Declan Chisholm Is Making Himself Impossible To Ignore

I like the way he plays and contributes. I also like the fact that he doesn’t look lost out there (like #4).

Yeah, I agree. Winnipeg was foolish not to trade him but Minnesota capitalized.

I think Merrill is the obvious guy to replace. Bogo has been alright and as a RHS there's good reason to say the six defensemen are locked in for next year. Hunt and Spurgeon will kinda be questions for next year as will Buium. Will the Wild have to do anything drastic, no I don't think so? Could they make a move to shuffle the deck and try to get Chisholm into a more prominent role?

I think he's on a trajectory where if he stays with the Wild becomes Brodin's replacement. Buium is another left shot so it kinda becomes a question of how you wanna organize your defenders. Spurgeon for the first time last year was irrelevant. It looks like Guerin will be forced this off-season to make some tough calls on who to keep and who to trade for upgrades. A couple guys are gonna be history but between prospects and players like Rossi or Chisholm, who do you keep? Where do you fit them in? Do Yurov and Buium have a spot waiting for them that squeezes out another guy?

I think Chisholm has staked claim to the 3rd pairing as it's guy. Buium or Bogo are the last man. Merrill will find another team we hope or could sign a 1M deal to be in reserve. I really think the smart thing is to move Spurgeon and upgrade the defense by adding size and reducing cost. I.e. improve depth with the money and players like Chisholm or Buium who are much less expensive. The nest 2-3 years are looking like a nice window, especially if Kaprizov can be extended. 

9 minutes ago, Protec said:

I really think the smart thing is to move Spurgeon and upgrade the defense by adding size and reducing cost.

Spurgeon is an awesome guy and teammate, as well as a quality player, so it will likely be hard for Guerin to want to choose this path, but it's possible he'll end up going that way to construct the best team he can put on the ice.

trade faber fat ass and rossi for matthews already! (once matthews is off IR)

throw in Wally as the goalie saver for maple nation

then play kap zuccy (once he heels up his ball) and matthews on line 1

EK and Bolds and our favorite scapegoal on line 2

Brilliant!

11 minutes ago, OldDutchChip said:

trade faber...and rossi for matthews already! (once matthews is off IR)

throw in Wally as the goalie saver for maple nation

First and foremost, that trade doesn't come close to being possible under the NHL salary cap rules. This master plan to trade less than $3M in salary cap for $13.25M in salary cap doesn't warrant further consideration.

39 minutes ago, Imyourhuckleberry said:

Spurgeon is an awesome guy and teammate, as well as a quality player, so it will likely be hard for Guerin to want to choose this path, but it's possible he'll end up going that way to construct the best team he can put on the ice.

It would make the most sense.

Assuming they don't re-sign Merrill and the other thing I think needs to happen is seeing how NHL-ready Buium is.  Hopefully Buium will sign on at the end of the season and we can evaluate that a bit.  If he looks good, then I think it's a foregone conclusion to move on from Spurgeon.

Bogosian is someone I'm good with keeping considering we just don't have any other defenseman like him (size, willingness to body opposing teams, and RHS).

I could see the defenseman being Faber, Brodin, Middleton, Chisholm, Buium, and a mix of Bogosian and hunt depending on who we were playing.  Again, that's if Chisholm continues to play well and if Buium looks the part as a NHL-caliber D.

The main issues I have with losing Spurgeon (aside from his experience/hockey sense) is losing his RHS.

The other thing is figuring out how we trade him.

His salary is fairly large so just not any team is going to want to take that on.  The teams that could do it tend to be in the bottom half of the league and most are probably on his no-trade list. 

We could sweeten the deal with higher picks or a decent prospect, but again, the teams that will value those most will be the rebuilding teams which are likely not to be an option. 

This means we likely have to deal with some of the fringe playoff teams and (probably) will have to hold some of the cap hit from Spurgeon's contract.  It also means those teams may value picks and prospects less, so we would likely have to part with someone who is a NHL player too.  The most likely candidate out of what we have would probably be Rossi. 

I wouldn't want to move him as a sweetener though, so it would be good to find a team who has a younger player at around Rossi's level who fits our needs more and maybe try to do Rossi and Spurgeon for an improvement on Rossi (if the team is insistent on finding someone else).  The problem with that is whether a team will be interested in two smaller stature players for their young up-and-comer. 

Difficult to say.

