Article: How Long Will the Wild Ride the "New Coach Bump"?

[Tom Schreier]

View full article

[Dean]

Good article.  I agree it’s too early to make judgements on hynes .  They are playing good hockey off a new coach bump. Does it last ? Idk. IMO I was never impressed with any of hynes previous teams but I also didn’t pay much attention.  Maybe he’s leaned from past and made improvements to his coaching.  I guess we really won’t know till we play the top teams . 
    If the wild do make wild card they will get a hard matchup. So will  making the playoffs after a slow start and likely flaming out in first round again , be considered a success by the wild  again?  It would be nice to consider success as a good playoff performance . 
 

[mnfaninnc]

16 hours ago, Dean said:

If the wild do make wild card they will get a hard matchup. So will  making the playoffs after a slow start and likely flaming out in first round again , be considered a success by the wild  again?  It would be nice to consider success as a good playoff performance . 
 

It would be nice, but, yes, that will be a success. Probably not for the fans as they yearn for a Stanley Cup, but by the owner who demands an invitation to the dance. The way the owner sees it, even with the cap penalties unfairly laid upon a team who signed two legal contracts right before the lockout, getting to the playoffs is kind of throwing that in the NHL's face. It also allows him a couple of extra games of revenue which switches the bottom line from red to black. 

Now, if we make it and do not give away any prospects like Fletcher did, and keep our top draft picks in house, we can continue the slow cooking method Guerin has introduced to the prospects to get them ready for NHL success. Here we are, several seasons into Guerin's tenure, and we have seen 1 draft pick finally have success. More are coming. 

[Dean]

3 hours ago, mnfaninnc said:

It would be nice, but, yes, that will be a success. Probably not for the fans as they yearn for a Stanley Cup, but by the owner who demands an invitation to the dance. The way the owner sees it, even with the cap penalties unfairly laid upon a team who signed two legal contracts right before the lockout, getting to the playoffs is kind of throwing that in the NHL's face. It also allows him a couple of extra games of revenue which switches the bottom line from red to black. 

Now, if we make it and do not give away any prospects like Fletcher did, and keep our top draft picks in house, we can continue the slow cooking method Guerin has introduced to the prospects to get them ready for NHL success. Here we are, several seasons into Guerin's tenure, and we have seen 1 draft pick finally have success. More are coming. 

To say Fletcher gave away prospects or picks  is not true. Just like saying Billy is doing anything different than Fletcher is not true! 
     I’m not an apologist for Fletcher but I’m not rewriting history to make excuses for bill. Fletcher was here 2009 to 2018. Only in 2013 and 2017 did we not have a first . Billy still has a few years to give a 1st for a rental.  Fletcher drafted ok as it looks like Judd is doing but time will tell . 
   Fletchers drafting. 2009. 1st #16 nick leddy -6th G kuemper-7th haula .. 2010 1st #9 granlund  2nd zucker…2011-1st Brodin 5 th seeler 2012-1st # 7 dumba 2013- 5 th soucy  2014- 1st #18 tuch 4th Kakkonen 2015 - 1st #20 ek 5 th KAPRIZOV 2016 1st #15 kunin  4th Duhaime  . 2017 4 th Shaw. 
    So to say Fletcher traded our prospects and picks away isn’t true. His drafting is the core of your team. To say  Billy’s slow cooking is something different isn’t true! It’s exactly the same. They both are drafting there young guns and in time will spend prospects and picks for rentals. Just like Fletcher. So the  question is how old and slow will the core of Billy’s team be by the time  his young guns are productive nhl players. Well we’re going to waste another decade to find out.  It didn’t work for Fletcher but some of his players went on to win cups with other teams that were built better than slow cooking. Fletcher wasn’t a good or great gm because he couldn’t manage the cap and roster responsibly . Just like Bill and his bottom six extensions and clauses that give him no flexibility.. 
      IMO flaming out again in first round isn’t success. It’s the problem . To many fans are ok with mediocre and buy the hopes and dreams the pr department is selling.. meanwhile the wild grift off the fans loyalty.IMO it’s  a failure to not acquire picks during buyouts because we’ve just spent a decade slow cooking. . 

[Disco Strangler]

A scheduled game against Big D would answer a lot of questions about the bump. My guess is the Wild still wouldn't look so good against them.

