Wild 2022 off season

[TallyTigerShark]

So, a little bit of Dumba “news” and those wanting to trade him won’t like this…

 

….Russo just held his Q&A session on The Athletic and was asked about the Wild trading Dumba. He replied that “league sources” had told him that BG had quietly called around to gauge interest in Dumba and there was none. A second guest followed up and asked did Russo mean no interest at the Wild’s asking price, or no interest in Dumba at all? Russo was clear that his league sources say there is no interest in Dumba AT ALL. If true, moving Dumba is going to be difficult unless we eat money or take low value prospect(s) in return….unless some other team has an injury and their needs change. 
 

Take that for what it’s worth.

[CreaseAndAssist]

21 minutes ago, TallyTigerShark said:

So, a little bit of Dumba “news” and those wanting to trade him won’t like this…

 

….Russo just held his Q&A session on The Athletic and was asked about the Wild trading Dumba. He replied that “league sources” had told him that BG had quietly called around to gauge interest in Dumba and there was none. A second guest followed up and asked did Russo mean no interest at the Wild’s asking price, or no interest in Dumba at all? Russo was clear that his league sources say there is no interest in Dumba AT ALL. If true, moving Dumba is going to be difficult unless we eat money or take low value prospect(s) in return….unless some other team has an injury and their needs change. 
 

Take that for what it’s worth.

 

What a surprise (sarcasm), absolutely no interest for Matt Dumba. 

 

No team in the league is going to do the Wild a favor on this.  You see if there is any offer at all and you take it.  My guess is he'll be dealt at the deadline.  I am sure Guerin will get mad at "they" for saying that the rest of the league has absolutely no interest in the defenseman whom he thinks is great.  Apparently 'they' weren't buying what Guerin was trying to sell.  

 

I wonder if the analytics crowd who likes to tell you that Dumba is one of our best defenseman will be able to accept that.  

 

There is a perception of value versus their actual value.  If other teams have zero interest in him, there is no way the Wild should keep him at even 1/2 of his current contract value per season.  

[CreaseAndAssist]

44 minutes ago, TallyTigerShark said:

I find it REALLY hard to believe that Chuck Fletcher is still a GM in this league.

 

I was really surprised he wasn't fired right along with Mike Yeo.  I noticed Fletcher brought back Louie Belpedio in free agency.  

[Tomdog]

I really feel sorry for the Fliers fans and more so the poor GM that takes over for the Fliers after they fire him. 

[TallyTigerShark]

6 hours ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

There is a perception of value versus their actual value.  If other teams have zero interest in him, there is no way the Wild should keep him at even 1/2 of his current contract value per season.

Yeah, Russo alluded to that somewhat as well as he was answering those questions and he postulated about what the Wild could do with Dumba. He doesn’t see any way that the Wild will resign Dumba for anything more than about $4.5M/per at most because of the cap crunch. If Dumba won’t sign at that number, and Russo kind of doubts he would, then if you can’t sign him now or during the season, your choices are clear. You move him at some point during the year or he walks for nothing after the season. We have to hope he plays well and hope some team needs a defenseman come the deadline. I’d hate to let him walk for nothing.

[CreaseAndAssist]

14 hours ago, TallyTigerShark said:

Yeah, Russo alluded to that somewhat as well as he was answering those questions and he postulated about what the Wild could do with Dumba. He doesn’t see any way that the Wild will resign Dumba for anything more than about $4.5M/per at most because of the cap crunch. If Dumba won’t sign at that number, and Russo kind of doubts he would, then if you can’t sign him now or during the season, your choices are clear. You move him at some point during the year or he walks for nothing after the season. We have to hope he plays well and hope some team needs a defenseman come the deadline. I’d hate to let him walk for nothing.

 

I heard those comments and I think $4.5 million for Dumba is still an overpayment.  He just doesn't produce or perform well enough to justify that salary.  And as Russo said...this team has a TON of defense prospects.  Many of them who look like great skaters and will be far cheaper.  It makes all the sense in the world to just let him go and use the cap space.  It's a shame his value is so low we'd practically have to give him away (maybe some kind of Future Considerations deal) but it makes ZERO sense to block off those young players just to keep him around and overpay him at that.  I agree with Russo's sentiment on that, 100%.  

[Icechipper]

Free agent signings boring. Guerin saving opportunities for Rossi, Beckman and Addison, is my guess.

[ClusterChuck]

On 7/14/2022 at 12:57 PM, TallyTigerShark said:

that BG had quietly called around to gauge interest in Dumba and there was none.