4 minutes ago, Imyourhuckleberry said:

First and foremost, that trade doesn't come close to being possible under the NHL salary cap rules. This master plan to trade less than $3M in salary cap for $13.25M in salary cap doesn't warrant further consideration.

i didn't say the trade makes sense haha but i suppose we can make it work by gifting them Trenin!

just thought of throwing out a crazy ideas

feel free to do the same - it's friday 🙂

1 hour ago, raithis said:

The other thing is figuring out how we trade him.

His salary is fairly large so just not any team is going to want to take that on.

And bro turns 35 in a week, is diminutive and is coming off major reconstructive surgery.  I gotta believe he's here til the end of that contract.

1 hour ago, OldDutchChip said:

gifting them Trenin

That's like shitting on someone's head and saying i just gifted you a hat.

Russo posted that Trenin's 3rd in the NHL forwards (Foligno 2nd) in 5-on-5 expected goals against per 60 min.  I guess I'll trust the science over my eye test.

#lumberwagondrinkinggame

I'm always hearing, "It's a business."

You'd have to consider replacing Spurgeon with a less expensive, bigger guy.

Would be tough to lose Spurgeon.  I think Zeev steps in and wins a spot somewhere right away.  I would rank Brodin and Spurge as the top 2 d-men we have.  Not sure I could trade one of my top 2 D-men away.  

Was at the Dallas game the other night, and Chisholm was very visible all night.  He looked comfortable all night, and always seemed to be in the right spot at the right time.  He looked bigger than 6'1", although perhaps I was still in shock seeing Bogo get rocked by Dumba.  Twice in the same dance.  If he is consistent, Chisholm deserves a spot.  Of course Spurgeon is a double edged sword with the injuries / missed time, hard to part ways when his game is on.  But for playoffs, I see the Wild get pushed around too much and out-skated, out-paced, out-played.  Chisholm can help make up that difference.

3 hours ago, MNCountryLife said:

Would be tough to lose Spurgeon.  I think Zeev steps in and wins a spot somewhere right away.  I would rank Brodin and Spurge as the top 2 d-men we have.  Not sure I could trade one of my top 2 D-men away.  

I hear you.  I wouldn't want to trade him this season but at some point he's going to start to fall off more and won't be one of the top 2 D-men.  It's going to be hard enough to trade him before that happens.  Afterwards, there is almost no chance we would be able to do so.  I'd rather trade him when his value is a little higher.

There's a lot that needs to fall in place for us to move him though.Buium has to be good.  Chisholm has to make his case over more games that he's a long term fit.  

Then we look at the landscape and decide if Spurgeon is the asset worth trading or if Chisholm is the one we move.  I'd think it would make more sense to get younger, but at the end of the day Guerin has to look at the team and decide whether moving a player leaves us better off for that year and upcoming years.  That second part might be the main reason to really consider moving on from Spurgeon.

6 hours ago, OldDutchChip said:

i didn't say the trade makes sense haha but i suppose we can make it work by gifting them Trenin!

just thought of throwing out a crazy ideas

feel free to do the same - it's friday 🙂

 

Still doesn't work.  That isn't even half of Matthew's salary (Faber is still on his ELC) and we would have to add in more players to even make this even.  This would then put Toronto over the roster limit and Minnesota under the limit with no cap space to ice anything close to a full roster.

It's not a crazy idea, it's just unrealistic and stupid.

.

38 minutes ago, raithis said:

Still doesn't work.  That isn't even half of Matthew's salary (Faber is still on his ELC) and we would have to add in more players to even make this even.  This would then put Toronto over the roster limit and Minnesota under the limit with no cap space to ice anything close to a full roster.

It's not a crazy idea, it's just unrealistic and stupid.

.

well wait a year and do it then. give rossi his 7 mil and trade him and fabs 8.5 mil for matthews. now that's realistic and smart but now is it crazy? 

To me, Chisholm should be on the ice every game he's able. Heinzy mentioned that we have seven defenders, not a 7th defender. I disagree, Merrill is a 7th defender. If an emergency happens, the best person to move into the top 4 right now is Chisholm. He skates better, and I question the 190. That's where he was last season, but, to me, he has added some strength. 

This logic here, however, I cannot agree with:

Quote

Bogosian is a load at 6-foot-3, 230 lbs., and Merrill is 6-foot-3. The veteran pair is bigger than Chisholm, who is 6-foot-1, 190 lbs. However, the Wild should play Chisholm over Bogosian and Merrill because of his puck-moving ability, offensive flair, and underlying metrics. 

You've got to have Bogosians on your team, specifically your 3rd pairing. They play a certain role and that role is needed. Midsy can't do it himself, Bogosian's game frees Midsy up to play his fully. 

