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

    2 hours ago, MNCountryLife said:

    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. 

    Exactly. Its crazy to me that we get mad at Bill because he 'overpaid' Zuccy/Hartman/Foligno/Trenin/Middsy but when he tries to get value from a more valuable player, which will make him an easier asset to move in the future, we also get upset with him...

    Fact is that Rossi has limited leverage. It sucks for him but it is what it is. The sooner he and his agent accept that and sign his deal, the sooner he can start increasing his value to make another team want to offer more than some spare parts for him via trade. 

    • Like 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    19 minutes ago, ArizonaWildFan said:

    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.

    I don't know that Rossi would have been higher. If Heinzy keeps Boldy-Ek-Kaprizov together, Rossi doesn't really have anyone helping him. If Heinzy goes Boldy-Rossi-Kaprizov, which would be an good line too, he's likely higher.

    But, in that argument, Rossi doesn't get PP1 time, likely lowering his point total, and he's likely getting a little less icetime. 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    27 minutes ago, ArizonaWildFan said:

    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.

    the whole universe is against Rossi! zona - stay strong!

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, MNCountryLife said:

    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. 

    There is zero chance of getting Rossi for $5M or for that matter any forward with 2C potential . Sole exception maybe a one year deal signed 3 days before training camp . With the risk that Yurov will be good and Kaprisov healthy  whole season. And Rossi not doing a 60 put a 75 point season 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, OldDutchChip said:

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

    If he fits Top 6 is not really relevant 

    Even a 3C can demand close to 7 million next off season 

    And the height argument is almost bizarre . Rossi will be a 200lb player soon 

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    28 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    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.

    With my example I gave, I do not think I am wrong.  If he was signing for 7 years yes, I am suggesting 4, no UFA years are being bought out, it takes him right to his UFA season.  Signing him for 2 at $4.5 yes gives him arbitration rights and a higher QO in two years but cut my proposal of 6-7M in half and say 6.5M a year pays him 26M.  He would need a contract of 8.5M to make up the difference in two years.  I think the optics of offering a player 5 years and then cutting it to two is not a good look, and I think a 4-year contract at 6-7M is quite fair for both sides.  Just my opinion though.  

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, B1GKappa97 said:

    Exactly. Its crazy to me that we get mad at Bill because he 'overpaid' Zuccy/Hartman/Foligno/Trenin/Middsy but when he tries to get value from a more valuable player, which will make him an easier asset to move in the future, we also get upset with him...

    Fact is that Rossi has limited leverage. It sucks for him but it is what it is. The sooner he and his agent accept that and sign his deal, the sooner he can start increasing his value to make another team want to offer more than some spare parts for him via trade. 

    Very true, BG was used to getting players to accept less than their worth because poor old-BG we have the parise/suter buyout, please take a team friendly deal.

    Rossi does have limited leverage, just wait a bit until Ek gets hurt then the Wild are going to be hurting.  BG has to be sweating a bit until 97 and 23 resolves itself.  The way Rossi has been treated sure shows Wallstedt, Jiricek, Buium, Yurov, and Ohgren what awaits them!

    Trenin at $3.5 for three more years is a brutal overpay, but he signed after Foligno got hurt much of the season and the Wild had no other big bodies.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    16 minutes ago, 0 Stanley Cups said:

    Very true, BG was used to getting players to accept less than their worth because poor old-BG we have the parise/suter buyout, please take a team friendly deal.

    Rossi does have limited leverage, just wait a bit until Ek gets hurt then the Wild are going to be hurting.  BG has to be sweating a bit until 97 and 23 resolves itself.  The way Rossi has been treated sure shows Wallstedt, Jiricek, Buium, Yurov, and Ohgren what awaits them!

    Trenin at $3.5 for three more years is a brutal overpay, but he signed after Foligno got hurt much of the season and the Wild had no other big bodies.

    They were hurting with Ek injured even when Rossi was playing.. dude had only 4 points in all of March despite playing top-line minutes with Boldy and Zuccy while Kap and Ek were out the entire month. 

