Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness Zone Coverage Property
  • The Mikael Granlund Contract Should Have Ended the Marco Rossi Debate


    Image courtesy of Robert Edwards-Imagn Images
    Tony Abbott

    In the endless, three-year-long debate about Marco Rossi's value, the biggest argument of his critics is simple:

    He's another Mikael Granlund.

    It's not a particularly fair critique for either player. Rossi has been more productive than Granlund at a similar age while sticking at center. Meanwhile, Granlund has played 902 NHL games and has five 60-point seasons under his belt. That's a hell of a player.

    Still, the parallels between the two players make it easy for Wild fans to put them in the same box. Granlund and Rossi were drafted in the exact same spot (ninth overall), ten years apart. Minnesota drafted both of them as undersized centers with a lot of hype. They each had false starts in the NHL before adjusting and coming into their own with the Wild.

    Granlund played 461 games with the Wild, racking up 317 points, which still puts him in the top-10 in franchise history. Since leaving Minnesota in the Kevin Fiala trade, Granlund has pivoted back to center, spending stints with the Nashville Predators and San Jose Sharks before catching on with the Dallas Stars for their playoff run. Once in Dallas, he apparently impressed the organization enough that the Stars wanted to keep him around, even though he ultimately signed with the Anaheim Ducks.

    Granlund signed a three-year, $21 million deal with Anaheim. The $7 million AAV is a match to what Rossi is believed to be asking for in his RFA negotiations with the Wild.

    So while it's easy to argue otherwise, let's accept the premise:

    Rossi is the next Mikael Granlund.

    OK, then. The debate's over. We know how much that's worth, and the price tag is $7 million AAV.

    A seven-year deal would take Rossi through his age 24 to 30 seasons, using Hockey-Reference's cutoffs. During that same age range, Granlund averaged 18 goals and 57 points per 82 games. If that's Rossi's exact career trajectory, then we should be able to expect him to be around a 60-point center over that time. 

    That was the case for Granlund over his last contract (four years, $5M AAV); he averaged 61 points per 82 games during that time. He got $7 million. The market spoke!

    Sure, they're different circumstances. Granlund was a UFA, while Rossi's rights are restricted. He can sign with another team, but the Wild have the right of first refusal for the contract and have vowed to match any offer sheet. Teams could get into a bidding war for Granlund's services, while they have to be much more strategic if they wish to pursue Rossi.

    Still, even so, we have another Granlund contract that helps us spitball his value -- his three-year RFA deal signed in 2017.

    At age 24, Granlund broke out after a shift from center to wing. He blew past his career highs of 13 goals and 44 points en route to a 26-goal, 69-point season. Again, you can draw the parallels between the two players if you like. Granlund increased his career-high by 25 points in a contract year, while Rossi moved his up by 20 last season.

    Like Guerin has with Rossi today, Chuck Fletcher seemed to have his doubts about going long-term with Granlund after his breakout season. While Fletcher handed out five- and six-year deals for Nino Niederreiter, Charlie Coyle, and Jonas Brodin, he opted for a shorter-term contract with Granlund, signing a three-year, $5.85 million AAV deal.

    It was a "prove-it" deal of sorts, giving Granlund the ability to show he could play at a high level before hitting UFA status. It also came in at a hefty rate, accounting for 7.67% of the salary cap when it took effect.

    A 60-point season from a young player was highly valued then, and it remains highly valued now, even if the player doesn't have a long history of achieving that mark. Applying that same percentage to Rossi's cap hit for the upcoming season gives us something in the $7.3 million range. Again, if Rossi is simply the next Granlund... that's what Granlund was worth at a similar stage in their career and trajectory.

    The Wild have their line with Rossi, but it doesn't appear to be one that's aligned with the market or reality. The highest reported AAV from Minnesota in a contract offer is $5 million, which matches what Ryan McLeod signed as an RFA this offseason, who put up fewer goals and points than Rossi despite being two years older. Come on.

    It's obvious where this writer stands RE: Rossi's value. A full-time center with strong two-way numbers and 60 points at 23 is a much better asset than Granlund was at any stage of his career. But fine, if you want to insist that they're the same player -- skilled, undersized forwards whose slighter frame puts a ceiling on them -- then, once again, we know what that's worth today. If Rossi is indeed the next Mikael Granlund, then pay him Granlund money. This shouldn't be that difficult!

    Think you could write a story like this? Hockey Wilderness wants you to develop your voice, find an audience, and we'll pay you to do it. Just fill out this form.