[raithis]

21 hours ago, Dean said:

To say Fletcher gave away prospects or picks  is not true. Just like saying Billy is doing anything different than Fletcher is not true! 
     I’m not an apologist for Fletcher but I’m not rewriting history to make excuses for bill. Fletcher was here 2009 to 2018. Only in 2013 and 2017 did we not have a first . Billy still has a few years to give a 1st for a rental.  Fletcher drafted ok as it looks like Judd is doing but time will tell . 
   Fletchers drafting. 2009. 1st #16 nick leddy -6th G kuemper-7th haula .. 2010 1st #9 granlund  2nd zucker…2011-1st Brodin 5 th seeler 2012-1st # 7 dumba 2013- 5 th soucy  2014- 1st #18 tuch 4th Kakkonen 2015 - 1st #20 ek 5 th KAPRIZOV 2016 1st #15 kunin  4th Duhaime  . 2017 4 th Shaw. 
    So to say Fletcher traded our prospects and picks away isn’t true. His drafting is the core of your team. To say  Billy’s slow cooking is something different isn’t true! It’s exactly the same. They both are drafting there young guns and in time will spend prospects and picks for rentals. Just like Fletcher. So the  question is how old and slow will the core of Billy’s team be by the time  his young guns are productive nhl players. Well we’re going to waste another decade to find out.  It didn’t work for Fletcher but some of his players went on to win cups with other teams that were built better than slow cooking. Fletcher wasn’t a good or great gm because he couldn’t manage the cap and roster responsibly . Just like Bill and his bottom six extensions and clauses that give him no flexibility.. 
      IMO flaming out again in first round isn’t success. It’s the problem . To many fans are ok with mediocre and buy the hopes and dreams the pr department is selling.. meanwhile the wild grift off the fans loyalty.IMO it’s  a failure to not acquire picks during buyouts because we’ve just spent a decade slow cooking. . 

Yes, Fletcher had 1sts, but much of the rest of the picks were traded (or nothing became of them), and about half the rest were traded either before making the team or within a few years of getting into the league to keep or acquire aging vets with a short window.  He sold old the future.  This is why we had so few prospects in our system at the start of Guerin's tenure.

Guerin hasn't really done this yet, at least there's not the pattern Fletcher had.

The clauses are worrisome, but at least they sort of line up with when some of the prospects should be ready to really challenge for NHL spots.  It's possible that they were thrown in to keep the contract value or length down a bit.  Maybe they like it here enough that they worry that the dead cap might cause Guerin to have to tweak things more with Leipold's wish to get playoff revenue.  Convincing them that they wouldn't be traded out of here might be less of a country club situation than it is just the player saying that they will sign for x if they know they can stay.  Whether they could get more elsewhere though is hard to say.  I'm sure the dead cap makes players think twice about whether this is a team they can win a cup on.  It might be why some of the lengths to be what they are.  I mean, if you are going to help a team through a time where chances of winning a cup a slim, you likely want to be there still when it comes out of the other side of the tunnel, right?  I'm not defending the clauses, but if you consider other perspectives outside of the fan point of view, it looks a little different.

If the salary cap keeps going up and even a quarter of the prospects make it to the NHL as serviceable players (and Guerin doesn't trade half of them away for aging vets on the downside of their playing days), then we are in a really good spot and should be at least in contention.

So far, comparing Guerin to Fletcher is premature as there isn't enough to support that argument.  Maybe there will be in the future.  Or maybe we will think he is best GM the Wild have ever had.  Time will tell.  It just doesn't tell us that they are the same right now.

[Pewterschmidt]

1 hour ago, raithis said:

I'm sure the dead cap makes players think twice about whether this is a team they can win a cup on.  It might be why some of the lengths to be what they are.  I mean, if you are going to help a team through a time where chances of winning a cup a slim, you likely want to be there still when it comes out of the other side of the tunnel, right?  I'm not defending the clauses, but if you consider other perspectives outside of the fan point of view, it looks a little different.

Great point and insights

[Protec]

I believe Guerin wants to win a Stanley Cup in MN. Do I think he was lazy or foolish to offer those contracts or grasping at straws by firing Evason? Maybe a little but not a lot. 

Guerin hasn't done anything to be on the hot seat by giving contracts to Foligno, Hartman, Fred, and Zuccarello. 

