Tidbits: Around the League: NHL News - 2022-23

Status
Not open for further replies.

Digitalbooya

By order of the Peaky Blinders
Sponsor
Jul 10, 2010
26,491
7,333
Wisconsin
There are benefits that comes with that…
I honestly can’t think of one benefit for the player gained from higher taxes that is better than the United States. The only plausible reason I can see wanting to play in Canada is being closer to family and playing in front of hardcore fans.
 

Wild11MN

First round losers
May 28, 2013
13,217
1,999
MN
Turns out that sometimes guys like Eichel are worth the risk. The hard part is figuring that out for each individual case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BagHead

NHL1674

Whatever...
Sponsor
Aug 8, 2008
28,096
5,307
Minnesota
It was really a meh kind of Finals though. Folks I've talked with just didn't care when it got down to the final two. Not a lot of fanfare, which is unusual for the final round. Don't know if it's a mixture of issues or if it was simply about the last two clubs standing.
 

Wild11MN

First round losers
May 28, 2013
13,217
1,999
MN
It was really a meh kind of Finals though. Folks I've talked with just didn't care when it got down to the final two. Not a lot of fanfare, which is unusual for the final round. Don't know if it's a mixture of issues or if it was simply about the last two clubs standing.
After a run of meh series before it, with a bunch that were never close, this one just followed the trend. I watched about half a game before watching about 10 minutes last night. Pretty boring playoff year altogether. I don't think it was just the teams left standing.
 

BagHead

Registered User
Dec 23, 2010
6,565
3,556
Minneapolis, MN
I'm still curious what our actual trade would've been. If I remember correctly, the draft behind-the-scenes said that they had it written on the board, but obviously was never released.
I remember Rossi's name being a mainstay in those discussions, at least on this board (no idea about real life). I imagine two 1sts would have been in the deal as well, in an effort to beat the Knights deal. Got to think that means the Wild wouldn't have drafted Yurov.

The Knights gave up Tuch, Krebs, a top 10 protected 1st, and a 2nd. Does Rossi, two 1sts (top 10 protected), and Foligno get it done? I have my doubts, even keeping in mind that this was the recent 26 points in 39 games Foligno. Maybe they'd have wanted Greenway instead. I just don't see a roster player on the Wild that matches up at all with Tuch besides Boldy or Fiala, who I think were TOO much to offer in addition to the rest.

I think the Wild could have beaten it, but it would mean they wouldn't have Rossi, Yurov, their 1st this year, and one of Boldy or Faber. Expensive as heck, but potentially worth it. It certainly beats the Knight's offer.
 

AKL

Danila Yurov Fan Club President
Sponsor
Dec 10, 2012
39,649
18,068
I remember Rossi's name being a mainstay in those discussions, at least on this board (no idea about real life). I imagine two 1sts would have been in the deal as well, in an effort to beat the Knights deal. Got to think that means the Wild wouldn't have drafted Yurov.

The Knights gave up Tuch, Krebs, a top 10 protected 1st, and a 2nd. Does Rossi, two 1sts (top 10 protected), and Foligno get it done? I have my doubts, even keeping in mind that this was the recent 26 points in 39 games Foligno. Maybe they'd have wanted Greenway instead. I just don't see a roster player on the Wild that matches up at all with Tuch besides Boldy or Fiala, who I think were TOO much to offer in addition to the rest.

I think the Wild could have beaten it, but it would mean they wouldn't have Rossi, Yurov, their 1st this year, and one of Boldy or Faber. Expensive as heck, but potentially worth it. It certainly beats the Knight's offer.

I think it was both Rossi and Boldy + more. You're probably right that the Yurov pick would have gone the other way, but that could mean Ohgren too. Recall that we had Yurov ranked higher but took Ohgren first because they thought it was less likely that Ohgren falls.

I don't think Faber comes into play here because he was still a Kings prospect at the time.

Looking at each piece 1:1, it would probably look similar to:

Tuch=Boldy
Krebs=Rossi
1st=Yurov or Ohgren
2nd=our 2nd this summer

Obviously we'd have to send cap back (or somewhere else), so I'm not sure how you reconcile that with the value. The only sizeable contracts we had to send back were Dumba and Zuccarello
 
Last edited:

BagHead

Registered User
Dec 23, 2010
6,565
3,556
Minneapolis, MN
I think it was both Rossi and Boldy + more. You're probably right that the Yurov pick would have gone the other way, but that could mean Ohgren too. Recall that we had Yurov ranked higher but took Ohgren first because they thought it was less likely that Ohgren falls.

I don't think Faber comes into play here because he was still a Kings prospect at the time.

Looking at each piece 1:1, it would probably look similar to:

Tuch=Boldy
Krebs=Rossi
1st=Yurov or Ohgren
2nd=our 2nd this summer

Obviously we'd have to send cap back (or somewhere else), so I'm not sure how you reconcile that with the value. The only sizeable contracts we had to send back were Dumba and Zuccarello
To be clear, I only brought up Faber because I had Fiala in there as an option to go to Buffalo. But anyway, I think you're spot on with this post.
 