Welcome to 2 years ago.
His 'Value' dive bombed season after seaon from his 1 offensive production season.
He goes on to be protected from VGK, Gets the big $$ and gets comfortable. Shades of the 'ol Country Club.
With already so much movement going on, Dumba's not a hot commodity by any means so at best all we can hope for is sometime as mentioned before trade deadline, Some team needs to fill a spot out of desperation/injury or a move for a PO run. Either way we'd probably have to eat some of his salary.
If nothing happens then, Not even picks...Let him walk.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

1 hour ago, Icechipper said:

Free agent signings boring. Guerin saving opportunities for Rossi, Beckman and Addison, is my guess.

 

Well, given Minnesota's situation, I'd say that was expected. Not much wiggle room during these next three "Dark Cap Years"...and like you said, there are younger guys the team should be focusing on, and if they look like they are going to pan out, you get the checkbook ready for them.

I'd rather see the Wild do nothing, or make "boring, safe" moves in free agency, than make a signing just for the sake of it, or to make an ill advised "splash".

Next few seasons will tell us what these prospects the team has are made of.

[CreaseAndAssist]

3 hours ago, ClusterChuck said:

Welcome to 2 years ago.
His 'Value' dive bombed season after seaon from his 1 offensive production season.
He goes on to be protected from VGK, Gets the big $$ and gets comfortable. Shades of the 'ol Country Club.
With already so much movement going on, Dumba's not a hot commodity by any means so at best all we can hope for is sometime as mentioned before trade deadline, Some team needs to fill a spot out of desperation/injury or a move for a PO run. Either way we'd probably have to eat some of his salary.
If nothing happens then, Not even picks...Let him walk.

 

Not sure if that's quite accurate.  According to Russo, he said he believes when Paul Fenton was GM and the Maple Leafs were having a hard time signing William Nylander that Fenton passed on an offer from Kyle Dubas asking for Dumba for Nylander in a straight player-for-player swap.  

 

As for now, its unfortunate his value is basically nothing.  But I see little to no sense to keeping him around any longer than we have to with so many young defensive prospects waiting for those spots in the lineup.  

[CreaseAndAssist]

2 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

 

Well, given Minnesota's situation, I'd say that was expected. Not much wiggle room during these next three "Dark Cap Years"...and like you said, there are younger guys the team should be focusing on, and if they look like they are going to pan out, you get the checkbook ready for them.

I'd rather see the Wild do nothing, or make "boring, safe" moves in free agency, than make a signing just for the sake of it, or to make an ill advised "splash".

Next few seasons will tell us what these prospects the team has are made of.

 

Guerin already made his ill-advised mistakes; Merrill and Goligoski's extensions.  

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

37 minutes ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

 

Guerin already made his ill-advised mistakes; Merrill and Goligoski's extensions.  

 

Meh, Goligoski 2M for just this season and next doesn't bother me that much.
His play is sorta Jonas Brodin-lite, IMO.
Gives you about as much, with Brodes being the better overall defender of course.

The Merrill extension, not franchise crippling, but still, I never cared much for Merrill as a defender even in his NJ and Vegas days.
I thought for sure he would be one of the defenders the Wild let walk, but well, a misstep for sure for Guerin there.

[ClusterChuck]

11 hours ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

 

Not sure if that's quite accurate.  According to Russo, he said he believes when Paul Fenton was GM and the Maple Leafs were having a hard time signing William Nylander that Fenton passed on an offer from Kyle Dubas asking for Dumba for Nylander in a straight player-for-player swap.  

 

As for now, its unfortunate his value is basically nothing.  But I see little to no sense to keeping him around any longer than we have to with so many young defensive prospects waiting for those spots in the lineup.  

That had to be 2018 or so? Anyway, Closer to the season of production than the period I mentioned after.
Then you factor in Fenton for what? A year being a GM (disaster) and a "Belief" from Russo, While technically, Some Possible interest. 

[CreaseAndAssist]

Fenton is an interesting character.  For as much as people piled on with the Niederreiter for Rask deal and the low-ball price he got for Coyle.  He also made some pretty smart moves.  Fiala was the gamebreaker he said he was and some of his draft selections turned out to be decent too.  

 

I think we're pretty much stuck with Dumba unless they mostly want to give him away; which may not be the worst thing to do at the deadline when perhaps someone will give you a 2nd rounder for him depending on where the Wild is at, at at that point.  

[CreaseAndAssist]

13 hours ago, TropicalFruitGirl26 said:

 

Meh, Goligoski 2M for just this season and next doesn't bother me that much.
His play is sorta Jonas Brodin-lite, IMO.
Gives you about as much, with Brodes being the better overall defender of course.

The Merrill extension, not franchise crippling, but still, I never cared much for Merrill as a defender even in his NJ and Vegas days.
I thought for sure he would be one of the defenders the Wild let walk, but well, a misstep for sure for Guerin there.