Doesn't this Hynes-bump prove the team and contracts aren't so bad and these players can do the job? Over the next 1-2 years, penalties end as young players step into roles and aging guys nurse injuries. Yes it will be interesting to see if the Wild can still make the playoffs but Fletcher stinks and so did Fenton. Guerin might have some spicy comments but he's had better senses than the others who shouldn't get big credit for obvious 1st round picks. Guerin hasn't done any deals he's been forced to buyout. Hasn't traded for bad value and hasn't given away much for picks or prospects when adding at the deadline. 

The Wild aren't perfect but Guerin got the Wild back to winning and playoffs while ending the 11/20 Era and getting good prospect. Guerin hasn't won the Cup yet but he's done a lot to make the Wild good during his time here. To say he has ruined the Wild or is ruining the Wild must have forgot Fenton or that Fletcher just got canned again after using the time he's been away from MN to screw Philly up nicely so they also needed a stabilize.

[Disco Strangler]

3 hours ago, raithis said:

Yes, Fletcher had 1sts, but much of the rest of the picks were traded (or nothing became of them), and about half the rest were traded either before making the team or within a few years of getting into the league to keep or acquire aging vets with a short window.  He sold old the future.  This is why we had so few prospects in our system at the start of Guerin's tenure.

Guerin hasn't really done this yet, at least there's not the pattern Fletcher had.

The clauses are worrisome, but at least they sort of line up with when some of the prospects should be ready to really challenge for NHL spots.  It's possible that they were thrown in to keep the contract value or length down a bit.  Maybe they like it here enough that they worry that the dead cap might cause Guerin to have to tweak things more with Leipold's wish to get playoff revenue.  Convincing them that they wouldn't be traded out of here might be less of a country club situation than it is just the player saying that they will sign for x if they know they can stay.  Whether they could get more elsewhere though is hard to say.  I'm sure the dead cap makes players think twice about whether this is a team they can win a cup on.  It might be why some of the lengths to be what they are.  I mean, if you are going to help a team through a time where chances of winning a cup a slim, you likely want to be there still when it comes out of the other side of the tunnel, right?  I'm not defending the clauses, but if you consider other perspectives outside of the fan point of view, it looks a little different.

If the salary cap keeps going up and even a quarter of the prospects make it to the NHL as serviceable players (and Guerin doesn't trade half of them away for aging vets on the downside of their playing days), then we are in a really good spot and should be at least in contention.

So far, comparing Guerin to Fletcher is premature as there isn't enough to support that argument.  Maybe there will be in the future.  Or maybe we will think he is best GM the Wild have ever had.  Time will tell.  It just doesn't tell us that they are the same right now.

 

3 hours ago, raithis said:

Yes, Fletcher had 1sts, but much of the rest of the picks were traded (or nothing became of them), and about half the rest were traded either before making the team or within a few years of getting into the league to keep or acquire aging vets with a short window.  He sold old the future.  This is why we had so few prospects in our system at the start of Guerin's tenure.

Guerin hasn't really done this yet, at least there's not the pattern Fletcher had.

The clauses are worrisome, but at least they sort of line up with when some of the prospects should be ready to really challenge for NHL spots.  It's possible that they were thrown in to keep the contract value or length down a bit.  Maybe they like it here enough that they worry that the dead cap might cause Guerin to have to tweak things more with Leipold's wish to get playoff revenue.  Convincing them that they wouldn't be traded out of here might be less of a country club situation than it is just the player saying that they will sign for x if they know they can stay.  Whether they could get more elsewhere though is hard to say.  I'm sure the dead cap makes players think twice about whether this is a team they can win a cup on.  It might be why some of the lengths to be what they are.  I mean, if you are going to help a team through a time where chances of winning a cup a slim, you likely want to be there still when it comes out of the other side of the tunnel, right?  I'm not defending the clauses, but if you consider other perspectives outside of the fan point of view, it looks a little different.

If the salary cap keeps going up and even a quarter of the prospects make it to the NHL as serviceable players (and Guerin doesn't trade half of them away for aging vets on the downside of their playing days), then we are in a really good spot and should be at least in contention.

So far, comparing Guerin to Fletcher is premature as there isn't enough to support that argument.  Maybe there will be in the future.  Or maybe we will think he is best GM the Wild have ever had.  Time will tell.  It just doesn't tell us that they are the same right now.

Guerin can't make those types of trades given the cap situation. I would be hard pressed to think he wouldn't have made those types of trades if he had cap room to do them. Maybe he would do them better than Fletch, but I have my doubts based on what he's done so far.