    • Like 4
    • Thanks 1

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments



    Featured Comments

    Granlund being a 50-60 pt player for years would have helped.  This is Guerin or the agent playing chicken when there's no guarantee a Fiala-esque return is waiting.

    Maybe there is or maybe someone better trade wise is waiting (doubtful), but $1-2m or an extra year can't seriously mean this much to either side...so frustrating.

    • Like 5
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Every dollar of every contract matters.  We can say: "Pay the Man, he is worth it"... and he probably is.... but it won't change the fact that if we can get Rossi at $5M instead of $7M that leaves $2M more that can go to another player and make this team deeper.  So we play the money game. 

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    It seems easy to me being a math guy.  One side offered 5x5, the other asked for 7x7, middle ground would say 6x6.  Use that as a new starting point and it shouldn’t take long.  If I am Rossi, I would want a 4 year deal to bring me to UFA status.  4x6-7 seems fair

    • Like 5
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    we shouldn't rush to sign him to 7 or higher LT deal until he proves that he belongs in the top 6. we have leverage on him, and we are using it.

    it is also in Rossi's best interest (financially speaking) to bet on himself (if he believes in himself). sign a short term deal - come in and deliver - and it will pay off. 

    i think billy is handling this surprisingly well (i was wrong about him), not just Rossi but the team construct part.

    i do believe he understands that top 6 needs more physically imposing and skilled players. those are hard to get but he is banking on one being available this TDL. perhaps Tage or Tuch or Brady or Larkin or Pasta or Panarin (not tough but super skill). you have to have flexibility to get them and you'd loose that if you pay up for Rossi now. 

    there is also Rossi's replacement - Yurov. i get it that he is an unknown, but it does seem like top 6 is a spot for him sooner or later. So having two undersized players (centers too) added to an already "soft" list of players in the top 6 is just not a good strategy.

    so it's simple - Rossi is a good player - but he doesn't fit our Top 6. 

    • Like 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    I will say this.  Every time that I refresh the Puckpedia page, I am hoping to see the players signed number go up and then see Rossi's name.  Then I scroll down and check the trades.  Just can't wait until this is over.  I am patient on the KK97 signing.  None of the other big names of 2026 have signed yet and I am assuming we will hear something when Kap gets back from Russia.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    39 minutes ago, OldDutchChip said:

    we shouldn't rush to sign him to 7 or higher LT deal until he proves that he belongs in the top 6.
    Rossi is a good player - but he doesn't fit our Top 6. 

    I thought he proved himself pretty clearly this past season. If he doesn’t belong in the top 6 then who do you suggest? Hartman? Or some unproven player with little experience like Ohgren or Yurov?

    • Like 4
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    39 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

    me being a math guy.

    I like to start with this equation when solving team construction problems. 1C>2C. As ODC stated it’s all about priorities in how BG wants to build the Wild moving forward. You mentioned Rossi 4*$6, makes sense to me until equation 1 can be solved. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 minutes ago, Sam said:

    I thought he proved himself pretty clearly this past season. If he doesn’t belong in the top 6 then who do you suggest? Hartman? Or some unproven player with little experience like Ohgren or Yurov?

    i disagree - i don't think he proved it

    none of the above

    the top 6 help will likely be external unless Yurov is a fireball

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, Burnt Toast said:

    I like to start with this equation when solving team construction problems. 1C>2C. As ODC stated it’s all about priorities in how BG wants to build the Wild moving forward. You mentioned Rossi 4*$6, makes sense to me until equation 1 can be solved. 

    Agreed, and a 4x6-7 contract should be easily moved in a trade if we want to do that in the future.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    58 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

    4x6-7 seems fair

    This is the issue, though. Within the CBA, "fair" doesn't play a part in it. For the 1st 6 years of a player's career, he is under team control essentially meaning that he will be a value signing. The player has 2 options, but Rossi has just qualified for 1, offersheet or arbitration. 

    And, I think this is exactly where we are in this debate. It is up to the GM to keep the players relatively happy while getting the best deal he can for the team. It is up to the player's agent to get as much for the player (and ultimately himself) as he can. 

    What ends up happening should be that Guerin wins this battle...but, if it's a 1 or 2 year deal, he may or may not win that one.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Just now, mnfaninnc said:

    This is the issue, though. Within the CBA, "fair" doesn't play a part in it. For the 1st 6 years of a player's career, he is under team control essentially meaning that he will be a value signing. The player has 2 options, but Rossi has just qualified for 1, offersheet or arbitration. 