 

Yet those moves to extend Merrill and Goligoski added up so you couldn't keep Fiala.  Toss in Kulikov's deal in there too or even Greenway's extension.  You keep giving those players a few million apiece and now you can't afford to keep your 2nd leading scorer.  For as good as our prospect pool appears to be now, we don't have anyone that is ready right now to fill that kind of role and produce at that level.  Even Russo admitted he was a bit 'loose' with his money and it kind of bit the Wild in the ass and compelled them to trade him.  

[IllaZilla]

I think with the Merrill and Goligoski extensions it was more of “the devil you know” because of the cap crunch. 
 

They could have let them walk and looked at the free agent market for cheaper players. But then there is the uncertainty of who they could bring in for cheap. 
 

Maybe they should have let those two walk and brought up some Iowa guys. Then they could have kept Fiala potentially. 
 

I think the real reason they signed those two was that this franchise is deathly afraid of using the “R” word for whatever reason and feel they need to appear as they are only a player or two away from a bona fide Cup run to keep the fan base interested. 

[CreaseAndAssist]

1 hour ago, IllaZilla said:

I think with the Merrill and Goligoski extensions it was more of “the devil you know” because of the cap crunch. 
 

They could have let them walk and looked at the free agent market for cheaper players. But then there is the uncertainty of who they could bring in for cheap. 
 

Maybe they should have let those two walk and brought up some Iowa guys. Then they could have kept Fiala potentially. 
 

I think the real reason they signed those two was that this franchise is deathly afraid of using the “R” word for whatever reason and feel they need to appear as they are only a player or two away from a bona fide Cup run to keep the fan base interested. 

 

Rebuild shouldn't be seen as a bad word.  Especially since everyone understands the team is in a cap crunch.  As crappy as it would be to squander the years with #97, this would be the natural time to just embrace being bad.  

 

Sustained mediocrity are the two words this team should be more afraid of even though they've embraced it for the better part of a decade.  

[IllaZilla]

29 minutes ago, CreaseAndAssist said:

 

Rebuild shouldn't be seen as a bad word.  Especially since everyone understands the team is in a cap crunch.  As crappy as it would be to squander the years with #97, this would be the natural time to just embrace being bad.  

 

Sustained mediocrity are the two words this team should be more afraid of even though they've embraced it for the better part of a decade.  

I agree. In the Era of the Salary Cap, you can’t just spend your way out of a mistake or just keep increasing payroll year after year. At some point a rebuild is in order or you just continue to be a good team. Which supposedly isn’t good enough. 

Personally I think there is zero chance #97 resigns with the Wild. He’ll want to go to a big market we’re in fly over country. Unless the Wild suddenly turn into a version of the early 1990’s Penguins, there really won’t be a reason for him to want to stay here. They’re already paying him the max they can. He’s going to want his name on the Cup not another first round exit. 
 

For whatever reason this team would rather be mediocre year after year rather than to gut the team like Chicago did and rebuild. I haven’t looked forward to a Wild draft in forever, because they continue to pick in that 15-20 range and get more or less good players, but no one to get excited about. 

[Tomdog]

The R word could be used a little differently as a retool, rather than a total rebuild.

While I don't totally understand the workings of a proffesional hockey team, I also don't understand why they keep some of the prospects for as long as they do.

Is it really that hard to move on from players that do not show as much promise 2 years post draft,or is it that no other team wants them?

How long should the team hold on to some of their draft picks that really aren't showing the hoped for advancement.

Is it possible to package unproven prospects that are not really showing the improvement wanted for a player that has more of an imediate upside? 

[IllaZilla]

23 minutes ago, Tomdog said:

The R word could be used a little differently as a retool, rather than a total rebuild.

While I don't totally understand the workings of a proffesional hockey team, I also don't understand why they keep some of the prospects for as long as they do.

Is it really that hard to move on from players that do not show as much promise 2 years post draft,or is it that no other team wants them?

How long should the team hold on to some of their draft picks that really aren't showing the hoped for advancement.

Is it possible to package unproven prospects that are not really showing the improvement wanted for a player that has more of an imediate upside? 

 

They said they were going to "retool-on-the-fly" several years ago and that worked so well. 

 

Problem with draft picks is that not everyone develops at the same rate. Some develop right away and others take several years to develop. So the team has to walk a fine line between releasing an apparent stagnating prospect and then the following year seeing that player blossom in another teams system while hanging onto a different prospect too long and now they can't trade that prospect for anything. And defensemen typically take longer to develop than forwards, so a team may hang onto a defensive prospect longer than a forward prospect.