[Protec]

I'm not claiming my math to be perfect but under Guerin the Wild are 178-100-29. 

Three non-elite coaches. 

Guerin signed Ek, Spurgeon, Boldy, Kaprizov, and had Hartman at 1.7M while he scored a bunch of goals. Resigned Zuccarello and is getting dividends after a 75pt season. Got Middleton for an okay goalie while drafting a future top tendy. Got Faber for Fiala plus a 1st. Playoffs every season despite buyouts.

There's probably fifteen teams who haven't been as successful as the Wild in that stretch of time. 

The Wild have good young players coming. Some guys like Gus could be traded but with Fleury and Goligoski plus the cap increase, the Wild will be able to afford another guy shorter term. 

My take is while the Wild floundered, everyone started the blame game. Who would you rather have than Guerin and what would that guy do so special? It's just not that bad even though the Wild had some bad weeks and games and PK and PP and injuries and poor coaching this season.

[raithis]

10 hours ago, Disco Strangler said:

 

Guerin can't make those types of trades given the cap situation. I would be hard pressed to think he wouldn't have made those types of trades if he had cap room to do them. Maybe he would do them better than Fletch, but I have my doubts based on what he's done so far.

I honestly don't think he would be trading those same types of players even if he did have the cap space.  As least not in the way Fletcher did.

Guerin didn't give up the farm to bring in all the deadline players last year, but that's exactly what Fletcher would have done and did do on several occasions. The Wild have the best prospect pool they may have ever had under Guerin's reign.  He could have easily sent some of them out the door on last year trade deadline when there was cap room available for rentals like Fletcher did, but he didn't.  Instead we gave up very little for those players.

Do I have blind faith in Guerin - not in the slightest.  But I think we are on a good path forward.  It's easy to knock him down a bit because we are impatient for things to turnaround, but until we are on the other side of these cap hits and some of our prospects ripen a bit more into competent NHLers in a couple years (assuming at least some do).  Fletcher left those cupboards rather bare and so it's taking time to get that flow of youth in the pipeline.

[M_Nels]

4 hours ago, raithis said:

I honestly don't think he would be trading those same types of players even if he did have the cap space.  As least not in the way Fletcher did.

Guerin didn't give up the farm to bring in all the deadline players last year, but that's exactly what Fletcher would have done and did do on several occasions. The Wild have the best prospect pool they may have ever had under Guerin's reign.  He could have easily sent some of them out the door on last year trade deadline when there was cap room available for rentals like Fletcher did, but he didn't.  Instead we gave up very little for those players.

Do I have blind faith in Guerin - not in the slightest.  But I think we are on a good path forward.  It's easy to knock him down a bit because we are impatient for things to turnaround, but until we are on the other side of these cap hits and some of our prospects ripen a bit more into competent NHLers in a couple years (assuming at least some do).  Fletcher left those cupboards rather bare and so it's taking time to get that flow of youth in the pipeline.

Couldn't have said it better myself! 100% agree with everything here.

[Protec]

Exactly. When the team was winning last year, the Wild were a happy topic and nobody was spending lots of time on the topic of Dean's playoff failures, or how Foligno, Hartman, Fred, and Zuccarello are toast.

The Wild had a terrible start but aren't that bad of a team that they belong in the bottom six where they sat when Dean was fired. We know it, the team knows it, the GM knew it.

The Wild have gone sideways but not out of nowhere or like under Fletcher. This year and next were planned for and the Wild should be a playoff team. Can they begin to feel like they are internally and make up the lost ground using that chemistry and mojo???

Guerin has them setup with depth at all positions where if guys like Mojo, Foligno, Fred, and Duhaime started chipping in more and the defense/ goalies get into their typical form MN would again be a pretty dangerous team.  