    If it was Rossi signed to a $5.25M contract and Ek trying to get $7M... Ek probably would've gotten that $7M. 

    Edited by B1GKappa97
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    44 minutes ago, goenzoy said:

    If he fits Top 6 is not really relevant 

    Even a 3C can demand close to 7 million next off season 

    And the height argument is almost bizarre . Rossi will be a 200lb player soon 

    of course it's relevant, he wants and expects himself to be a top 6 player. 

    it's not a height argument but more weight and strength that matters and how you use that. 

    • Thanks 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, OldDutchChip said:

    of course it's relevant, he wants and expects himself to be a top 6 player. 

    it's not a height argument but more weight and strength that matters and how you use that. 

    He is already a top 6 player. If he can do it any season and during any game is a different story . At the end of the day team needs to sort out next season 

    The rest is rather irrelevant and what will follow in 2026 

    But at least they still have the whole August 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    10 minutes ago, goenzoy said:

    He is already a top 6 player. If he can do it any season and during any game is a different story . At the end of the day team needs to sort out next season 

    The rest is rather irrelevant and what will follow in 2026 

    But at least they still have the whole August 

    spacer.png

    • Haha 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, MNCountryLife said:

    I never understood why we play inter-divisional opponents in preseason.  Don't we play them enough already.  West teams should play east teams in preseason.

    Probably to cut down on travel, although it doesn’t help much in the Western Conference.  Second is the thought that divisional matchups will help put butts in the seats for meaningless games.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Again, McBain just signed a 4.25M x 5 year contract coming off a 27 point season.  I don’t think Rossi is a 5M or less player on any deal, although Billy can stick to the QO only.  I do think it is tricky for Billy to argue that Rossi shouldn’t get a better contract and then likely try to trade him to another GM while arguing that the same other GM should value Rossi higher in a trade than the value Billy placed on Rossi.  Although that is the same logic that many posters on this forum use.

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 minutes ago, WildNotMild said:

    Again, McBain just signed a 4.25M x 5 year contract coming off a 27 point season.  I don’t think Rossi is a 5M or less player on any deal, although Billy can stick to the QO only.  I do think it is tricky for Billy to argue that Rossi shouldn’t get a better contract and then likely try to trade him to another GM while arguing that the same other GM should value Rossi higher in a trade than the value Billy placed on Rossi.  Although that is the same logic that many posters on this forum use.

    I would rather have Mcbain than Rossi.  

    • Confused 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 minutes ago, mnhockeyfan03 said:

    I would rather have Mcbain than Rossi.  

    It depends.  If we are talking about a 3C, then I would agree because McBain’s height, weight and nastiness would be a benefit.  If we are talking about a 2C, then Rossi’s better skill and 2-way game would prevail.

    I think this is part of the underlying issue with the Rossi situation.  If Yurov shows that he is a legit 2C or definitely will be, Rossi isn’t a good fit as a bottom 6 center.  If Yurov struggles or is a better fit on the wing, then the Wild still need an offensive top 6 center.

    I am not a huge Billy fan, but I think he is really trying to bide his time before having to really commit to Rossi because of the above.  I would like to see Rossi stay because the more natural centers a team has, especially in the playoffs, the better.

    • Like 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, SkolWild73 said:

    With my example I gave, I do not think I am wrong.  If he was signing for 7 years yes, I am suggesting 4, no UFA years are being bought out, it takes him right to his UFA season.  Signing him for 2 at $4.5 yes gives him arbitration rights and a higher QO in two years but cut my proposal of 6-7M in half and say 6.5M a year pays him 26M.  He would need a contract of 8.5M to make up the difference in two years.  I think the optics of offering a player 5 years and then cutting it to two is not a good look, and I think a 4-year contract at 6-7M is quite fair for both sides.  Just my opinion though.

    I wouldn't be completely unhappy at 5 x $5m, and I could probably swallow 4 x $5m, but the best thing for the Wild is to have the contract end while Rossi is still an RFA. 2 x $4-4.5m is right where Rossi is right now. It's not just the points but overall game. This contract is easy to move if necessary. 