    And, I think this is exactly where we are in this debate. It is up to the GM to keep the players relatively happy while getting the best deal he can for the team. It is up to the player's agent to get as much for the player (and ultimately himself) as he can. 

    What ends up happening should be that Guerin wins this battle...but, if it's a 1 or 2 year deal, he may or may not win that one.

    I meant fair for both sides.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Granlund was overpaid because he was successful in the playoffs.  I chuckled when I heard he got 7M.  Good for him, but comparing a UFA to a RFA in terms of value smells somewhat like a red herring.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, OldDutchChip said:

    So having two undersized players (centers too) added to an already "soft" list of players in the top 6 is just not a good strategy

    Isn't Yurov 6'1''?  He may need to add some weight/muscle but he won't be undersized for long.  At 21 you still haven't filled your frame.  Between now and age 23 I would expect him to bulk up to roughly 200lbs.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Let's investigate Tony's argument a little deeper. 

    Mikael Granlund came out of his ELC with a 2 year bridge deal at $3m. If Tony's argument is that Rossi is Granlund 2.0, then a bridge deal is probably the route to go. 

    Today, that bridge deal is probably closer to the $4.5m mark, maybe $4m. Statistically speaking, though, Granlund didn't hit 60 points until he went to wing in his 5th season. Then he got the $5.75m contract for 3 years, which is probably closer to $7m now. 

    So, Rossi's camp wants to jump the bridge deal and go straight for the next contract up. Granlund was then traded in the 2nd year of the $5.75m contract and struggled in Nashville. He had pay cuts ever since that one until now, which probably is on par with what he got in his 3rd contract.

    So, how were the others handled? Nino got a 3 year bridge at $2.67m, Coyle immediately got a 6 year deal at $3.2m, which was a pretty good bargain. 

    Why is there so much talk about skipping the 2nd bridge deal contract? I know some teams have just caved and gone big after ELCs, typically buying out the beginning of UFA years, but now that the cap has expanded again, why not go back to the team friendly bridge deals? 

    In Granlund's case, he had to be moved out of center, and 2nd line C was the best he was getting. Then he had his 69 point season in a contract year and got his $5.75m where he continued to produce close to that level. 

    Rossi isn't a $7m player. Remember how Koivu spoke about Granny, glowing that his 200' game had drastically improved and that was what he was most proud of? Granny was getting tossed to the ground by Big Buff during his 2nd contract. Granny was far more solid in his 3rd. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Granlund vs Rossi is a great comparison, but I definitely prefer the way Rossi plays on the ice, he gets to the dirty areas both behind and in-front of the net kind of like Parise.

    The Wild have their line with Rossi, but it doesn't appear to be one that's aligned with the market or reality.

    Very true!  the way the Wild has treated his 4th line demotion and lowball offers is unwarranted for a team who can't draft centers, and the Wild definitely wouldn't have made the playoffs without Rossi, while both 97 and 14 were injured much of the season.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, MNCountryLife said:

    Isn't Yurov 6'1''?  He may need to add some weight/muscle but he won't be undersized for long.  At 21 you still haven't filled your frame.  Between now and age 23 I would expect him to bulk up to roughly 200lbs.

    All we have listed on him is his draft weight. We have no idea the body building he's done in Russia.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    20 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

    I meant fair for both sides.

    Precisely, the 1st couple of years coming out of an ELC are still meant to be "value" years for the club owning the rights.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, MNCountryLife said:

    Isn't Yurov 6'1''?  He may need to add some weight/muscle but he won't be undersized for long.  At 21 you still haven't filled your frame.  Between now and age 23 I would expect him to bulk up to roughly 200lbs.

    i definitely hope so! the arrival of yurov - 

    spacer.png

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    Precisely, the 1st couple of years coming out of an ELC are still meant to be "value" years for the club owning the rights.

    So you do or don't think 4X6 is fair for both sides?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    A fair question for management to have answered is was the real Rossi the guy who we saw for the first 3/4 of the season, or the guy we saw the last 1/4? 

    To answer this question, more data is needed. In the last 1/4, we can throw out the ppg argument, he was very inconsistent and was invisible against stronger competition many of those games. Therefore a lower 2 year bridge deal is in order. 

    And, so far, the market has spoken. He's not worth $7m a year. Perhaps an offersheet comes in the next couple of weeks, but Rossi didn't have adequate trade offers, and it looks very much like nobody is willing to give up 1, 2, 3 next draft. In fact,  it looks like nobody is willing to give up 1, 3 either.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

    So you do or don't think 4X6 is fair for both sides?

