All Activity

Florida won the SC with BOB finishing #1 in Save % for the playoffs. Meanwhile Edmonton is desperate for a goalie upgrade. Dallas just fired their coach partly due to his mishandling of the goalie position in the playoffs. You have to pay whatever it takes to stay solid in the net.

If the Wild want to keep Gus, that could be a brutal contract negotiation. Will the Wild get the motivated Gus year after year or the out of shape Gus to start some seasons. Plus, is Gus or any Wild goalie the product of the team structure and its commitment to defense? Goalie contracts have really risen in recent years. Will the Wall step up to make the Wild feel comfortable playing hardball with Gus and/or let him walk or will Gus have all the leverage? If the Wall falters, the Wild might be looking for two goalies.

Probably going up to near 10$M pretty soon. I’m ok with going as high as that if we stay in the top 10 as a tandem.

What will the Wild need to give up? I’m not sure that CBJs will be fishing for another late first round pick.

Our D group shouldn’t be over $25mm. We need stabilizing guys back there that are big. I honestly think we are going to regret Faber at $8.5mm and he could be a great trade chip to get the 1C we need. Also Spurgeon and Brodin have to go soon. More Spurg than Brodin. This league is changing to a forward powerhouse with D being able to clear the net and get them the puck. We have to much money in our D right now. To many decent guys can be had for $3-4mm and that’s all we need. if we can trade Faber for Tage Thompson or Dylan Larkin or Necas or Barzal I do it. We need FORWARDS badely! no more than. $7mm on goalies. If Gus wants more than $4mm on a new deal trade him

Also, since we now do have money, what would be your budget? How would you spread it out? How much for the forward group? How much for the defense group? How much for the goalie group? This would be a decent discipline to walk through just to see how we should spend the money. For instance, we're at $30m for our defense. I don't think going over that mark is really necessary which may mean Brodin needs to go in a couple of years. I do not see Jiricek getting a large raise next season, nor Lambos. When Spurgy falls off, we have money to pay for Buium. $47m for the forward group I think is a little low. So, the target would be getting help in this area. Goaltending is $6m and that looks like a real bargain. I wouldn't go over $7.5m for both 'tenders, though, I'd probably rather invest in the defense than goaltending.

And here's a nice rumor mill piece: Count me as in on this trade. I think Ohgren-Rossi-Voronkov makes a better line, though.

I like that Shooter kept his cash and upgraded with Sturm and the rookies. These rookies were going to have to eventually come into the league. I believe Shooter is a better judge of team chemistry than Fletcher ever is/was. Fletcher tried to bring in help, but typically whiffed in that effort because the guys didn't really fit in. With the cap space still there, we can weather any storm of injuries that happen, and we can make targeted solutions starting in January before the TDL to fill in the holes which we don't know how deep they are yet. We can take on guys with term, or resign free agents. I do think, which has been pointed out, that the draw for MN is that it is a good place to raise a family. Politics aside, you still have a pretty rural setting not far out from the city. You can have a decent property with acreage and pretty good schools. This would appeal to guys maybe in their late 20s, and especially guys who have a wife and kids. Free agency usually starts when they are 27 and a couple of years might have been bought out. So, our target may be in the Kaprizov/Ek age group. There's plenty of good hockey still left in those guys.

I suppose this was what I meant by the flag being very simple and lacking complexity. There's got to be more to the state than a lot of water and a clear view of the North Star visible from all 50 states. Did MN also change the state seal? Also, I'm trying to steer clear of any political talk here. The flag simply caught me by surprise as a wholesale change.

I had briefly heard that it was changed and the woke comment but didn't know where that was coming from. Then, when looking at the states and flags today, something looked very unfamiliar! Thanks for the representation description, I wouldn't have gotten that from just plain looking at it. About all I can say is that is a huge change. If they were going for simple, mission accomplished. I did like the Rochester flag a lot. Seems like the new flag kind of misses the mark. Not in a woke way, but in a missing detail way. It's kind of like the Twins Blue and Yellow uniforms. I'm not sure where they got that from. They look nice but where is the yellow from? Don't eat the yellow snow? Flags and uniforms are symbols. For me, the Wild need a change. The current jerseys just look outdated. With 5-6 new rookies coming in, and likely some trade deadline deals, it seems to me that you'd want a visual representation of this is a new and different team. Not to mention the benefit of to the owner of sales of the new look. The road jersey, especially needs a new look, it's very stale. I think both reverse retros are the best upgrade at this point, but I wouldn't mind seeing the old North Star jersey with the Wild colors, especially the roads. If you want to stay with the green/red combo, I'd brighten the shades and am very curious as to why there is no lake blue in the jersey.

This team should only be judged by playoff performance. I don't care if he's saving money and making a run, or if they're a cap ceiling team every year and can do what the Timberwolves have done these last 2 years.

Marner signed this year. Rantanen signed this year. Those guys are as close to perfect comparable for KK as you will get.