    It may sound like I'm being harsh on Rossi, but I'm not on the trade him bandwagon unless we really improve our team. My biggest issue is that he still needs strength to be the most effective player that he can be. But, if you look at how it went for Granny, how it went for Nino, and how it went for Coyle, they all got 2nd contracts with a low AAV. My point is that this is also how Rossi should be treated. It was recently that people start handing out large contracts to kids after their ELCs. I would say that the success rate on that is a little higher than 50%. 

    But what we could do is have a mock arbitration case for Rossi even though it wouldn't count for anything. So, if I'm in Guerin's shoes, I look straight into the agents eyes and tell him "I don't know which player Marco is. Is he the one for the first 3/4 of the season, or the one for the last 1/4 of the season." "Let's go 2 years and he can prove which one he is."

    The thing is, none of us really know which player he is. We've got the evidence of the injury that he played through, and that could be part of the reason, but the slide started well before the puck to the knee. Scoring 0 points and looking invisible against Colorado and Dallas and then scoring 3 points against San Jose makes you look like you're a ppg player. But really, are you? No, and that's the issue we have here. Does Rossi simply disappear in important games with better competition? 

    I also would like to see angry Rossi, one with a chip on his shoulder like Marchand has played his whole career. We don't need any face licking, but I'd like to see him playing with that chip and getting into a few scrums, fighting for position, chipping at goalies who don't quite have the puck frozen. I don't think you get a look at that with $7m x 7 or $6m x 6. I think you probably do with $4-4.5m x 2. And, would this be a team value contract? You bet it is! 

    When Granny got his 2nd contract, he put up another 40ish point year and then exploded on the wing with 69. Was 60 a mirage? I don't know and neither does anyone else. That's why you bridge at a low number. That carrot for the young guys still needs to be there. 

    • Like 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, MNCountryLife said:

    I never understood why we play inter-divisional opponents in preseason.  Don't we play them enough already.  West teams should play east teams in preseason.

    I might be wrong, but I think it's the teams that set up the preseason games, not the league. They do it for a short travel schedule, and that's the way the divisions are set up. Really, out east you could go just about anywhere for preseason, and nobody cares about the west so this is what we have. It will be interesting to see if Utah does some Pacific conference teams.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, WildNotMild said:

    Again, McBain just signed a 4.25M x 5 year contract coming off a 27 point season.  I don’t think Rossi is a 5M or less player on any deal, although Billy can stick to the QO only.  I do think it is tricky for Billy to argue that Rossi shouldn’t get a better contract and then likely try to trade him to another GM while arguing that the same other GM should value Rossi higher in a trade than the value Billy placed on Rossi.  Although that is the same logic that many posters on this forum use.

    It's internal and external. Internally you want the player for a low number, externally he may be the next Gretzky. GMs play this game all the time. It's really none of our business what Utah gave McBain. Shooter merely has to point to Tavares' contract and say "see." 

    • Confused 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, mnfaninnc said:

    Shooter merely has to point to Tavares' contract and say "see." 

    This would work great on someone who did not know anything else about Tavares' situation or market value. Do you think his agent is one of them?

    • Haha 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    5 minutes ago, Tony Abbott said:

    This would work great on someone who did not know anything else about Tavares' situation or market value. Do you think his agent is one of them?

    No, and I don't think it's an arms length deal either. But, it is a quick answer to WNM's question on McBain. And it also points out that there are other valuable things to have other than point production. Plus McBain always scores against us. If he just played us, he'd probably be a 50 goal scorer.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, WildNotMild said:

    It depends.  If we are talking about a 3C, then I would agree because McBain’s height, weight and nastiness would be a benefit.  If we are talking about a 2C, then Rossi’s better skill and 2-way game would prevail.

    I think this is part of the underlying issue with the Rossi situation.  If Yurov shows that he is a legit 2C or definitely will be, Rossi isn’t a good fit as a bottom 6 center.  If Yurov struggles or is a better fit on the wing, then the Wild still need an offensive top 6 center.

