Article: Buffalo Has What the Wild Need At the Deadline

[Kalisha Turnipseed]

View full article

[Pablo]

If someone wanted to destroy a locker room. This would be the blue print to so it. I can see trying to get one of tuch or quinn but Guerin isnt trading Boldy or any of the 3 building block prospects that could be mainstays in ‘25/26 and beyond. 

[RedLake]

LTIR Spurgeon go get Tuch. Insert Spurgeon for game 1 of the playoffs.

[Sam]

I like the article for the most part, but what’s with this Alex Tuch obsession that people seem to have? Was it because he played here before and was traded away on a bad deal? 

[Up North Guy]

That is a lot to ponder.

[Mateo3xm]

As much as it’s fun to think about some of this stuff, it’s highly unlikely this happens. Quinn is a future 30 goal scorer once he gets to his prime but he’s having a really rough season right now. I don’t think it’s smart to get rid of Boldy simply because he’s in a slump. In my opinion his ceiling is higher than Tuchs.

[Pablo]

19 minutes ago, RedLake said:

LTIR Spurgeon go get Tuch. Insert Spurgeon for game 1 of the playoffs.

Agreed but who do you trade to get him. A 1st or 2nd round pick and Riley Height and NoJo?

[mnfaninnc]

Wow, this is a lot to comprehend. While I agree with Tuch getting traded for, I was hoping for futures. Tuch + Quinn certainly helps balance out the handedness with the forwards. I wasn't anticipating subtracting Boldy unless it was for Tkachuk. But, Quinn was chosen 3 spots higher in the same draft, so obviously there was a base to build off of. 

I was thinking a Boldy-Ek-Tuch line being an excellent playoff line with a Zuccarello/Yurov-Rossi-Kaprizov top line. I think we're pretty good with the bottom 6, in fact, some of that pool is still trying to play top 6 which is out of place. 

Now, what Boldy does in this move is subtract $7m and at this point Quinn will not be signing an extension for $7m. He'll be more like a 30-40 pt. player, and I'd be looking at Foligno's contract. I'd like to extend him longterm since I do think there is untapped potential and, like Boldy, I think it will be unlocked. But, it looks like $5m longterm might be a good investment. Kalisha has him at $3m, and that's likely a 2 year bridge. 

When you look at the money, however, Kalisha has us subtracting Brodin's $6m contract for what appears like no reason. If she's calculated $66m without Yurov and Stramel, we're in good shape to keep Brodin. 

I disagree with the argument on MaRat. I think he won't need to be traded in the Buffalo deal, is probably worth a 3rd rounder at this time. I think you could make that deal without including MaRat, and he won't be much to resign. He won't really get a raise either, since he's got like 5 points on the season. Kalisha listed a bunch of replacements but why rush them, they are still quite a ways off, and Kumpulainen was observed by Wheeler at the WJCs who commented that he still has "heavy feet." That doesn't sound like a center. Bankier and Stramel still could play center but they are not yet ready for a 4th line role. Keep MaRat.

Kalisha also mentioned Yurov signing a 2 year ELC. He is not eligible for the 2 year ELC yet, he still gets a 3 year per CBA. We might burn a year this season, but we'd still have him on one until summer of '27 (or '28 if we don't burn it this year, and if he's not eligible for playoff play this season why would we?) Keep in mind, his ELC will have significant bonuses attached, so it's likely a $3m cap hit.

I'm on the fence with this trade proposal even if it is just Boldy+Haight=Tuch+Quinn. I've also got to believe that Quinn's listed weight at 185 has to be far north of that at this time. He's got to be around 200 by now. 

The question here is will Boldy reach superstar status by 25 where he'd be a definite keeper, or, could you get better production from Tuch and Quinn? There are benefits to both side of this trade, which might make it a win-win.

 

[Citizen Strife]

The Wild need to get a 2nd line scorer to HELP Boldy, not to send him out and find a replacement...

[Citizen Strife]

Reading up on their stats more, I suppose you could say right now Tuch and Boldy are neck and neck, with Tuch being a whole $2.25m cheaper.  But he's also 5 years older, and he's up for his deal way sooner.  Tuch is what he's going to be, but if Quinn makes any strides at all, you're going to end up paying for the same amount of money a year or so out, for what may end up being the same production.

Boldy's contract is set for 5 more seasons...sure as hell wouldn't want to get rid of a 60-70 pt. guy at what could or could not be under market value years from now.

[Will D. Ness]

Kalisha = ODC?

No offense but trading Boldy is about as unrealistic as it gets.

[FredJohnson]

1 hour ago, Sam said:

what’s with this Alex Tuch obsession that people seem to have?

He's bigger than Rossi. That's about it. ABR (anybody but Rossi)

I'm ABN (anybody but NoJo).

[Pewterschmidt]

2 hours ago, Sam said:

what’s with this Alex Tuch obsession

I don’t get this either.  I’m in the camp that we let bygones be bygones.  Giving up assets to get him back after losing him once already (with no compensation) feels like we’re paying for Tuch twice.   

