He was. The idea was to overload at 3C behind Staal/Koivu.I thought Hanzl was considered a #3C?
It comes down to the contract for me 4 years at 5 million is the most id give him. We’re an ideal for for him, so maybe he’s intruiged. I really like the player. You don’t need a ppg center man if Fiala/Kaprizov are what they’ve been, 50 point, selke caliber player is a welcome addition while we continue to build in my book.
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.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)
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)
Hanzal wasn’t really a solution for us, whereas these guys were for their teams. And Demitra was ~15 years ago.
I thought Hanzl was considered a #3C?
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.
“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.
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.
hanzal and rask arent even in the same ballpark as players and comparing them is almost offensive to hanzal.
Hanzal was good player, but very injury prone. Doesn't matter how good you are if you aren't on the ice.Don't make Hanzal out to be anything more than he was.....his career numbers aren't much better than Rask's.
Unlikely but not impossible... they managed to clear a good chunk of space without giving up anything that was in their long term plans.clearing cap for dumba?
Well there goes the Borgstrom idea.
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.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.
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 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.