Speculation: Trade Ideas and Free Agency XIV

[nickschultzfan]

The Wild need players who put the puck on the net. And despite his many whiffs, and pass handcuffs he had this year, the only players that put the puck on net at a rate greater than Pomminville is Zucker and Parise.

When he stops doing that, I'm all for starting to ease him down the lineup.

But you aren't acknowledging goals are function of not just ability but prime minutes. Or that there is no stat for missed opportunities.

Pominville only had 3 PP goals, and 11 PP assist. What happens if you give Dumba that spot on the PP? Does he get 10 PP goals and 15 assist?

Fontaine (who I am pretty "eh" on) put up 0.41 5v5 PPG playing on the 3rd and 4th lines. Pominville put up 0.49 5v5 PPG playing on the 1st line with Granlund and Parise. You don't think Fontaine is going to put up 6.5 more points or 4 more goals if he played with those two?

 

[forthewild]

But you aren't acknowledging goals are function of not just ability but prime minutes. Or that there is no stat for missed opportunities.

Pominville only had 3 PP goals, and 11 PP assist. What happens if you give Dumba that spot on the PP? Does he get 10 PP goals and 15 assist?

Fontaine (who I am pretty "eh" on) put up 0.41 5v5 PPG playing on the 3rd and 4th lines. Pominville put up 0.49 5v5 PPG playing on the 1st line with Granlund and Parise. You don't think Fontaine is going to put up 6.5 more points or 4 more goals if he played with those two?

This isn't quite the same comparison tho. Just because they put up those stats on 5v5 doesn't mean they did it vs the same competition or same level of players or same level of expectations.

Mittens was a guy who was on the 1st line with Koivu for a long long time and yet his production didn't go up, there is a different expectation to playing on the 1st line than there is to playing on the 3rd line. I'm not saying Fonzie can't do it, or that he shouldn't get a shot there, he should, but you can't just use a 5v5 stat and be like look.

Also last year Pommenville had a very very bad shooting %.

There is more to scoring than a guy being put somewhere, there is the ability to play that position. I'd like to see Fonzie get that shot, but its important to be realistic.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Straw man argument. I never said he was useless. I said he was a highly depreciating asset that is signed long-term for a huge cap hit who is neither in our long-term plans and will have a marginal impact on getting a Cup to Minnesota. Pominville could be entirely replaced by Dumba on the 1st PP and Fontaine in 5v5.

In those situations, you move on early, not later. Otherwise you just get another Heatley, Havlat, Backstrom, etc. situation. Zombie players.

Maybe not the past day or so, but you most definitely have.

 

[Hall of Faber]

Not like they didn't try Dumba on the top unit. Didn't go so well.

 

[Spurgeon]

Pominville is a year removed from a 30-30 season. Let's see how he does this year and re-evaluate either at the trade deadline or in the offseason.

 

[nickschultzfan]

Maybe not the past day or so, but you most definitely have.

I've said his trade value is close to zero given his contract, and that he is a one-dimensional player that is losing that dimension. I may even have said that he will be a negative value player in the future. But I don't think he's useless. If he was on a 1-year, $1.5 million contract, he would be a bargain.

 

[nickschultzfan]

My main point with Vanek (and a lesser extent Pominville) is they are basically girlfriends that you already know aren't the one. Sure, you can come up with justifications for keeping them around, but once you know they aren't the one for you long-term, what the hell are you doing? Break up with them or else you are only hurting yourself.

Vanek is a bad fit for the Wild's system, but he's really unmovable. Pominville is a better fit but he is slight more movable, so he gets the majority of the trade talk focus.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I've said his trade value is close to zero given his contract, and that he is a one-dimensional player that is losing that dimension. I may even have said that he will be a negative value player in the future. But I don't think he's useless. If he was on a 1-year, $1.5 million contract, he would be a bargain.

And there it is.

 

[TJL48]

He is not overpaid by that much especially if he has a bounce back year this year. I wouldn't mind if he was traded but not for scraps just to get his contract off the books.

 

[nickschultzfan]

And there it is.

So, you don't actually disagree with my points on Pominville but just wanted up to agree that he would be a bargain at $1.5 million/year?

