also if ennis cant get the job done kunin is a good plan B.
Also gained Cullen. You're also leaving out that we are essentially "gaining" Eriksson Ek, because it looks as if he's going to be given every opportunity to prove himself. If Ek can be a legit 3rd line center, and Cullen slots in on the 4th line, I think we're doing pretty well.
Also forgot losing Hanzal. Love Cullen, but Hanzal is a better player at this point in their careers. I don't get how Olofsson is all of a sudden a proven NHL Dman. He's anything but. Same with Ek. A lot of wishful thinking going on. Look at how long it took Zucker and Nino to develop.
Also forgot losing Hanzal. Love Cullen, but Hanzal is a better player at this point in their careers. I don't get how Olofsson is all of a sudden a proven NHL Dman. He's anything but. Same with Ek. A lot of wishful thinking going on. Look at how long it took Zucker and Nino to develop.
Unless Quincy positivity surprises us, I'm really concerned about the blueline.
Although, BB is giving me hope that he'll finally put Suter-Dumba and Brodin-Spurgeon together. Our imbalance of our pairings has been a major contributor to untimely goals against.
I think Reilly's main problem is that he's got to beat out Olofsson AND hope that Quincy is reliable defensively to a point where BB can trust a Reilly-Quincy bottom pairing.I'm with you on those pairings, though I thought that Brodin/Olofsson looked pretty good in their short time together. I can't recall Spurgeon and Brodin ever playing together. I'm sure it must've happened. Is it possible that it won't work out?
One thing for sure is that Brodin must be encouraged to be more aggressive offensively. I thought Stevens was good at that, and wouldn't let Brodin settle into a defense only role that he gravitates to. Spurgeon is a great role model for both Brodin and Dumba when it comes to supplying offense from the back end w/o hurting the D.
I do think that Reilly has a chance to be an effective NHL'er. He has all the tools.
Also forgot losing Hanzal. Love Cullen, but Hanzal is a better player at this point in their careers. .
Seriously? You're comparing Cullen and Hanzal?
Cullen - $1 mil base, possible $700K in bonuses for a year.
Hanzal - $4.75 mil per for THREE years.
Let's keep making nonsense comparisons, apples to lawn chairs...
And forget real world things like Hanzal just might be the slowest player in the NHL, there's no way the Wild could fit that albatross contract into their payroll, a three year contract for a grossly over-rated player would block prospects like EEk or Kunin...
I was OK with the Hanzal/White trade at the time, but in retrospect it blows my mind that anyone wouldn't label it a total train wreck. Hanzal was a horrible fit. A big, at best moderately talented, super slow motion player on a team, that had success as a speed transition/possession team... Classic BAD fit.
Seriously? You're comparing Cullen and Hanzal?
Cullen - $1 mil base, possible $700K in bonuses for a year.
Hanzal - $4.75 mil per for THREE years.
Let's keep making nonsense comparisons, apples to lawn chairs...
And forget real world things like Hanzal just might be the slowest player in the NHL, there's no way the Wild could fit that albatross contract into their payroll, a three year contract for a grossly over-rated player would block prospects like EEk or Kunin...
I was OK with the Hanzal/White trade at the time, but in retrospect it blows my mind that anyone wouldn't label it a total train wreck. Hanzal was a horrible fit. A big, at best moderately talented, super slow motion player on a team, that had success as a speed transition/possession team... Classic BAD fit.