[mnfaninnc]

On 12/5/2023 at 3:14 PM, Dean said:

To say Fletcher gave away prospects or picks  is not true. Just like saying Billy is doing anything different than Fletcher is not true! 
     I’m not an apologist for Fletcher but I’m not rewriting history to make excuses for bill. Fletcher was here 2009 to 2018. Only in 2013 and 2017 did we not have a first . Billy still has a few years to give a 1st for a rental.  Fletcher drafted ok as it looks like Judd is doing but time will tell . 
   Fletchers drafting. 2009. 1st #16 nick leddy -6th G kuemper-7th haula .. 2010 1st #9 granlund  2nd zucker…2011-1st Brodin 5 th seeler 2012-1st # 7 dumba 2013- 5 th soucy  2014- 1st #18 tuch 4th Kakkonen 2015 - 1st #20 ek 5 th KAPRIZOV 2016 1st #15 kunin  4th Duhaime  . 2017 4 th Shaw. 
    So to say Fletcher traded our prospects and picks away isn’t true. His drafting is the core of your team. To say  Billy’s slow cooking is something different isn’t true! It’s exactly the same. They both are drafting there young guns and in time will spend prospects and picks for rentals. Just like Fletcher. So the  question is how old and slow will the core of Billy’s team be by the time  his young guns are productive nhl players. Well we’re going to waste another decade to find out.  It didn’t work for Fletcher but some of his players went on to win cups with other teams that were built better than slow cooking. Fletcher wasn’t a good or great gm because he couldn’t manage the cap and roster responsibly . Just like Bill and his bottom six extensions and clauses that give him no flexibility.. 
      IMO flaming out again in first round isn’t success. It’s the problem . To many fans are ok with mediocre and buy the hopes and dreams the pr department is selling.. meanwhile the wild grift off the fans loyalty.IMO it’s  a failure to not acquire picks during buyouts because we’ve just spent a decade slow cooking. . 

This is a great perspective post, but I don't believe you're looking at it completely fair. Fletcher started off on this path, and 2009-2012 things were going according to plan. When the Wild signed Suter/Parise, that's when things started to go poorly. He traded away 2 1sts and the better part of a decade of 2nds after 2012. He rushed Coyle, Zucker, Granlund to the N. He never fully appreciated Haula who had great value. This is where his mistakes came from. 

Coyle, Zucker (who was on the I-35 train a lot) and Granlund needed at least another year in the A, it was too soon to call them up. I did get to see them live a couple of times and they were uninspiring except for Zucker who was noticeable with his speed. They simply weren't ready yet. 

But, and this is the biggest difference between Guerin and Fletcher, Fletcher was an executives kid who didn't play. He acquired what he thought he needed, and it wasn't right. I appreciate some of the moves he made, but constantly going to the well to trade with Buffalo was probably wrong. Guerin has played and knows team chemistry far better and can get the right pieces. Last season, while the Wild floundered, a simple little deal to get Reaves changed things. Reaves, alone, wasn't much, but for some reason, the collective team played better. And, Guerin did buy rentals, while retaining his 2nds, and even moving up. 

Another thing Guerin has done is put a priority on playing in the A. Fletcher did not have this priority, and many of his top prospects got trained in the NCAA as he was a huge supporter of that and the USHL. He also loved Swedish/Finnish prospects. Guerin almost always requires some A time for prospects. I believe Faber was scheduled to do the same this season until he absolutely proved he was ready to step up on the big stage late last season. Plus, we had the "opportunity" available for him to step right into Dumba's slot. 

Both GMs, however, have been a little handcuffed as it was demanded that both make the playoffs. This is a handicap none of the fans can overcome unless we collectively buy the team from OCL. It's not apologizing for Guerin and some of his decisions, and some of them have been a little strange. But, most of them have worked out too. His "feel" is far better than Fletcher's and it must be acknowledged. Shooter is far better, also, in finding role players who can be useful in an elevated role. Fletcher just never had that touch.

[mnfaninnc]

22 hours ago, Disco Strangler said:

A scheduled game against Big D would answer a lot of questions about the bump. My guess is the Wild still wouldn't look so good against them.

However, this would be a great test to see how our special teams were doing!

[Disco Strangler]

7 hours ago, raithis said:

I honestly don't think he would be trading those same types of players even if he did have the cap space.  As least not in the way Fletcher did.

Guerin didn't give up the farm to bring in all the deadline players last year, but that's exactly what Fletcher would have done and did do on several occasions. The Wild have the best prospect pool they may have ever had under Guerin's reign.  He could have easily sent some of them out the door on last year trade deadline when there was cap room available for rentals like Fletcher did, but he didn't.  Instead we gave up very little for those players.

Do I have blind faith in Guerin - not in the slightest.  But I think we are on a good path forward.  It's easy to knock him down a bit because we are impatient for things to turnaround, but until we are on the other side of these cap hits and some of our prospects ripen a bit more into competent NHLers in a couple years (assuming at least some do).  Fletcher left those cupboards rather bare and so it's taking time to get that flow of youth in the pipeline.