Dude, you could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by just stating that.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

So, you don't actually disagree with my points on Pominville but just wanted up to agree that he would be a bargain at $1.5 million/year?

Dude, you could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by just stating that.

No, I absolutely disagree with your points, but I'm not going to keep repeating what others have said about shot attempts, shooting % and aging players.

And I think I can speak for everybody here when I say that we would all love and welcome a $1.5M 20 goal, 50 point player. Not only would Pommer be a bargain at that price, he'd be the best bargain in the entire NHL (outside of maybe #1 pick ELC's).

 

[nickschultzfan]

No, I absolutely disagree with your points, but I'm not going to keep repeating what others have said about shot attempts, shooting % and aging players.

And I think I can speak for everybody here when I say that we would all love and welcome a $1.5M 20 goal, 50 point player. Not only would Pommer be a bargain at that price, he'd be the best bargain in the entire NHL (outside of maybe #1 pick ELC's).

Yeah I was being coy. Of course you don't agree with me.

The discussion has always been about Pominville's value in relation to his cost.

And you were arguing against a straw man that the argument was about just his value.

 

[ThatGuy22]

But you aren't acknowledging goals are function of not just ability but prime minutes. Or that there is no stat for missed opportunities.

Pominville only had 3 PP goals, and 11 PP assist. What happens if you give Dumba that spot on the PP? Does he get 10 PP goals and 15 assist?

Fontaine (who I am pretty "eh" on) put up 0.41 5v5 PPG playing on the 3rd and 4th lines. Pominville put up 0.49 5v5 PPG playing on the 1st line with Granlund and Parise. You don't think Fontaine is going to put up 6.5 more points or 4 more goals if he played with those two?

Bolded #1: You will never here me deny that. Usage is a giant portion of production. What I'm arguing is that Pomminville is the player that deserves the prime minutes, based on his underlying numbers. We don't have a right wing that's better at driving possession, and generating shots. The reason he gets those prime 5v5 minutes is because he's a dang good player that deserves them.

Bolded #2: I agree, Pommer should be removed from the point on the PP. Its a terrible spot for him. He should either be along the half wall or down low. Most of my arguments in favor of him resolve around 5v5 play which is 90% of the game.

Bolded #3: Could Fontaine have put up Pommer's career low shooting% production? Probably, but we'd be worse at generating shots and maintaining possession as a whole for the first line, and I'd be highly suspicious of his ability to match a normal Pominville season 5v5 production.

 

[ThatGuy22]

My main point with Vanek (and a lesser extent Pominville) is they are basically girlfriends that you already know aren't the one. Sure, you can come up with justifications for keeping them around, but once you know they aren't the one for you long-term, what the hell are you doing? Break up with them or else you are only hurting yourself.

Vanek is a bad fit for the Wild's system, but he's really unmovable. Pominville is a better fit but he is slight more movable, so he gets the majority of the trade talk focus.

You'd have much less argument, if any at all, on this topic if it was focused on Vanek. Because he did have drastic declines in all underlying numbers that are very concerning. Specifically his atrocious shooting rate that was worse than freaken Brodziak.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

Yeah I was being coy. Of course you don't agree with me.

The discussion has always been about Pominville's value in relation to his cost.

And you were arguing against a straw man that the argument was about just his value.

And I think his value matches his cost pretty well when he doesn't have a shooting % that, until proven otherwise, is an anomaly in his career.

I understand that some people can construe that as a decline, and want to get out in front of it, but I fervently disagree with those people. I also don't think that his value will plummet between this summer and next, so if we need to make a move for financial or roster reasons, then that option will be there next summer as well. I think it's very premature to have these discussions at this point in time.

 

[nickschultzfan]

In a vacuum it's Vanek hands down who should be cut if cap space is needed. But projecting forward it is entirely reasonable to trade Pominville this summer. He is easier to trade, in both value and willingness to waive his NMC, and his longer contract makes a buyout difficult next summer if he struggles again next year. If Fletcher had a deal for a top6 center, Pominville is the likely candidate to be moved the other way to make the salaries fit.

 

[nickschultzfan]

I am just very interested to see what Fletcher does the rest of the summer. I don't need a big move. But if not, I almost rather clear some space to give Graovac and Keranen a shot in the top9.