    I am not a huge Billy fan, but I think he is really trying to bide his time before having to really commit to Rossi because of the above.  I would like to see Rossi stay because the more natural centers a team has, especially in the playoffs, the better.

    how about i bring up matt duchene? yes he is older, but in the next 4 years he will for sure outperform Rossi. so how about that for comparison? Rossi at 4.5 for 4 years? no? 

    also try to understand that this is not about just Rossi. Billy needs to construct a team that can actually win the SC and he has to be smart at it. he cannot overload our top 6 with players that share similar limitations, ones that will be exploited in the Playoffs. That is as simple as that. We need to diversify our top 6. 

    Sure, if our team was Vegas then Rossi could slot in the top 6 and line up with brutes like Stone and Eichel.

    OOOOOh let's make that happen - surely they'd trade Dorofeev for Rossi! Rossi kicks his butt in your precious point comparison 60 to 52....they would no doubt jump at that? 

    no, of course they won't. there is a lesson in there if you can uncover it 😉

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    1 hour ago, mnfaninnc said:

    I wouldn't be completely unhappy at 5 x $5m, and I could probably swallow 4 x $5m, but the best thing for the Wild is to have the contract end while Rossi is still an RFA. 2 x $4-4.5m is right where Rossi is right now. It's not just the points but overall game. This contract is easy to move if necessary. 

    It may sound like I'm being harsh on Rossi, but I'm not on the trade him bandwagon unless we really improve our team. My biggest issue is that he still needs strength to be the most effective player that he can be. But, if you look at how it went for Granny, how it went for Nino, and how it went for Coyle, they all got 2nd contracts with a low AAV. My point is that this is also how Rossi should be treated. It was recently that people start handing out large contracts to kids after their ELCs. I would say that the success rate on that is a little higher than 50%. 

    But what we could do is have a mock arbitration case for Rossi even though it wouldn't count for anything. So, if I'm in Guerin's shoes, I look straight into the agents eyes and tell him "I don't know which player Marco is. Is he the one for the first 3/4 of the season, or the one for the last 1/4 of the season." "Let's go 2 years and he can prove which one he is."

    The thing is, none of us really know which player he is. We've got the evidence of the injury that he played through, and that could be part of the reason, but the slide started well before the puck to the knee. Scoring 0 points and looking invisible against Colorado and Dallas and then scoring 3 points against San Jose makes you look like you're a ppg player. But really, are you? No, and that's the issue we have here. Does Rossi simply disappear in important games with better competition? 

    I also would like to see angry Rossi, one with a chip on his shoulder like Marchand has played his whole career. We don't need any face licking, but I'd like to see him playing with that chip and getting into a few scrums, fighting for position, chipping at goalies who don't quite have the puck frozen. I don't think you get a look at that with $7m x 7 or $6m x 6. I think you probably do with $4-4.5m x 2. And, would this be a team value contract? You bet it is! 

    When Granny got his 2nd contract, he put up another 40ish point year and then exploded on the wing with 69. Was 60 a mirage? I don't know and neither does anyone else. That's why you bridge at a low number. That carrot for the young guys still needs to be there. 

    I am not going to debate what type of player I think Rossi will be.  All I know is he improved in every aspect of his game from year one to year two.  In Billy's tenure this is what he has done with his top players on ELC's, from what I remember.

    Kap: played one year, signed 5-year extension at age 24 in 2021

    EK:  Played 5 seasons, signed 8 year, $5.25 AAV at age 24 in 2021, which would be over $6m in todays salary cap.

    Boldy: Played a year and a half, signed 7 year, $7M AAV at age 22 in Jan. of 2023

    Faber:  Played one year, signed 8 year, $8.5M AAV at age 22.

    Only top player that he did not sign that I remember is Fiala.  Might have if we had the money.  I would say that all of these contracts have been good contracts with a wait and see on Faber's.  Rossi is the only one, so far anyway, not to get offered long term into their UFA years.  All of those contracts have been fair to the player and the team. I don't think a 4-year contract is all that much, it is still very tradeable if that is the route we want to go.

    My whole point of my first post was not what I thought he would or should get, it was what I thought would get a deal done

    Edited by SkolWild73
    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...