[Dis-allowed display name]

2 hours ago, Sam said:

I like the article for the most part, but what’s with this Alex Tuch obsession that people seem to have? Was it because he played here before and was traded away on a bad deal? 

I think it was for a couple reasons.  First he was a big player who could score, and type we always wanted and second because we, in one of our never ending gigantically stupid moves gave him away for essentially nothing.  They did not know he was on the cusp of a breakthrough.

They GAVE him to the Golden Knights before the expansion draft so that they would agree to NOT take players we would leave exposed when they came to pick from our team.  You could protect only so many players and players with full no movement clauses were automatically protected, and gosh darn wouldn't you know, the team was full of those.  They wanted to protect some younger "talent".   

It was understandable they wanted to protect Brodin, but they also wanted to protect  soon to be unloaded stiffs Niederrieter and Coyle, and the aging but decent Granlund.   The Knights then went on to take the very servicable Haula.

We lost a good, very young 30 goal scorer who I think was a 1st round pick, and a serviceable player to protect a couple guys that basically were bad fits later moved for other junk.  

 

At least that is what I recall.  It sticks in the collective craw.

 

 

Edited 5 hours ago by Dis-allowed display name

[Mateo3xm]

46 minutes ago, Dis-allowed display name said:

I think it was for a couple reasons.  First he was a big player who could score, and type we always wanted and second because we, in one of our never ending gigantically stupid moves gave him away for essentially nothing.  They did not know he was on the cusp of a breakthrough.

They GAVE him to the Golden Knights before the expansion draft so that they would agree to NOT take players we would leave exposed when they came to pick from our team.  You could protect only so many players and players with full no movement clauses were automatically protected, and gosh darn wouldn't you know, the team was full of those.  They wanted to protect some younger "talent".   

It was understandable they wanted to protect Brodin, but they also wanted to protect  soon to be unloaded stiffs Niederrieter and Coyle, and the aging but decent Granlund.   The Knights then went on to take the very servicable Haula.

We lost a good, very young 30 goal scorer who I think was a 1st round pick, and a serviceable player to protect a couple guys that basically were bad fits later moved for other junk.  

 

At least that is what I recall.  It sticks in the collective craw.

 

 

I’m pretty sure it was to protect Dumba. That was the year Dumba had 50pts as a 24 year old and was on his way to being a Burns/Subban type player. Of course we protected him and the next season he was on a tear points wise, then tore his pec and was never the same after that. I think Dougie Hamilton had the same thing happen to him. He’s still playing well but not the same player. His cannon of a shot is gone.

[RedLake]

3 hours ago, Pablo said:

Agreed but who do you trade to get him. A 1st or 2nd round pick and Riley Height and NoJo?

Ohgren, a prospect, a 2nd and give them Nojo back. The top 6 would be fire with a determined Tuch. 

[mnfaninnc]

4 hours ago, RedLake said:

LTIR Spurgeon go get Tuch. Insert Spurgeon for game 1 of the playoffs.

The problem with this strategy is he will be ready to go in a week or 2. You can't just LTIR a guy with no legitimate injury. Yeah, yeah, Kucherov and Stone. Both of them, however shady it looked, did have legit injuries. Coming out and saying that we dodged a bullet with Spurgy, it's only going to be 2-3 weeks kind of deflates that possibility.

17 minutes ago, RedLake said:

Ohgren, a prospect, a 2nd and give them Nojo back. The top 6 would be fire with a determined Tuch. 

Give them Nojo back is specifically a video game type of move. It doesn't work in real life. I'm pretty sure that while we were dumping Staal, they were dumping Johansson and wouldn't want him back. With a full NTC, we could waive him and I'm sure somebody would pick him up for free, or, we could see if he's willing to go to Washington with a waivers threat if he doesn't agree. It's a strong arm move, and this is typically not the way Guerin treats his players. 

What makes it even harder is that Johansson has had a decent season. He's fulfilled what a $2m player can do. I do think Johansson-MaRat-Lauko could form a nice 4th speed line. But, to your point of getting rid of Johansson, I think getting him to Washington is our best option.

3 hours ago, Citizen Strife said:

The Wild need to get a 2nd line scorer to HELP Boldy, not to send him out and find a replacement...

This is how I see it too. I think Guerin thinks that Boldy can become a better version of himself and he can't trade that away. I also think a Tuch-Ek-Boldy line would be hard to contain in the playoffs. The deal Kalisha suggests is a real blockbuster, and I'm still on the fence with Jack Quinn. I don't really watch Buffalo games except twice a year. I can't remember him being remarkable.

BTW, I've still got that trade itch. Kalisha's trade could be done tomorrow, probably without even including MaRat. We gain cap space with it.

Edited 3 hours ago by mnfaninnc

[FredJohnson]

3 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

You can't just LTIR a guy with no legitimate injury. Yeah, yeah, Kucherov and Stone. Both of them, however shady it looked, did have legit injuries.

Spurge has legitimate injuries, too.

[mnfaninnc]

I thought this might interest you guys:

Quote

Is Kirill Kaprizov comfortable where he is or will he be thinking starting a new?

Igor Rabiner of RG.org: Sergei Samsonov left his role as Director of Player Development from the Carolina Hurricanes back in 2023 to take a player development position with the Dan Milstein’s Gold Star Hockey agency.