Again, I'll go back to BG didn't give up the farm because he had no opportunity too.

This is more of a rhetorical question, unless you have a great memory or want to go back and study it, but, what trades could Geurin have made (based on the trades that were made by multiple teams) at the deadline that prove your point?

I don't believe Geurin had the capitol or the cap to do any of the trades other than what he did. Therefore, Fletcher wouldn't have either.

If I'm knocking Geurin, it's only based on his track record. For those saying the cupboards were bare? How about the Dewey's, how about Shaw, how about Beckman and many of the other prospects. I think it's fair to say that despite sending out picks the Wild drafted well in the Fletcher area. I'm not defending Fletcher, I'm just saying I believe BG would have, given the opportunity, done the same, and I just don't see based on what he's done, how it would have been better then the Fletcher era.

In a nutshell, I'm saying BG hasn't followed the Fletcher path because he limited his opportunity to do so. Almost everyone thought they would not be as good a team as they were during the Evason era and yet he still made trades at the deadline to get better, to think he wouldn't have made more aggressive trades had the cap restraints not been there is not realistic. He may have used players and/or draft picks but he would've made trades to get better and compete. Let's not forget the MAF trade could have included a first round pick based on the Wild's playoff success.

[Disco Strangler]

1 hour ago, mnfaninnc said:

However, this would be a great test to see how our special teams were doing!

I agree. Let's see how the Oiler matchup goes.

[raithis]

52 minutes ago, Disco Strangler said:

I agree. Let's see how the Oiler matchup goes.

We don't even need to wait that long.  Vancouver tonight is the first real test.  Plus, we've historically owned Edmonton even when other teams have struggled with them, and that's mostly been because Brodin can mostly neutralize McDavid.  

 

[Disco Strangler]

11 minutes ago, raithis said:

We don't even need to wait that long.  Vancouver tonight is the first real test.  Plus, we've historically owned Edmonton even when other teams have struggled with them, and that's mostly been because Brodin can mostly neutralize McDavid.  

 

Is Vancouver for real though? I have my doubts. But you're right They've been playing well.

[raithis]

1 hour ago, Disco Strangler said:

Again, I'll go back to BG didn't give up the farm because he had no opportunity too.

This is more of a rhetorical question, unless you have a great memory or want to go back and study it, but, what trades could Geurin have made (based on the trades that were made by multiple teams) at the deadline that prove your point?

I don't believe Geurin had the capitol or the cap to do any of the trades other than what he did. Therefore, Fletcher wouldn't have either.

If I'm knocking Geurin, it's only based on his track record. For those saying the cupboards were bare? How about the Dewey's, how about Shaw, how about Beckman and many of the other prospects. I think it's fair to say that despite sending out picks the Wild drafted well in the Fletcher area. I'm not defending Fletcher, I'm just saying I believe BG would have, given the opportunity, done the same, and I just don't see based on what he's done, how it would have been better then the Fletcher era.

In a nutshell, I'm saying BG hasn't followed the Fletcher path because he limited his opportunity to do so. Almost everyone thought they would not be as good a team as they were during the Evason era and yet he still made trades at the deadline to get better, to think he wouldn't have made more aggressive trades had the cap restraints not been there is not realistic. He may have used players and/or draft picks but he would've made trades to get better and compete. Let's not forget the MAF trade could have included a first round pick based on the Wild's playoff success.

This is the first year that the Wild have really been locked up by the cap and not had some maneuverability.  Even last year they had cap space.  Guerin could have mortgaged out the future at any time in that span but has resisted doing so and the emphasis has been the underlying moves related to roster construction are completely different given that Fletcher was seemingly almost entirely concerned with the present while Guerin has tended to Leipold's wants while installing a much broader pipeline to carry us forward.  Fletcher's path had some prospects that seemed promising, but in half the time, Guerin has built one that is more than double what Fletcher ever had because he gave a lot of them away as bargaining chips.  Even the conditional first for Fleury wasn't a huge risk since we'd have had to make the Western Conference Finals.  It's just not the same as Fletcher.

Guerin has has a lot of opportunities to go the Fletcher route.  Instead, he has built a strong foundation that we are still building on.  He's basically going through a rebuild without calling it that.