 

[Digitalbooya]

I wouldn't mind a Pominville+ for an upgrade or younger player that puts up similar numbers.

I'll run this by you guys since I saw it on my trade thread in the trade boards:

Pulkkinen would have to pass through waivers and you know he wouldn't do that. It's NHL or nothing now.

I would do the deal from the Wings POV if we could just make it work cap wise. If my quick approximation calculation is correct, if Nyquist gets say $4M and Jurco gets $1M, and we waive Kindl (no claimers) but make no other moves, then we would be $1M over the cap if we made this trade. Since Spurgeon only has 1 year left on his current deal, assuming that we can't move either Kindl or Quincey, would it be possible for Minnesota to retain that million in the deal?

So Pulkkinen + 2016 1st for Spurgeon @ $1.7M?

We'd still need to make a move but it wouldn't be so desperate.

Thoughts? I'd say that's pretty good value for Spurgeon 1 year out. Otherwise we can wait till next offseason and trade him likely for just a 1st at the draft (depending on contract demands).

 

[ThatGuy22]

I wouldn't mind a Pominville+ for an upgrade or younger player that puts up similar numbers.

I'll run this by you guys since I saw it on my trade thread in the trade boards:



Thoughts? I'd say that's pretty good value for Spurgeon 1 year out. Otherwise we can wait till next offseason and trade him likely for just a 1st at the draft (depending on contract demands).

I vote we offer him 5 x 4.5 million and figure it out next season by trading anyone but Spurgeon and Parise.

 

[Digitalbooya]

Another deal that turned my head was Spurgeon+4th for Nyquist which had two posters (no idea if Red Wings fans) thought were good value. That's a PROVEN right winger right there for ye who like to yell at me for trading for picks/prospects.

I vote we offer him 5 x 4.5 million and figure it out next season by trading anyone but Spurgeon and Parise.

I don't think Spurgeon has anywhere near the second highest value on the team. I'd say the most we can offer Spurgeon is $4m. I don't see how it works any other way.

 

[Dr Jan Itor]

I wonder what his contract demands are; back to back 27 goal seasons, and at almost 26, I doubt he's looking for a bridge...

 

[ThatGuy22]

Another deal that turned my head was Spurgeon+4th for Nyquist which had two posters (no idea if Red Wings fans) thought were good value. That's a PROVEN right winger right there for ye who like to yell at me for trading for picks/prospects.



I don't think Spurgeon has anywhere near the second highest value on the team. I'd say the most we can offer Spurgeon is $4m. I don't see how it works any other way.

I would keep Spurgeon over any of our defenders. Every new development in analytics make it pretty clear he's the most valuable defender we have. And because of his size, he's going to be under-valued in terms of dollars, making him a great bang for the buck.

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that Fletcher is going to trade him, and make another GM look very smart.

 

[Digitalbooya]

I wonder what his contract demands are; back to back 27 goal seasons, and at almost 26, I doubt he's looking for a bridge...

I'd guess around $4.5-5m long term. We'd have to trade someone like Coyle or buyout Vanek or keep Reilly and his $2.025m cap hit in the minors.

 

[TaLoN]

I would keep Spurgeon over any of our defenders. Every new development in analytics make it pretty clear he's the most valuable defender we have. And because of his size, he's going to be under-valued in terms of dollars, making him a great bang for the buck.

I've pretty much resigned myself to the fact that Fletcher is going to trade him, and make another GM look very smart.

I don't think his next contract will be as much of a bargain as you think. His next contract will take out UFA years, and those are mint to players. He's got the stats to get paid and he knows it.

It's not very likely, with Suter, Brodin, Scandella already locked up long term, and Dumba starting to break out in ways this team absolutely needs... that Spurgeon will be around long term.

 

[ThatGuy22]

I don't think his next contract will be as much of a bargain as you think. His next contract will take out UFA years, and those are mint to players. He's got the stats to get paid and he knows it.

It's not very likely, with Suter, Brodin, Scandella already locked up long term, and Dumba starting to break out in ways this team absolutely needs... that Spurgeon will be around long term.

He's worth upwards of 5.5m, but fletch should start at 5x4.5 and see if he bites.