Minnesota Wild forward Kirill Kaprizov is eligible to sign a contract extension after July 1st as he has one year remaining on his contract. Samsonov thinks things will play out organically.

“It depends so much on the player’s own feelings,” Samsonov explained. “We don’t know what’s going on in the team, what Minnesota’s future will necessarily look like yet or what the offer would be. No matter which team Kaprizov chooses, the money is going to be there; he’s earned himself a great contract. The biggest question is whether he’ll want to start all over again in a new, possibly more stellar team, or whether he’ll be more comfortable playing where he’s already worked his way up to being a player of that level.”

It was taken off the mynhlrumors.com site.

[mnfaninnc]

6 minutes ago, FredJohnson said:

Spurge has legitimate injuries, too.

Spurgy's legitimate injuries are to take 2-3 weeks to heal. That's the point. Had they said nothing and put him immediately on LTIR, they had a legit reason for doing it. They could cite both this injury and maintenance on his other stuff. However, since they came out and said 2-3 weeks, nobody is going to buy that.

But, as the clock is ticking, Kaprizov's absence could be LTIR. If you make it retroactive, do you bank some cap space? Or, should it be referred to as Kap space?

Edited 3 hours ago by mnfaninnc

[Amaddeo]

Yeah….. no. Boldy isn’t going anywhere, so as soon as I saw that, I knew this was not even close to realistic. 

[FredJohnson]

13 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

That's the point. Had they said nothing and put him immediately on LTIR, they had a legit reason for doing it.

That is a very good point. Maybe he has a rehab setback. 😉

[mnfaninnc]

6 minutes ago, FredJohnson said:

That is a very good point. Maybe he has a rehab setback. 😉

This is a legitimate point, but a "setback" on a 2-3 week injury is like another couple of weeks which would be LTIR eligible. However, that doesn't take us to the playoffs, which it would need to do. I don't think the league office would look kindly at that. It would certainly be investigated. I'm also sure several teams will put in a complaint instigating such an investigation. Spurgy would need an academy award type of performance to pull that off. Have you seen his commercials? Not academy award material.

[Citizen Strife]

Did some rough math of the top 16 teams and their GF and GA

Winnipeg: 156 GF, 108 GA
Washington: 156 GF, 111 GA
Vegas: 143 GF, 112 GA
Minnesota: 129 GF, 116 GA
Toronto: 135 GF, 124 GA
New Jersey 142 GF, 114 GA
Dallas: 132 GF, 101 GA
Edmonton: 139 GF, 117 GA
Carolina: 145 GF, 118 GA
Colorado: 146 GF, 137 GA
Florida: 140 GF, 132 GA
Los Angeles: 121 GF, 98 GA
Vancouver: 123 GF, 129 GA
Tampa Bay: 146 GF, 110 GA
Boston: 116 GF, 142 GA
Calgary: 107 GF, 122 GA

 

GF Ranks
Winnipeg: 156
Washington: 156
Colorado: 146
Tampa Bay: 146
Carolina: 145
Vegas: 143
New Jersey: 142
Florida: 140
Edmonton: 139
Toronto: 135
Dallas: 132
Minnesota: 129 (12th)
Vancouver: 123
Los Angeles: 121
Boston: 116 
Calgary: 107

GA Ranks
Los Angeles: 98
Dallas: 101
Winnipeg: 108
Tampa Bay: 110
Washington: 111
Vegas: 112
New Jersey: 114
Minnesota: 116 (8th)
Edmonton: 117
Carolina: 118
Calgary: 122
Toronto: 124
Vancouver: 129
Florida: 132
Colorado: 137
Boston: 142

So, of the top teams, they are in the top half defensively, but bottom 1/3 offensively.  Within the conference, here's Minnesota against them.

Within Conference:
GF Ranks
Winnipeg: 156
Colorado: 146
Vegas: 143
Edmonton: 135
Dallas: 132
Minnesota: 129 (6th)
Vancouver: 123
Los Angeles: 121
Calgary: 107

GA
Los Angeles: 98
Dallas: 101
Winnipeg: 108
Vegas: 112
Minnesota: 116 (5th)
Edmonton: 117
Calgary: 122
Vancouver: 129
Colorado: 137

Now, bear in mind that Minnesota is likely facing either Dallas or Colorado at this point.  Colorado's early rough start and Minnesota's hot early streak may account for differences, but Minnesota's "woeful" offense isn't really all that bad compared to Dallas.  The biggest concern might be dealing with getting goalied.  Winnipeg and Colorado are for sure (pure numbers wise) a bigger problem.  Things will obviously change as the year goes on, but Minnesota isn't completely out of the woods too much.

Minnesota has played Dallas closer than most other years too...so that would be an advantageous matchup.  I sure as shit don't want Winnipeg, LA, or Colorado.

Edited 1 hour ago by Citizen Strife

[Burnt Toast]

I’m going to comment now then read everyone else’s. NO NO NO NO NO NO That’s 5 times NO PLUS ONE! ODC? Why do I have your moniker in my head right now? 😂