Toggle sidebar

Proposal: Penguins-Wild

Empoleon8771

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
87,218
88,767
Redmond, WA
Wild get Rakell (signed through 2027-2028 at $5 million a year)
Penguins get Hartman (signed through 2026-2027 at $4 million a year), Haight or Heidt and a 2025 2nd

The Wild get a righty goal scorer with Rakell that they seemingly have a huge need for. The Penguins buy low on Hartman, who seems like he'd be Sullivan's new favorite player, in addition to some futures to close up the value.

I know that Haight and Heidt are very different in value, since Haight had a decent juniors career and has been decent in the AHL this year while Heidt has been lighting up juniors since being drafted. Haight feels a bit too light and Heidt feels too expensive IMO, so I'm curious if there's a better middle ground there.
Click to read more...
 
“Lighting up juniors” is a tale as old as time. Doesn’t really mean much. More often than not that doesn’t transfer to the NHL.

Also want nothing to do with Hartman.

Pass easily
 
Gurglesons said:
Not sure why the Wild would be further diluting their center depth for wing help. Probably the last thing they need to be honestly.
Click to expand...

Minnesota's center depth is Rossi, Ek and Gaudreau as their top-9 centers. Hartman appears to have only played center when Ek was injured.

None of Hartman's 3 most common lines this year (Johansson-Rossi-Hartman, Johansson-Ek-Hartman and Foligno-Gaudreau-Hartman) had Hartman playing center.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hn777 and Dominance
Eh. Doesn't do much for me. He's 31. Not really interested in giving up a 2nd and would much prefer to see what the team has in Haight or Heidt. Wouldn't be the kind of move I think they need to make. Contrary to what I think a few other Wild fans believe, there isn't any hope for doing anything meaningful in this years playoffs. The PP/PK are atrocious and Rakell isn't likely to make enough of a difference in either of those. Unless it's a move for the future/window, I don't think the team needs to be making trades that don't work towards that end. I don't see Rakell as a part of that at that age. Similar reason I don't think they should waste assets on Brock Nelson for some misguided playoff push.

Pass.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hockeyfan200 and AKL
Pass on this one. More than I wanna give up for a 32 year old ~55 point winger.

MK9 said:
Unless it's a move for the future/window, I don't think the team needs to be making moves that don't work towards that end. I don't see Rakell as a part of that at that age. Similar reason I don't think they should waste assets on Brock Nelson for some misguided playoff push.
Click to expand...

andy-bernard.gif


Any move the Wild make for someone with term should make the roster younger, not older. I could understand acquiring a cheap bottom six depth player as a rental at the deadline (not that we'll have the cap space this year to even do that), but for a guy with two seasons left on his deal, we're getting two years older, and giving up two good future assets to enhance a window that isn't even open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MK9
It would have to be Hartman because we have zero cap space. I don't think it's a bad offer but having already traded our 1st and 3rd, I would rather not trade the 2nd.

I might be persuaded to deal Hartman + Heidt for Rakell because I think adding another goal scoring wing gives us a snowball's chance in the playoffs , but it sounds like Brocks Nelson and Boeser are both strong possibilities to sign as UFA this summer and they wouldn't cost us anything.
 
Sota Popinski said:
It would have to be Hartman because we have zero cap space. I don't think it's a bad offer but having already traded our 1st and 3rd, I would rather not trade the 2nd.

I might be persuaded to deal Hartman + Heidt for Rakell because I think adding another goal scoring wing gives us a snowball's chance in the playoffs , but it sounds like Brocks Nelson and Boeser are both strong possibilities to sign as UFA this summer and they wouldn't cost us anything.
Click to expand...

I would probably do just Hartman and Heidt for Rakell as well. The 2nd would be nice because the Penguins don't have a 2nd, but Heidt seems like a really enticing C prospect that the Penguins are lacking in the system.

I also like Hartman though and see value in him, despite him having a bad season.
 
Empoleon8771 said:
I would probably do just Hartman and Heidt for Rakell as well. The 2nd would be nice because the Penguins don't have a 2nd, but Heidt seems like a really enticing C prospect that the Penguins are lacking in the system.

I also like Hartman though and see value in him, despite him having a bad season.
Click to expand...
The wild have no reason to move Hartman for a worse contract/ player and Ryan Hartman isn’t going to waive.

Why would wild pay anything to Pittsburgh to take on a worse contract and cap for ? Somehow wild will have to add more? No thanks
 
Hockeyfan200 said:
The wild have no reason to move Hartman for a worse contract/ player and Ryan Hartman isn’t going to waive.

Why would wild pay anything to Pittsburgh to take on a worse contract and cap for ? Somehow wild will have to add more? No thanks
Click to expand...

What are you talking about "worse player"? Rakell has both more goals and more assists than Hartman has points this year.

Hartman has 7 goals and 16 points in 46 games. Rakell has 23 goals and 43 points in 52 games. Hartman isn't as bad as his production this year has been, nor is Rakell as good as his production this year has been, but calling Rakell a "worse player" is just a laughably false statement.

Rakell is a 25 goal, 55 point winger having a phenomenal season. Hartman is a 20 goal, 45 point winger that's having a bad season.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nfumass
Don't think the value is terrible, just don't think it makes a whole lot of sense for where the Wild are at and their prospects this year.

The through 27-28 on Rakell is what really kind of kills it for me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom