The benefit of Vanek is his contract goes away at the end of the year, and he's possibly sellable during the off season or at the deadline. He is also already a probable 20 goal scorer already on the roster. You could replace him with 2 lesser guys, but those guys need roster spots. Without Vanek you still have 8 forwards for 9 spots, and the cap hits of whoever you bring in will last though next season which is when Nino, Granny, Reilly and Haula will be needing that cap space. Outside of Reilly it's pretty unlikely you are getting any of those guys signed on bridge deals.
Confirmed with Link: Bruce Boudreau new head coach of the Wild
- Thread starter Wild11MN
- Start date
- Status
The benefit of Vanek is his contract goes away at the end of the year, and he's possibly sellable during the off season or at the deadline. He is also already a probable 20 goal scorer already on the roster. You could replace him with 2 lesser guys, but those guys need roster spots. Without Vanek you still have 8 forwards for 9 spots, and the cap hits of whoever you bring in will last though next season which is when Nino, Granny, Reilly and Haula will be needing that cap space. Outside of Reilly it's pretty unlikely you are getting any of those guys signed on bridge deals.
Yup, right on. The only reason I'm still hesitant is - will we actually get those replacements? You can intend to sign a few in FA, but they might not want to come here.
Also very good points.
The problem is if we're in the playoff hunt, that makes us worse. It's not necessarily the wrong option, but I don't think GMCF will be thrilled by that.
It goes without saying that if he is productive and we are in the chase then we simply keep him.
Ultimately that is what is wrong with Minnesota is that they don't trade assets when they should. I mean New York Islanders were in the playoff hunt and traded Vanek with a 5th for Sebastian Collberg and a 2nd round pick.
At least that was something.
Engebretson
Thank you, sweet rabbit
Seriously, we're back in the GMCF thread again...
Back on the topic of the coach, is anyone else getting a little tired of hearing about Boudreau's "Minnesota ties" seeing as he only played 30 games in 1 season for a defunct WHA team? I mean, I know it's the offseason for us and all, but I've seen an eyebrow-raising amount of articles about Boudreau's "history" in Minnesota.
Back on the topic of the coach, is anyone else getting a little tired of hearing about Boudreau's "Minnesota ties" seeing as he only played 30 games in 1 season for a defunct WHA team? I mean, I know it's the offseason for us and all, but I've seen an eyebrow-raising amount of articles about Boudreau's "history" in Minnesota.
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
ThatGuy22
Registered User
- Oct 11, 2011
- 10,521
- 4,206
If 15 points out of the playoffs on Trade Deadline day is "in the playoff hunt", then yes. The Islanders were in the playoff hunt when they traded away Vanek...
My mistake, I confused 13-14 with 14-15. Still the point stands that Minnesota doesn't trade free agents.
It'll be interesting to see what Bruce does with the roster. I honestly hope that the roster from last year goes into this year, so we can at least we can get an honest evaluation of the roster.
I think Boudreau will want Vanek to stick around. He's too good of a weapon on your 3rd line to justify paying to get rid of him. As much as I liked Nino-Haula-Pominville, I'd like to see Nino get a look with the Finns. That line has the potential to be dominant in both ends.
Granlund-Koivu-Nino
Parise-Haula-Pominville
Vanek-Coyle-Zucker
Unless we can get a true C that can move Coyle to RW, I wouldn't mind these units. Key thing for me is keeping 64 on the W and putting 22 in a position to succeed, something Yeo was always hesitant to do.
Granlund-Koivu-Nino
Parise-Haula-Pominville
Vanek-Coyle-Zucker
Unless we can get a true C that can move Coyle to RW, I wouldn't mind these units. Key thing for me is keeping 64 on the W and putting 22 in a position to succeed, something Yeo was always hesitant to do.
Chemistry is a crazy thing and it changes over time and after coaching/tactical changes. Look no further than the end of the 14/15 season when everyone was penciling in a Vanek-Coyle-Fontaine line after their performance down the stretch. Now one is 99% not a part of our team and another is a potential buy-out. I'm all for Bruce testing out his own lines, I think all 3 of those players are fine complimentary players with the rest of our roster who should be able to gel with whoever they play with, and if that makes us a better team its the right decision.
Fremitus Borealis
Flügelstürmer
Well yeah, you could say the same about the Nino-Koivu-Zucker line for the first third of the season, when they were one of the best lines in the NHL. After their hot streak stopped, it barely looked like they were playing the same game, let alone on the ice together
Also worth mentioning Bruce's comments made it sound like he wants familiar faces on the bench with him, specifically hinted (by Russo) as Bob Woods and John Anderson.
Torch has some assistant interviews elsewhere, but if he doesn't get them I wonder how much the bridge is burned here, or if Bruce would even want him as an assistant.
Torch has some assistant interviews elsewhere, but if he doesn't get them I wonder how much the bridge is burned here, or if Bruce would even want him as an assistant.
My guarantee on Bruno held true.
No surprise on keeping Mason at all, he's a quality coach. Looks like Darby's role is getting reduced if he's no longer on the bench.
Bookman
Registered User
I know a couple guys that would fit Bruce like a glove:
Not a slam, he just reminds me a lot of Curly.
Not a slam, he just reminds me a lot of Curly.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
GAME 7 - North Bay Battalion @ Oshawa Generals - Series tied 3-3Wagers: 4Staked: $875.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Series Winner Florida Panthers vs Boston BruinsWagers: 14Staked: $110,895.00Event closes- Updated:
-