Speculation: Trade and Free Agency - 2024-25
- Thread starter TaLoN
- Start date
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
It's more of a 'I can see them liking him the least of the three' thing, where then subsequently doesn't make less sense (to them).
I'm just trying to imagine scenarios where it is actually one of the big three getting moved, and in that case it's easiest to see it being Yurov. I don't think it's likely to be him and I don't think they dislike him, I'm just stretching my imagination.
Obviously biased but I think Buium is a hell of a lot better prospect than Jiricek. Can’t see them drafting him a few months ago and turn around to flip him for another prospect.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
I think it needs a guy like Buium to hit his potential just as much as it needs scoring forwards. Brodin-Middleton-Chisholm isn't that great, especially long term. That's why my personal opinion is that Wallstedt would make the most sense of the three, because we already have Gus, you only need one good goalie, and frankly you don't even need a world beater goalie to win Cups, just a capable starter to get hot at the right time.
Minnewildsota
He who laughs last thinks slowest
- Jun 7, 2010
- 8,898
- 3,097
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
This is a big part of why I could see it being Yurov more easily than the other two, from managements perspective. Yurov isn't the shiny new toy, he's already extended in Russia once (though by all accounts Guerin was on board and he won't extend again), and he's having a down year statistically.
Buium is shiny and new and looks like a future star in the making. Wallstedt is someone they've already invested pretty heavily in and see him as the future 1G.
I wouldn’t do it, but out those three (Buium, Yurov, Wallstedt) I think the Wild are most prepared to cover LD than center or goaltending.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
I think you're looking at it mostly from a position point of view, and I don't think position would be much of a consideration in this specific scenario. Think they'd look at which player they like the most and who they project to be best.
I don’t want to say Yurov would be the end all be all in Kaprizov re-signing but if not a prospect who could potentially provide an impact, they’d need to find a legitimate top 6 player if they were to move Yurov if this type of deal in my view. Putting all your top 6 hopes in Yurov being that guy might not be the best plan but if you have him and potentially get a Brock Nelson on a reasonable deal, that looks workable.
Regardless the elephant in the room is needing to show Kaprizov a legitimate roster I think Yurov is in the that conversation to help get there.
I don't see that Yurov has followed up last year's performance with an equally good one this year, while Buium has picked up where he has left off. With Wallstedt's mediocre numbers down in Iowa, I think Buium is our #1 prospect.
CBJ has some decent D prospects besides Jiricek in Mateychuk, Svozil, and Elick. I could see CBJ being vaguely interested in reuniting Spacek and Svozil, but otherwise, they are not going to be excited by Lambos, Peart, ROR, Healey of the like coming back in a trade. I can see Hunt having some value, especially if Dean puts in a good word for him. Players like Ohgren would be of the most interest, assuming that Rossi in not available. It's not a stretch to imagine Ohgren playing on their team sometime this year, unlike someone like Yurov.
CBJ has some decent D prospects besides Jiricek in Mateychuk, Svozil, and Elick. I could see CBJ being vaguely interested in reuniting Spacek and Svozil, but otherwise, they are not going to be excited by Lambos, Peart, ROR, Healey of the like coming back in a trade. I can see Hunt having some value, especially if Dean puts in a good word for him. Players like Ohgren would be of the most interest, assuming that Rossi in not available. It's not a stretch to imagine Ohgren playing on their team sometime this year, unlike someone like Yurov.
Last edited:
I’m not really interested in adding any 20yo that has significant question marks around their ability to skate. Hard pass
- Mar 19, 2023
- 4,358
- 2,358
If he can't crack the Jackets lineup, then yeah.....big question marks. I'm not against trading for him, but as long as it doesn't require our best prospects.
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
Buium is still going to be on the under side of 25 when Middleton's extension expires, let alone Brodin's time here. There is no argument in favor of Buium being the guy.
There actually isn't any argument for any of the big 3 being the guy in the deal for a guy that'll be playing behind Faber for his entire time here. It's a terrible allocation of resources.
Heidt is the most obvious choice if you consider him redundant as a "smaller center" with Rossi on the roster.
There actually isn't any argument for any of the big 3 being the guy in the deal for a guy that'll be playing behind Faber for his entire time here. It's a terrible allocation of resources.
Heidt is the most obvious choice if you consider him redundant as a "smaller center" with Rossi on the roster.
Heidt + a non-1st draft pick would be absolute no brainer in my mind. Adding this year’s first starts to get questionable for me but probably borders more on the side of fair.
If that’s what it would take, would have assume a lot of other organizations have a lot of pause regarding this kid.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
I actually question if it's a good allocation of resources to trade Heidt or Ohgren for a guy who will be playing behind Faber his entire time here, as well. We're not swimming in top six talent as it is, and not all of Yurov, Heidt and Ohgren will pan out like we hope. Plus, I have no issue moving someone to the third line if necessary, most championship teams have some kind of offensive punch to their third line.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
You know, we always talked about the logjam we had at LD, which has so far turned out not be a logjam at all (another + for keeping Ohgren and Heidt)
But with that, we talked a lot about how we could trade from that supposed position of strength to address a position of weakness. It's a complete pipe dream, but doing something like Lambos/Hunt+Spacek+1st/2nd could be what that type of deal would look like, if for whatever reason Waddell really liked Lambos/Hunt/Spacek/etc.
Peart might be another guy to consider in all of this.
But with that, we talked a lot about how we could trade from that supposed position of strength to address a position of weakness. It's a complete pipe dream, but doing something like Lambos/Hunt+Spacek+1st/2nd could be what that type of deal would look like, if for whatever reason Waddell really liked Lambos/Hunt/Spacek/etc.
Peart might be another guy to consider in all of this.
I would prefer to give a LHD and a pick to moving any of Ohgren, Yurov, Heidt....and no one has mentioned Marat, who I think has value. We need top 9 forward talent, and I don't know which of those players will end up being good, if any.
For all we know, CBJ might be desperate to acquire Stramel, and BG is refusing to give him up.
For all we know, CBJ might be desperate to acquire Stramel, and BG is refusing to give him up.
- Dec 10, 2012
- 40,761
- 19,007
One person did, thestonedkoala I think, but Russo did report that they don't want to take away from their NHL roster, and even though he's just a 4C, we don't actually have a replacement for him.
I'd love to give up a LD instead of Ohgren or Heidt, I just don't see any of our LD being as appealing as Ohgren or Heidt.
Ad
Latest posts
-
GDT: Game #23 - Oilers@Hockey Club - 7PM - Why Utah heff to be mad?
- Latest: CycloneSweep
-
-