[Disco Strangler]

4 minutes ago, raithis said:

This is the first year that the Wild have really been locked up by the cap and not had some maneuverability.  Even last year they had cap space.  Guerin could have mortgaged out the future at any time in that span but has resisted doing so and the emphasis has been the underlying moves related to roster construction are completely different given that Fletcher was seemingly almost entirely concerned with the present while Guerin has tended to Leipold's wants while installing a much broader pipeline to carry us forward.  Fletcher's path had some prospects that seemed promising, but in half the time, Guerin has built one that is more than double what Fletcher ever had because he gave a lot of them away as bargaining chips.  Even the conditional first for Fleury wasn't a huge risk since we'd have had to make the Western Conference Finals.  It's just not the same as Fletcher.

Guerin has has a lot of opportunities to go the Fletcher route.  Instead, he has built a strong foundation that we are still building on.  He's basically going through a rebuild without calling it that.

Nah, I have to disagree with you. When you're giving out 1'st rounders you're getting players back with big price tags, price tags that this team could not afford. I agree that now and into the future is when the cap is at its worst, but this team still did not have room to sign difference makers. You can go back to Fiala to see that and I'm guessing you could go back and examine the trades that were made last deadline to see we really had no chance at getting any of the top players available.

[raithis]

22 hours ago, Disco Strangler said:

Nah, I have to disagree with you. When you're giving out 1'st rounders you're getting players back with big price tags, price tags that this team could not afford. I agree that now and into the future is when the cap is at its worst, but this team still did not have room to sign difference makers. You can go back to Fiala to see that and I'm guessing you could go back and examine the trades that were made last deadline to see we really had no chance at getting any of the top players available.

Many of the moves that Fletcher made didn't give us a return of a player with a massive contract when trading out high-value picks and prospects.  He wasn't always trading for top players.  Even the top players were usually players well into their decline.

Martin Hanzal's cap hit was $1.5M, and we traded a 1st, a 2nd, a 4th, and a prospect for him and another player that didn't really do anything for us and their 4th..  Granted, the prospect wasn't anything special, but you hand out that kind of return and you expect someone more than Hanzal.  To top it all off, he was a rental.

We could have afforded too make boneheaded moves like that in every year under Guerin but this one.  Guerin could have decided he absolutely needed such-and-such and throw 1sts and 2nds for a rental player that does nothing, but he doesn't clean out most of the cupboards or severely damage the inflow of youth into the organization to do so.

Agree to disagree if you want, but Fletcher and Guerin aren't similar at all.

[Pewterschmidt]

23 hours ago, raithis said:

This is the first year that the Wild have really been locked up by the cap and not had some maneuverability.  Even last year they had cap space.  Guerin could have mortgaged out the future at any time in that span but has resisted doing so and the emphasis has been the underlying moves related to roster construction are completely different given that Fletcher was seemingly almost entirely concerned with the present while Guerin has tended to Leipold's wants while installing a much broader pipeline to carry us forward.  Fletcher's path had some prospects that seemed promising, but in half the time, Guerin has built one that is more than double what Fletcher ever had because he gave a lot of them away as bargaining chips.  Even the conditional first for Fleury wasn't a huge risk since we'd have had to make the Western Conference Finals.  It's just not the same as Fletcher.

Guerin has has a lot of opportunities to go the Fletcher route.  Instead, he has built a strong foundation that we are still building on.  He's basically going through a rebuild without calling it that.

Great take!  Fletcher was consistently mortgaging the future and swinging for the fences.  While I appreciate his go big or go home mentality, his achilles heal was that he never seemed to connect on any of his home run swings.

Guerin on the other hand is more methodical and patient.  I don't think we need to give him too much credit for taking the obvious correct path on the stealth Wild re-build.  Judgement day comes for BG when we see whether or not our can't miss prospect pipeline become's contributing NHL'rs or not.  A savvy BG trades dead end can't miss prospects before the rest of the league finds out.  A savvy BG hires a scouting savant who can also manage a scouting staff.  Too early to judge Brackett, but I for one will not crown his ass because some hockey podcasters in their mom's basement call him a genius.  Rossi showing signs this year sure helps though.  BG has proven savvy by his management of Leopold, but his grade is still TBD IMO.  We'll know BG's grade in 3-4 years.  Wouldn't it be great to have a performance review every 8 years.  (see above: savvy by his management of Leopold) 

[Pewterschmidt]

16 minutes ago, raithis said:

and another player that didn't really do anything

Guggenheim