left with top 6 center upside.

He’s probably 1 and done too, so at least we’ll have another prospect to get excited about making room for sooner rather than later.

 

[DANOZ28]

Granlund was also demoted mid-season to the AHL, because he couldn't cut it. Donato hasn't. He only played 27 (out of 48) games in the NHL and 63 and 68 the next two years.

Yes, he was given opportunities, but the Wild also lacked centers at the time.

anybody else catch the preds caps game last night? granlund got a goal and was 100% responsible for another goal that deflected in off a cap player.

 

[Wabit]

As of 1/30:
So... who are we picking at 11th? I’m down for Zary.

At 11th I'd lead towards a d-man (Ghule). Most mock have all the FWDs going top-10, but d-men tend to be under-rated for where they are actually picked.

 

[BuiumSaveUs]

At 11th I'd lead towards a d-man (Ghule). Most mock have all the FWDs going top-10, but d-men tend to be under-rated for where they are actually picked.

You’d take Guhle? I don’t think I’d take him in the 1st. I actually disagree with your last part, too. Last year, Seider, Broberg, and Soderstrom were all taken higher than consensus simply due to lack of quality. defensemen available. This year is even worse. Teams will reach in Defensman due to need, I wouldn’t be surprised if 4 or 5 go top 15, but there are maybe 2 defenseman I’d take top 15.