    Actually, I'm leaning to 2 x $4.5m. $3.5m year 1, $5.5m year 2. That makes a QO at about $6.1m after 2 seasons. I think after 2 more seasons, management should have a good gauge on the player. 

    But, I'd also be trying really hard to pick up Mason McTavish and including Rossi in the package to the Ducks. 

    But to further answer your question, I don't think it has to be fair for both sides, I think this is mostly a 1 sided negotiation where Guerin has 90% of the power. 

    Edited by mnfaninnc
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    From my understanding, most offer sheets are done in August.  First, the argument that no one wants him because he hasn’t signed an offer sheet is incorrect.  For all we know, he has been presented with an offer sheet but hasn’t signed it or won’t for that particular team.

    Second, the argument that “no other team wants him” is likely incorrect.  If he was an UFA, does anyone really think he wouldn’t get 7M per?  Teams really have to think twice about giving up draft capital in an offer sheet or trade AND still paying the player.  That is a double whammy.  Plus, historically there has been a gentlemen’s agreement to not use the offer sheet route if the other team can easily match.

    Other GMs might be waiting for Billy to resign Kaprizov or make more moves to limit what he can match if Rossi does sign an offer sheet.  Likewise, Billy is limited in what he can do if he needs to keep 7M+ set aside just in case.

    Finally, I think Rossi is a good player.  I would rather lock him into a deal for 7 years because any deal will look better each year for a younger player as the cap goes up.  I also think Billy wants to trade him and having him signed to a longer contract will likely help.  A team acquiring Rossi would likely give up more if he is under contract for 6-7 years versus looking for a new contract in 1-2 years.  Similar to how more equity is given for players at the TDL who have more term left on their contracts.

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    4 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    Actually, I'm leaning to 2 x $4.5m. $3.5m year 1, $5.5m year 2. That makes a QO at about $6.1m after 2 seasons. I think after 2 more seasons, management should have a good gauge on the player. 

    But, I'd also be trying really hard to pick up Mason McTavish and including Rossi in the package to the Ducks. 

    But to further answer your question, I don't think it has to be fair for both sides, I think this is mostly a 1 sided negotiation where Guerin has 90% of the power. 

    Of course, Billy has all the power, but that doesn't mean you sign him to a 2 x $4.5.  What kind of message does that send to the rest of the players on the team as well as the rest of the league?  We offered him 5 x5M.  To do less years and offer less would be a terrible look.  The CBA wasn't put in place to screw over players coming out of their ELC, it was done to help teams to keep the players that they drafted.  Back to the 5 X 5M we offered.  If we offer 4 years, then the AAV goes up.  4 x6-7 is fair for both sides.  The total contract is close to what we originally offered, and we can still trade him if we want down the road .  Rossi gets close to what he is asking for, just less years, and if he plays well, he will get a larger one at the end of it when he is a UFA

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    25 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    A fair question for management to have answered is was the real Rossi the guy who we saw for the first 3/4 of the season, or the guy we saw the last 1/4?

    This isn't meant to be an argument but rather looking at last season from a different perspective. Would Rossi have been higher than a 60 point player last season if Kaprizov and Ek wouldn't have been out at the same time for an extended period? IMO absolutely.

    Guerin is quick to say that Ek needs depth help. Guerin was tight-lipped when Rossi stepped in to Ek's role while he was injured, without having Kaprizov's help as well.

    Rossi has been and continues to be held to a higher standard than others on the team and around the league. I wish the Wild management and coaches, along with the Rossi hating fans, would just come out and say they don't like him rather than trying to make lame excuses for not wanting him around. Grow some balls, people, because statistically moving on from Rossi just doesn't make sense.

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    32 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

    Of course, Billy has all the power, but that doesn't mean you sign him to a 2 x $4.5.  What kind of message does that send to the rest of the players on the team as well as the rest of the league?  We offered him 5 x5M.  To do less years and offer less would be a terrible look.  The CBA wasn't put in place to screw over players coming out of their ELC, it was done to help teams to keep the players that they drafted.  Back to the 5 X 5M we offered.  If we offer 4 years, then the AAV goes up.  4 x6-7 is fair for both sides.  The total contract is close to what we originally offered, and we can still trade him if we want down the road .  Rossi gets close to what he is asking for, just less years, and if he plays well, he will get a larger one at the end of it when he is a UFA

    You're wrong here. Less years = less AAV coming out of the ELC. More years>AAV because you are buying out improvement + UFA years. Go back and look at the Fletcher years, you'll see it.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites




    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...