Merrill, on the other hand, is about 6'3" 200+. He's not physical and merely has a reach advantage. He's too slow against most teams but is a nice fill in for a defender who needs a night off. And, we have to carry that type of defender with Spurgeon's condition. 

22 hours ago, Protec said:

I think Chisholm has staked claim to the 3rd pairing as it's guy. Buium or Bogo are the last man. Merrill will find another team we hope or could sign a 1M deal to be in reserve. I really think the smart thing is to move Spurgeon and upgrade the defense by adding size and reducing cost. I.e. improve depth with the money and players like Chisholm or Buium who are much less expensive. The nest 2-3 years are looking like a nice window, especially if Kaprizov can be extended. 

I think it's obvious that Buium will have a spot, and agree that it may be time to move Spurgeon. I can't remember where I read it, but I believe Buium plays either side and may prefer his off side. 

I don't think we should keep Merrill around, though. It may be that Bogosian is our 7th next season as Hunt and Buium should have spots in the top 6. Another thing I noticed is that the leader so far in the clubhouse for points by defenders is: David Spacek. I did not have him on my bingo card to be leading the defense in points, though I am thinking he will make the N.

Our we getting to the spot where we need to trade off some older players to make room for the youngsters? I think we are. We may even need to package some of our prospects to gain a couple of nice, needed, pieces. 

21 hours ago, raithis said:

We could sweeten the deal with higher picks or a decent prospect, but again, the teams that will value those most will be the rebuilding teams which are likely not to be an option. 

This means we likely have to deal with some of the fringe playoff teams and (probably) will have to hold some of the cap hit from Spurgeon's contract.  It also means those teams may value picks and prospects less, so we would likely have to part with someone who is a NHL player too.  The most likely candidate out of what we have would probably be Rossi. 

I wouldn't want to move him as a sweetener though, so it would be good to find a team who has a younger player at around Rossi's level who fits our needs more and maybe try to do Rossi and Spurgeon for an improvement on Rossi (if the team is insistent on finding someone else).  The problem with that is whether a team will be interested in two smaller stature players for their young up-and-comer. 

I can't remember where I read, perhaps it was capfriendly, but the most deduction we can give a team on Spurgeon was 20%. Spurgeon still has value, especially to a team that is up and coming and needs someone to solidify the back end. 

I'm thinking a team like Buffalo, Detroit, Ottawa or even Philly might appreciate what Spurgeon can offer: Leadership and competent play. To me, Detroit seems to be just a couple of pieces away, and having a guy under Seider could be beneficial. 

I really believe if Shooter is going to move Spurgeon, he will try to find the best position for him, not the best return, and, IMO, Spurgeon has earned that respect. 

His game has returned to close to what it used to be. I still see some puck bobbles that weren't there before, but the most part is back.

20 hours ago, Pewterschmidt said:

I guess I'll trust the science over my eye test.

Eye test is the best test. Don't trust the science! But, is your eye test biased? Does it require offense? Can a guy just be a good defensive forward that eats minutes, doesn't get scored on, contributes to the PK and takes the body? 

I think we were expecting offense from Trenin and it just isn't really there, but his line scored 3 times on Thursday night, so that says something.

17 hours ago, hydguy75 said:

Of course Spurgeon is a double edged sword with the injuries / missed time, hard to part ways when his game is on.  But for playoffs, I see the Wild get pushed around too much and out-skated, out-paced, out-played. 

I'd like to point out that this was Spurgeon as a top pairing. Spurgeon as a 2nd pairing might fair better.

15 hours ago, raithis said:

Then we look at the landscape and decide if Spurgeon is the asset worth trading or if Chisholm is the one we move.  I'd think it would make more sense to get younger, but at the end of the day Guerin has to look at the team and decide whether moving a player leaves us better off for that year and upcoming years.  That second part might be the main reason to really consider moving on from Spurgeon.

I like how you're thinking here. Maybe Chisholm is a piece to move too? I think he might get a decent price, kind of like Broberg did. 

I think we also have to see the baby Wild defenders, and how much improvement they make. Spacek looks like he's taking a leap. Lambos looks like he is better, but with no offense yet. Since this is a hard cap league, always looking for younger and cheaper should be in the equation. Maybe Chisholm simply gets us a competent RHS player of similar skill? 

I think you gotta hang on to Chisholm and allow him to get retribution against WPG for awhile. 

Kids distract me for 5-10 mins and the Wild are in OT. Wow!