Given that others have already commented on the flag, I will offer a brief comment as well, although I know it's supposed to be a hockey focused forum. The primary issue with changing the flag comes down to three things. 1. Was it a pressing issue for most Minnesotans, or just a small segment of the population? I would say there were more important issues than a flag. 2. A state with no past has no future. Trying to erase the past usually ends up making things worse rather than better. 3. Who gets to decide what's considered offensive? Are we going to redesign or change everything because someone is offended? We would be renaming things like every 5 minutes. Would England have become a global power if Rome had stayed out of the British isles? Can we bring back the Montreal Expos? I am offended by the way MLB treated the Montreal fans / community.

Recently, 2024 i believe. But you're opening a can of worms on that one... The old flag had two main issues: Imagery in the center was detailed and complex, which isnt great when you're trying to recreate it or recognize what was on the flag. It featured the french words 'le etoile du nord' but you would have to really closely examine the flag to see the picture in the middle as nothing more than a blob If you looked closely at the imagery, it was a white farmer plowing the land with a native american riding away in a horse. It was felt that this image depicted the white man forcing the natives off the land. They ran a contest in 2023 for new designs, and came upon the new simpler flag with blocks of blue for the lakes and a darker section of blue with a white 8 pointed star for 'le etoile du nord' or 'the north star'. Of course because it's 2024, 50% of the country feels the flag is 'too woke', and even though it is suppose to represent the lakes and the north star that the flag is actually proof that MN is a hellhole and working to appease the Somalian immigrants because of the similarities in the flag. People still fly the old flag as a sort of 'dog whistle' fighting 'wokeness.' I'm 99% sure I can guess how Protec feels about the new flag... If you want to see a badass flag, check out Rochester, MN: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Rochester,_Minnesota.svg

People have gotten so stat oriented that arguments and narratives become a little too regurgitated and oversimplified. I think people have lost perspective of this whole situation, but hey it's the offseason. The one thing about Rossi that I admire is his offseason work ethic. You would think that it would transition to an ethic on the ice? I think some wires are getting crossed there and hopefully it is just a lack of confidence. Unfortunately, it could be something way worse, like his dickhead agent having his ear. When I first heard Rossi was on the trading block, I instantly assumed it was some BG bullshit about his lack of size and grit, but now I'm thinking it is his agent undermining the situation. It's turning into a lose/lose for both Rossi and the Wild.

I just tested AI to give me the largest states by size. Out of the top 15 states, it got 4 wrong. I consider this an F. So, also interesting was looking at the state flags. I had no idea Washington actually has a picture of George Washington on the flag. And, what happened to the MN flag? When did that change?

I'm with P-Judge and probably NJS on this. I do believe that Brackett is the 1st sacrifice, and I have not liked his drafts and what he looks for. He gets a bit of a pass on the 2020 and '21 drafts due to Covid, it was pretty much just a crapshoot. He completely whiffed on O'Rourke, but I was very excited about that pick too. In '21, he completely whiffed on Peart too, and Knies was there, in their backyard, and should have been picked. My main issue has been the compiling of the same physical type of player. He has been LHS dominant, and he has consistently drafted smaller players who he sees as having smooth skating but can't compete in the NHL unless they bulk up substantially and they lack the willingness to do that. I do not see how that is not a question during their draft interviews with these kids, "Are you willing to bulk up to X amount of weight?" But, he also may have been given the mandate in '20, coming on with very little preparation to run the draft table, and just picking BAP. I had Lundell rated higher than Rossi, especially in our system. But the other guys were small even though O'Rourke played a big game. Why wasn't Faber taken instead? Perhaps he just wasn't seen as being that good back then? In '21 I thought he did well to pick up The Wall and Lambos. Outside of Knies, there hasn't been much that has come into the league after him. But taking Peart just wasn't a good pick. I get wanting to build from the back out. In '22 I thought picking up Yurov and Ohgren were good picks. I also consider this his best draft. I do think Haight has a shot at playing in the N, but he's got to be ready for a lower role than he's had all his life. But, this is where the rubber meets the road. We will see what we have this season. We must be patient, but these guys have been marinated quite well and should be better prepared than normal. Year 1, I think these rookies all need to look competent. We should see spurts of great play, but competence is the standard here. If we have busts in the 5 players coming in, maybe 6, I think that is where Judd finds another organization to draft from. But, it's a 2 part thing, we've got to hire a guy who can run the draft table, and Shooter isn't that guy.

That was his drafted weight. I think he's closer to 205 based upon last preseason. I think he'll be 210 coming into this preseason, and very motivated especially with Brodin out for awhile.

Let's add a little to this too, as the center, he is supposed to be more of the top of the offensive zone in this offense, so he really isn't the net front screen guy.

I agree with this take, but to do that immediately would be detrimental, I think. Much of the young guys have to learn from the vets about how to be NHL pros. I think when a prospect overtakes a guy in the lineup, that placeholder needs to be moved, and I believe Guerin has been slow to do that. I'll also add Zuccy to your list.

