Speculation: Trade and Free Agency Talk - LIII

[AKL]

I’d move a first and Lambos plus something else that stings a little less for Miller. I would think about a first and Rossi. Wallstedt would not be on the table.

Miller would be a damn near perfect fit on this team.

Wow

 

[ODoyle]

I’d move a first and Lambos plus something else that stings a little less for Miller. I would think about a first and Rossi. Wallstedt would not be on the table.

Miller would be a damn near perfect fit on this team.

I feel we would really regret moving Lambos.

 

[AKL]

I feel we would really regret moving Lambos.

I don't think we'd regret moving Lambos as much as we'd regret moving the guy who's supposed to be our top center for the next decade+ for a winger we could have for a max of two years at the expense of Fiala and Dumba.

 

[Prior]

Miller on this roster with no noteworthy subtractions make it a legitimate contender even with its goaltending. He instantly gives the PP ability and handedness it does not have. The moment he is here he’s the best player not named Kaprizov.

 

[AKL]

Miller on this roster with no noteworthy subtractions make it a legitimate contender even with its goaltending. He instantly gives the PP ability and handedness it does not have. The moment he is here he’s the best player not named Kaprizov.

I must have missed something, are we suddenly short on left handed wingers? We can agree to dsiagree on whether Miller makes us a contender or not, but I don't see how adding another lefty gives us an element we don't have in terms of handedness.

 

[Prior]

I must have missed something, are we suddenly short on left handed wingers? We can agree to dsiagree on whether Miller makes us a contender or not, but I don't see how adding another lefty gives us an element we don't have in terms of handedness.

Me getting his hands wrong is about the same as calling him a wing and not recognizing that’s not the case on the Wild.

 

[AKL]

Me getting his hands wrong is about the same as calling him a wing and not recognizing that’s not the case on the Wild.

It seems there are a lot of guys who play wing that Wild fans would want to turn into centers this season. Miller, Giroux, Pavelski. It doesn't change the fact that these guys have been wingers. Don't really care where you want him to play on this roster if that's not what he's been playing.

You getting his handedness wrong demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of who the player is and what he brings to this team. Kinda makes the "he's a perfect fit [in large part] because of his handedness" ring a little more hollow when you didn't know he's left handed.

 

[Prior]

It seems there are a lot of guys who play wing that Wild fans would want to turn into centers this season. Miller, Giroux, Pavelski. It doesn't change the fact that these guys have been wingers. Don't really care where you want him to play on this roster if that's not what he's been playing.

You getting his hands wrong demonstrated a fundamental misunderstanding of who the player is and what he brings to this team. Kinda makes the "he's a perfect fit [in large part] because of his handedness" ring a little more hollow when you didn't know he's left handed.

Cool, legitimately made a mistake. Suppose that doesn’t happen to you. Watch where he is on the Vancouver PP and what he does and tell me the Wild doesn’t need someone in that spot who can operate that way.

The Wild’s center on their top line is a wing, what are we talking about here? Pavelski and Giroux have aged out of their spots, Miller is certainly not that nor is getting there in the time the Wild would have him.

 

[DeagleJenkins]

No. I liked Dach a lot in 2019. In his rookie year he looked really good, like a future 1C. Haven't watched him this season, and I know he had a severe injury last season, but at this point trading Rossi+1st would be taking two steps back to go one step forward. Rossi looks like he can be every bit the player Dach is, so adding on top of him is just a waste.

If, for whatever reason, Chicago was really motivated to sell low, 1st+Marat is something I'd do. But I don't really know why Chicago would be interested in that.

agreed rossi +1st might be too rich considering dach is not blowing up. 1st+marat is too easy to sign the papers to get dach, feels like a low ball offer that gets easily rejected.

 

[Minnewildsota]

Stay the course. Don’t trade any significant assets away, whether it be players or picks.
The teams drafting and development have seemingly taken a step in the right direction.

 

[north21]

I think a little help on D and an upgraded center for Boldy and Fiala would be ideal, keep the 1st but see what is available.

 

[guitarhunterdude]

I look at the cap penalties for the next three years, our current record against the top ~8 teams, the up-and coming groups of youngsters in Anaheim, LA and Detroit, and our shiny new scouting/draft group and wonder why it is people aren't willing to wait this out and build through the draft. Still not convinced Kaprizov will be able to step up and carry his line once things get rough in the playoffs either, but that's a secondary concern to keeping draft capital to me. And I just don't see how any of the available rentals, even Giroux or Chycrun, puts us over the top.

Stay the course. In Brackett we trust.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I look at the cap penalties for the next three years, our current record against the top ~8 teams, the up-and coming groups of youngsters in Anaheim, LA and Detroit, and our shiny new scouting/draft group and wonder why it is people aren't willing to wait this out and build through the draft. Still not convinced Kaprizov will be able to step up and carry his line once things get rough in the playoffs either, but that's a secondary concern to keeping draft capital to me. And I just don't see how any of the available rentals, even Giroux or Chycrun, puts us over the top.

Stay the course. In Brackett we trust.

Because I think that people, including myself sometimes, are worried about wasting the the prime years of the best player that we've ever had. It's not egregious to try and figure out a way to strike at something while you've got a 100+ caliber player in his prime.

I guess for some people, the plan is for the 2019-2023 draft classes to be better support for a 80+ point Kaprizov and not need him to be the 100+ point player. Which is probably pretty defensible itself.

 

[AKL]

Because I think that people, including myself sometimes, are worried about wasting the the prime years of the best player that we've ever had. It's not egregious to try and figure out a way to strike at something while you've got a 100+ caliber player in his prime.

I guess for some people, the plan is for the 2019-2023 draft classes to be better support for a 80+ point Kaprizov and not need him to be the 100+ point player. Which is probably pretty defensible itself.

That's how the sports go. Teams win championships, not individual players.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

That's how the sports go. Teams win championships, not individual players.

And teams are comprised of individual players, and quite often you need great individual players to be a championship caliber team.

 

[AKL]

And teams are comprised of individual players, and quite often you need great individual players to be a championship caliber team.

Right, but consider this: 100% of teams that have won a championship up through this point in history have done so without a prime Kaprizov, and we have no evidence that winning a Cup is easier with a prime Kaprizov than with another group of players.

So given those two facts (or postulations, at the very least), it doesn't make any logical sense to try to go all in around Kaprizov for the few years he's guaranteed to be here (or the one single year most people want to do it). It makes far more sense to keep building the best team from top to bottom, regardless of Kaprizov, rather than building the best team we can around Kaprizov while he's here.

I mean there's a reason Guerin has tried hammering the point that he's not going to make any moves that benefit us short term at the expense of the long term, right? Because you're setting yourself up much better for a 5-10 year window down the line, as opposed to a one year window now. And a lot of people think you can have both, and that kind of mentality of shooting straight down the middle is exactly why we've been right down the middle for the last 10 years.

And to your point about needing great players to win a Cup, I'm no stranger to that idea. I've been advocating for that for years. Which is why I'm not a fan of trading potential great players for not-great players to add to our one great player. Usually you wait until you have the great players in place before you start filling in around them at the deadline.

 

[DANOZ28]

yuckk

whats wrong with a possible low cost center who happens to be russian? (on pace for 20 goals) i agree with "in brackett we trust" however adding a cheap/low cost center would be a good thing for a deep cup run.

 

[Wabit]

I look at the cap penalties for the next three years, our current record against the top ~8 teams, the up-and coming groups of youngsters in Anaheim, LA and Detroit, and our shiny new scouting/draft group and wonder why it is people aren't willing to wait this out and build through the draft. Still not convinced Kaprizov will be able to step up and carry his line once things get rough in the playoffs either, but that's a secondary concern to keeping draft capital to me. And I just don't see how any of the available rentals, even Giroux or Chycrun, puts us over the top.

Stay the course. In Brackett we trust.

Chychrun and Grioux are 2 completely different conversations. One is an 34 year old rental and the other is a (soon to be) 24yo on a good 3+ year contract.

 

[Drewcifer]

Trading picks or prospects for a rental, even a center, is asinine given what the Wild are looking at for the next three years. This is not the year to mortgage the future to go all in.

If we can pick up someone on a good contract who will be here for a few years that is a different story.

 

[guitarhunterdude]

Chychrun and Grioux are 2 completely different conversations. One is an 34 year old rental and the other is a (soon to be) 24yo on a good 3+ year contract.

