Jump to content
Hockey Wilderness Zone Coverage Property
  • Wild Blogger Round Table: Part Four


    Guest

    Everyone still with us? Hopefully you are enjoying the series as much as the bloggers had making it. The All Star break is almost over, and we are almost back to real hockey. This time off is ridiculous, and yet somehow... welcome. It will be great to get back to writing about hockey again, seeing how this season plays out.

    This is part four of the series, with only the lightning round remaining. You'll get that tomorrow. Make sure you weigh in on the questions, too. The final long answer section has some fun behind it. Are the Wild buyers or sellers? If you were in charge, what would you do?

    Not that you don't already know them, but here is our esteemed panel:

    Nathan:  If it were up to me? Sell. 2012-2013 should be the goal, and they should still stockpile prospects and picks. However, I don't pay the bills, and a third season out of the playoffs might be more than Craig Leipold and Chuck Fletcher can handle. Even a first round exit brings with it plenty of cash, and it's hard to turn that down.

    Heather: I think they hold, with a slight edge on buying if someone looks good. Why? Because that would annoy me and that seems to be the theme here.

    Elise: Sell. The Wild aren't going to win the Cup this year and getting knocked out in the first round of the playoffs isn't going to do anything to get fans back in the seats. Get some good, young players and build up a team that can really compete in the coming years.

    As for buying, there's no one rental which helps Minnesota off for two months and they're getting back Latendresse.

    Dan S: Barring an epic collapse, we stay put with the returns of Latendresse and Zidlicky on the horizon. In theory those two would be bigger additions than anything on the market, and you already have those two under contract.

    JS: I think they should be sellers, give guys like Bruno, Madden, Theo their shots with contenders, because there's no use mortgaging the future for a very unlikely cup run. We actually have some respectable, tradable assets this year, and I believe the Wild should take advantage, seeing as our prospect pool could use more offense and maybe we could free some cap space to prepare for the free agency period. Next year should be a good year if all goes well.

    Ryan: If the Wild are three points out of a playoff spot come the trade deadline, I think they should at least get some depth.  They obviously aren't in the market for a big-ticket item, but maybe a couple pieces that can help them sneak in.  Although, teams in the past that are right on the bubble tend to stand pat.  If the team happens to fall apart between now and then, they'll have some expiring contracts that other teams may be interested in.

    Jeremy: I think the Wild will be buyers. Pretty much every indication from Craig Leipold is that he expects this team to be a playoff team and if they are sitting where they are now I would expect them to make that push. As fans we can talk all we want about how it would be better to get a high draft pick than to barely make the playoffs, and there is some truth to that. But the financial reality is that the team needs to make the playoffs to make money. However, I also think Fletcher will try to work some magic and move some potential FA's while also adding. 

    Bryan: I've expounded on this already, but here's the short version. Both. They will sell off a UFA or two, and get a pick or two, and will be looking for a RFA in return as well.

    Elise: Oh gosh, this is a lot of imaginary pressure. I have no idea. I'd probably spend the entire day trying to figure out what to do.

    Nathan W: Make myself permanent GM and lose the keyboard. Dolla dolla bills y'all!

    Dan S: Oh man. I think you have to find a way to get rid of Cam Barker's contract. That cap space is too valuable, and he's been passed up by 3 rookies. 

    Bryan: Knowing that Fletcher was coming back the next day, I would take the heat off of him a bit. Cam Barker would be on waivers. Fletcher can't do it for respect of what he gave up to bring him in, too much money on the contract, etc. This would make it possible to get rid of him without the lingering effect of it being on Fletcher's shoulders. 

    Shep would be gone. The project is over. Cut him out completely. Gone. Any way possible. 

    First phone calls would be to the teams near last place, wanting to know what it would take to get their first round picks. Nothing is off the table. I want top five pick or two. (Lou, babe, call me.) I am also entertaining offers for all UFAs, no reasonable offer turned down. Basically, I'm wheeling and dealing, and I want a dance partner. Brian Burke? Deal. Glen Sather? Hell, yeah. It's time to make some moves. Get me three or four phones. Let's get this done.

    Oh, and call Kayem foods. It's time for a new hot dog supplier.

    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.


    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    There are no comments to display.



    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...