I think this is where we differ. I'm a very conservative person when it comes to risk. For me, that is much too risky. I'd rather be more sure and pay later than pay now with the possibility of having offload the contract or buy him out before 25. And, I think I've been very consistent with putting out conservative number estimates too. I felt the same way with Gustavsson and Boldy.

Wow, Will D. bringing a drop the mic moment! And this is the thing about a perceived small player, they cannot drop off. Yes, they do have a different standard they are measured to. Fair or not, they do, and when it comes to pay, they get the short end of the stick (pun intended).

Your last sentence is why I believe you try and get him to sign for line term. Why do two years for smaller money, when we have the cap space this year and next, and then have to pay him 8-9 million in two years. Longer term deals are gambles yes, but they are how a team gets value contracts, and those are huge when building a full roster. Rossi would have to regress a ton for his contract to not be tradeable too. 24-25 year old centers that put up 50-60 points are hard to come by. I would take the gamble to save money in the future.

Because we don't know which Rossi we've got. The 1st 3/4s of the season Rossi or the last 1/4 of the season Rossi. Think about this for a second. He had a very severe illness taking out a lot of what should have been his rookie year. He had to be sent down to Iowa due to ineffectiveness the following season. He was up and down but had a pretty good rookie year. He was on pace with Bedard and then slumped in the 2nd half. His next season he started out and played great until he again slumped in the 2nd half. This is why we bring it up. Does he wear down? Is he just streaky? We don't know.

We'll have to disagree then. I have a strong opinion on this and believe it is the right way to go. Rossi has to earn that large extension and he hasn't done it yet. 60 points is 60 points, but the issue for me isn't points and contracts shouldn't solely be negotiated for point production. What we have is a player who is progressing quite well, but we still don't know exactly what type of player he is. Would Guerin be more willing to give if Rossi had continued his good season by finishing the last 1/4 of the season on the same pace as the 1st 3/4s? I think so. But we have a run down player in that last bit. The 1st part of the ELC, we had to send him to Iowa. The 2nd part was solid at 40 points. You can project him continuing to progress, but that is mere projection that may not happen. What is he missing, then? Based on the eye test, I thought when it came to larger teams or teams up in the standings, Rossi was not nearly as effective. I thought when we needed Rossi the most, he disappeared. I thought he could have been sharper on his edges, and I thought he got knocked around a lot more in that last 1/4 of the season. I also thought that Freddy came through, and Hartman's game that last quarter was on the upswing. I didn't think he was good in the playoffs, I also didn't think he was bad. His line was certainly better than Freddy's and deserved more playing time. And I've said this numerous times before, with a younger player, giving the big contract too early can cause the player's hunger to wane. If you go back and look, I've also been against trading Rossi away to trade him. I have been in favor of trading him to get something better as a trade chip, but not just to get rid of him. I was against trading him when others had given up on him. And this brings me to the next comment: What other organizations do is not really part of my business. What Carolina did with Jarvis and Stankhoven, I think, was a mistake, but both produced very well in the playoffs until they ran into the wall that was Florida. Both Jarvis and Stankhoven played with feistiness and a bit of a chip on their shoulder. I do not see this in Rossi's game. But, again, I'll double down on who cares about the comparables right now. Those teams seem pretty sure that those guys will continue to produce at that level. Guerin for some reason is not. But, he hasn't been shy about handing out the contracts to Faber, Kaprizov, and Boldy. I think it is very fair to ask him why he was comfortable with giving those guys big deals and not Rossi? This seems to go against what he has done in the past. What bothers him about Rossi? The obvious thing is his size, but I think there is more behind it. I also think Rossi deserves credit for gutting out the final few games of the season when he could have gone on IR to rest and heal that knee. To me, that showed toughness. From a GMs perspective, I do not agree with giving the big contracts to the kids. I believe the best way to improve them is keeping the carrot in front of their eyes and bridging them. Kaprizov, I thought, was an exception as he was older. I was against Boldy getting the 7 year deal, and didn't really even have time to think about Faber. This is the same type of planning that GMs like Yzerman like to do, use that bridge deal. Some GMs have just gone ahead and quit the bridge and given their young budding stars the big deal early. I think they will end up whiffing on a lot of young players and maybe having to buy them out. Last part is a direct question, YES, I really do believe that young players should be very grateful for extensions that go beyond their QO. That shows the organization believes in them and is willing to go higher than they have to. In this case, with very little leverage for Rossi, he was kept with the QO, but it doesn't mean he has to stay there. It also doesn't mean he should be getting comparable deals either. I believe he and his agent will be the 1st to blink, and we'll see a 2-year $9m deal, where Rossi bets on himself and plays inspired hockey. I think when he puts up points, he should be looking directly at the GM box and Guerin. I'd love him to be rejected by the league on an offersheet, and then take it out on the rest of the league and put up 80 this year. I'd like him to come to camp ripped and with an attitude. I'd like him to show a lot of face off wins, and some superior edge work twisting larger defensemen into knots. And, while we didn't give him 7 x $7m, I'd love for him to earn 7 x $9m when his bridge is over.