NHL1674

Whatever...
Sponsor
Aug 8, 2008
28,096
5,307
Minnesota
So Suter still considers himself a top 4 defenseman. That article hints that Suter once again has a bit of an attitude problem when it comes to reducing his minutes. I know we always have to take things with a grain of salt, but when you start to hear the same thing over and over no matter what team he's playing for.....well....there has to be some truth there.

Still glad we bought him out.

 

thestonedkoala

Going Dark
Aug 27, 2004
28,257
1,617
So Suter still considers himself a top 4 defenseman. That article hints that Suter once again has a bit of an attitude problem when it comes to reducing his minutes. I know we always have to take things with a grain of salt, but when you start to hear the same thing over and over no matter what team he's playing for.....well....there has to be some truth there.

Still glad we bought him out.


I find it fascinating how much I got raked over the coals about dumping Suter and then when we actually do it was a great decision.
 

57special

Posting the right way since 2012.
Sep 5, 2012
48,162
19,865
MN
Tbh, I don’t think buying out Suter mattered all that much. He is certainly better than Goligoski, and cheaper once you factor everything in, but I don’t think he would be a difference maker in the playoffs, though he was pretty good against us. I ignore the other stuff… our wonderful dressing room made zero difference on the ice. If anything, we were worse. Bunch of disappearing acts on ice, but hey, if they have a “good room”, who am I to criticize?🤪
 
  • Like
Reactions: TaLoN

Minnewildsota

He who laughs last thinks slowest
Jun 7, 2010
8,732
3,018
Tbh, I don’t think buying out Suter mattered all that much. He is certainly better than Goligoski, and cheaper once you factor everything in, but I don’t think he would be a difference maker in the playoffs, though he was pretty good against us. I ignore the other stuff… our wonderful dressing room made zero difference on the ice. If anything, we were worse. Bunch of disappearing acts on ice, but hey, if they have a “good room”, who am I to criticize?🤪
We were? How do you quantify that?

Once Parise and Suter were gone we put up more points in both seasons, but we were worse? Seems like solid logic there.
 

Saga of the Elk

Honoured Person
May 31, 2008
3,166
975
We haven't made it past the first round.

Parise led those playoff wins. Suter was his typical below-average playoff performer. He's a calming presence that sucks the energy out of shifts, including those of his own team. This season, a greatly-diminished Parise actually did show some life, while Suter was arguably one of the worst players for any team.

I would attribute those two minor, symbolic wins as much to the "class of 2010" -- Zucker, Granlund, Nino, Coyle -- being in their prime and bringing some actual energy to games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BagHead

NHL1674

Whatever...
Sponsor
Aug 8, 2008
28,096
5,307
Minnesota
Suter may have been better than Goli, but he's not a top-4 guy anymore. And that's the problem. He thinks he is, and seems to have a problem with being treated otherwise. His reasons for the decline is lack of opportunities and rotating partners. While some of that can be a factor, he needs to realize that his game isn't as sharp as it was 10 years ago.

In the end, it wouldn't have made a difference for us these past two years in the postseason. He wouldn't have gotten us any further.

It's just interesting to me that there is an actual possibility of him being bought out twice in such a short amount of time.
 

BagHead

Registered User
Dec 23, 2010
6,565
3,556
Minneapolis, MN
We haven't made it past the first round.
Sounds more like they were the same rather than worse, but I think his point about the regular season still holds some weight. The regular season doesn't matter if you're looking at it from the viewpoint of "if they didn't get past the first round, they're the same" but it does matter if you're trying to actually measure the team's potential to do so (better regular season teams tend to win more in the playoffs than their counterparts). That doesn't mean they'll live up to that potential, but the potential is still real.
 

Minnewildsota

He who laughs last thinks slowest
Jun 7, 2010
8,732
3,018
Talking post season
K. Well we made it past the first round 2/10 seasons ('14 and '15) they were here. We missed the playoffs 2/10 years they were here.

Hard to quantify being worse when there's only been 2 seasons since they were bought out. We haven't made it past the first round without them, but it had been 5 years since we advanced while they were here. We haven't missed the playoffs since they left so....

Not worse.
 

TaLoN

Red 5 standing by
Sponsor
May 30, 2010
50,877
24,539
Farmington, MN
K. Well we made it past the first round 2/10 seasons ('14 and '15) they were here. We missed the playoffs 2/10 years they were here.

Hard to quantify being worse when there's only been 2 seasons since they were bought out. We haven't made it past the first round without them, but it had been 5 years since we advanced while they were here. We haven't missed the playoffs since they left so....

Not worse.
I agree with the same or worse statement though. At best we've been the same in some cases worse.
In the end, it's semantics and we certainly weren't better without them in the post season and at best we were just the same, so no real difference.
 

Minnewildsota

He who laughs last thinks slowest
Jun 7, 2010
8,732
3,018
This^. Not only that, but we showed a lack of fight and competitiveness … our past two playoff whiffs have been pretty uninspiring. Don’t know how you can argue otherwise.

So pretty much the same with every other year we were bounced in the first round.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad