Discussion in 'Minnesota Wild' started by Bazeek, Apr 2, 2021.
I thought Hanzl was considered a #3C?
He was. The idea was to overload at 3C behind Staal/Koivu.
Kaprizov - Rossi - Fiala (100% OZ and NZ starts)
Boldy - Danault - Zuccarello (secondary defense matchups, offensively capable)
Greenway - JEE - Foligno (primary defensive matchups, grinding forecheckers)
Parise - Sturm - Hartman (very capable 4th line)
Yeah that a situation where I'd be excited going into next year. Danault is a legit 2C, so to plop him onto the roster would be really nice. I do think Rossi will spend the first 10 games or so in Iowa, though.
I'm thinking Hartman may price himself out of Minnesota after the season. Could (or should) we pay a 4th liner ~$2.5 million AAV...especially when we have a $7.5 million 4th line player on the LW?
you said we hadnt traded for a top 6 center and were the only team in the division not to.. i named 2.
for us, but he was top 6 at arizona at the time
Agree here. Don't see anyway Hartman is on the team next year. Flat cap, combined with career season and arbitration rights = far too much for a player we would ideally want on the 4th line.
“Since the lockout”.
Hanzal played 20 games for us and he wasn’t a top 6 center. If we traded Rask, we aren’t trading a “top 6 center”.
he wasnt a top 6 for us, but he was 2c when we aquired him... just because we didnt play him in the top 6 didnt mean he wasnt one.
The fact that he was a 2C in Arizona is irrelevant. He was a 2C in the same way Victor Rask is a 2C for us...out of necessity, not because they are looked at that way across the majority of the league. I doubt most teams would look at Rask as a 2C just because he plays that role for the Wild.
hanzal and rask arent even in the same ballpark as players and comparing them is almost offensive to hanzal.
And because he was one in Arizona doesn’t mean he was one legitimately.
Well there goes the Borgstrom idea.
Don't make Hanzal out to be anything more than he was.....his career numbers aren't much better than Rask's.
clearing cap for dumba?
Hanzal was good player, but very injury prone. Doesn't matter how good you are if you aren't on the ice.
Unlikely but not impossible... they managed to clear a good chunk of space without giving up anything that was in their long term plans.
But does he make Strome expendable?
I'm not sure where they're at with Strome right now. Borgstrom seems like too much of a wildcard to make any NHL'er expendable, but I don't know how strongly Strome factors into their plans either way. Adding some prospect depth can't hurt, though.
We are talking about replacing Rask.
JEE is on pace for 43 points in 82 games.
Hartman is on pace for 42 points in 82 games.
Both are terrible at faceoffs, but they are very difficult to play against. Guerin and Evason both like their games, and both contribute a lot to the Wild's new identity. Unless Hartman tries to break the bank, they will be the likely 2nd and 3rd line centers next year.
Is Guerin really so concerned about giving Rossi a run at the 1st line center spot when he has the talent and ability to do it? He just removed the blockers from JEE and Greenway, and that has been rewarded. He may try again.
We need to curb all trade talks and focus on money and contracts for our runs.
Fiala is playing himself into his career contract and we are giving one to kap regardless. Ek is showing development and little by little raising that floor for his extension. He has center org need leverage.
Greenway has his own leverage for his game as does Kahko.
We need to figure out their deals and what we have to work with for next year while planning for expansion simultaneously.
I don't see Borgstrom or Stillman as prospects. This is just a bizarre trade. Borgstrom and Stillman are 23, but that's on the older part of the prospect scale.
I don't see Guerin doing much at the deadline.
Older, but the door hasn't closed at 23. We've got multiple guys playing this year that didn't make the NHL until that age or later.
I agree that it's kind of an odd one for Chicago, though.
Separate names with a comma.