Correct, but I'm making the assumption that we'd need to give 1st + Rossi + ? or something similar for Chychrun, which is probably something I'd avoid just as soon as a 1st for Giroux rental. All he'd be doing is keeping us in the mushy middle for the next 3 years, in addition to losing out on the pick and prospect(s) in the trade.

Then again maybe Brackett and Co. don't draft well or our development staff suck and we're sitting here in 4 years wishing we had anyone like that on D. I can't say which is really more likely to work out or not; I just know that the plan seems to be to draft and develop a core based around a good amateur scouting team, and my vote is to stick with the plan and see what happens.

Because I think that people, including myself sometimes, are worried about wasting the the prime years of the best player that we've ever had. It's not egregious to try and figure out a way to strike at something while you've got a 100+ caliber player in his prime.

I guess for some people, the plan is for the 2019-2023 draft classes to be better support for a 80+ point Kaprizov and not need him to be the 100+ point player. Which is probably pretty defensible itself.

I've just gotten to the point of accepting that as an inevitability due to the timing of the buyouts, and hope we show enough with our younger guys in 4-5 years that he's willing to stick around until his early-mid 30s, or, God forbid, we can trade him for a haul.

 

[GuerinUp]

whats wrong with a possible low cost center who happens to be russian? (on pace for 20 goals) i agree with "in brackett we trust" however adding a cheap/low cost center would be a good thing for a deep cup run.

he hasnt had a good season once. Im firmly from the camp, if youre going to make a move, either you buy the best asset available, or you dont buy at all.

Right, but consider this: 100% of teams that have won a championship up through this point in history have done so without a prime Kaprizov, and we have no evidence that winning a Cup is easier with a prime Kaprizov than with another group of players.

So given those two facts (or postulations, at the very least), it doesn't make any logical sense to try to go all in around Kaprizov for the few years he's guaranteed to be here (or the one single year most people want to do it). It makes far more sense to keep building the best team from top to bottom, regardless of Kaprizov, rather than building the best team we can around Kaprizov while he's here.

I mean there's a reason Guerin has tried hammering the point that he's not going to make any moves that benefit us short term at the expense of the long term, right? Because you're setting yourself up much better for a 5-10 year window down the line, as opposed to a one year window now. And a lot of people think you can have both, and that kind of mentality of shooting straight down the middle is exactly why we've been right down the middle for the last 10 years.

And to your point about needing great players to win a Cup, I'm no stranger to that idea. I've been advocating for that for years. Which is why I'm not a fan of trading potential great players for not-great players to add to our one great player. Usually you wait until you have the great players in place before you start filling in around them at the deadline.

what..... kucherov, tarasenko, washington had multiple stars in their primes,crosby, kane/toews, kopitar..... EVERY team had a prime Kaprizov like players...

also, alot of those teams had a great pickup at the deadline

 

[AKL]

what..... kucherov, tarasenko, washington had multiple stars in their primes,crosby, kane/toews, kopitar..... EVERY team had a prime Kaprizov like players...

also, alot of those teams had a great pickup at the deadline

None of those players are Kaprizov so I think you missed the mark here.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

what..... kucherov, tarasenko, washington had multiple stars in their primes,crosby, kane/toews, kopitar..... EVERY team had a prime Kaprizov like players...

also, alot of those teams had a great pickup at the deadline

I think you missed, what I can only assume, was a joke that he was trying to make.

 

[AKL]

I think you missed, what I can only assume, was a joke that he was trying to make.

Not a joke. 100% of teams have won a Cup without prime Kaprizov so it's possible to win one without prime Kaprizov.

 

[GuerinUp]

None of those players are Kaprizov so I think you missed the mark here.

i think you wrote a whole lot of words, to prove a point, that in itself is false. you stated you need great players around your great player before you make deadline moves... something we have. We literally went to game 7 against vegas last year, and barring an injury to our best defenseman, couldve won that game and series. We just took the best team in the west to a shootout with our 2 best defensemen out of the game, and arguably our best or second best center out. our team is better this year than it was last year.

There is no harm in losing 1 high 20s first round pick to take a swing. that pick, may end up being a serviceable player, but the chance of it being an elite one is very slim.

now if the original post was sarcasm, i missed it in translation and i apologize.