 

The other thing with draft picks is that they continually have a draft, so there are players constantly coming into the system. So there are points in time where the team has to cut bait with certain players depending on their lack of development or lack of talent at a certain position. If the team is short on centers, they're probably going to give a center prospect more time to develop than say a left wing when they have several in the system and have just drafted 3 more. And higher pick prospects are probably going to be given more time than later round picks, simply because of the value they represent. 

 

Packaging stagnating prospects for an immediate impact prospect is kind of a video game thing. All teams keep tabs on each others systems, and they know which prospects are performing and which prospects are not. So to try and trade three prospects that are not performing for a prospect that is performing is kind of hard, because the other team is going to know that you're trying to pawn your junk off on them. You might have to throw a draft pick in, or take some of their junk back. Maybe they are defensive prospects and you're trying to trade to a team that lacks defensive prospects, so maybe that will work, but usually prospects that aren't performing will get pushed to the wayside by prospects that are performing. And then teams that might have been interested in them can sign them without having to give anything up.

[Tomdog]

I get most of that, but I wonder if it might not work out to cut bait on some of these prospects a little earlier. 
Would a couple 20 year old prospects gain a little more return than waiting until they are 24?

[CreaseAndAssist]

5 hours ago, IllaZilla said:

 

They said they were going to "retool-on-the-fly" several years ago and that worked so well. 

 

Problem with draft picks is that not everyone develops at the same rate. Some develop right away and others take several years to develop. So the team has to walk a fine line between releasing an apparent stagnating prospect and then the following year seeing that player blossom in another teams system while hanging onto a different prospect too long and now they can't trade that prospect for anything. And defensemen typically take longer to develop than forwards, so a team may hang onto a defensive prospect longer than a forward prospect.

 

The other thing with draft picks is that they continually have a draft, so there are players constantly coming into the system. So there are points in time where the team has to cut bait with certain players depending on their lack of development or lack of talent at a certain position. If the team is short on centers, they're probably going to give a center prospect more time to develop than say a left wing when they have several in the system and have just drafted 3 more. And higher pick prospects are probably going to be given more time than later round picks, simply because of the value they represent. 

 

Packaging stagnating prospects for an immediate impact prospect is kind of a video game thing. All teams keep tabs on each others systems, and they know which prospects are performing and which prospects are not. So to try and trade three prospects that are not performing for a prospect that is performing is kind of hard, because the other team is going to know that you're trying to pawn your junk off on them. You might have to throw a draft pick in, or take some of their junk back. Maybe they are defensive prospects and you're trying to trade to a team that lacks defensive prospects, so maybe that will work, but usually prospects that aren't performing will get pushed to the wayside by prospects that are performing. And then teams that might have been interested in them can sign them without having to give anything up.

 

I agree with @IllaZillaretooling is just another way to say tweaking.  Tweaks haven't worked.  It just keeps putting an above average team that can't get it done in the playoffs.  You draft mid-to-late in the 1st round and its rinse and repeat year after year.  

 

I feel like we draft better; but all in all IllaZilla is right, Kaprizov isn't going to want to stay with a glorified and delusional pretender year after year.  He's going to want to chase a cup and be the showcase player he is.  No one cares who plays in Minnesota other than the people who live there.  He wants to be seen as a superstar everywhere.  

 

Rebuilding is a healthy part of the cycle.  Retooling / tweaking is like being an old man taking steroids as they desperately try to stay relevant.  You can juice all you want, at some point your age is going to catch up to you and you're only delaying your inevitable crash.  We keep guys around too long.  You should almost want to filter out the 30+ year old guys and replace them with younger and cheaper players.  Giving players contracts into their late 30's is a sure way to have a bunch of albatrosses that dog your team.  Been there done that.  

[IllaZilla]

51 minutes ago, Tomdog said:

I get most of that, but I wonder if it might not work out to cut bait on some of these prospects a little earlier. 
Would a couple 20 year old prospects gain a little more return than waiting until they are 24?

Maybe. But if you cut them loose and another team picks them up and they blossom, you get to explain to the owner why you let those prospects go.

Part of the reason teams hang onto these guys for so long is that so few prospects make it to the NHL, teams want to increase their odds of this happening (the team getting an NHLer). So they hang on to as many prospects as possible to increase their chances of getting an NHLer or two or three. 
 

I’ll throw your question back to you. If you were a GM, what would you give up for a couple of 20 year old prospects that have mediocre stats?

[Tomdog]

Depending on my team, I would consider a player that could be serviceable as a 6-7 defenseman or depth forward  in order to get a few more prospects that might work out in the future. 
As I see it now the Wild have no depth at forward. 

[Alexandron]

I just found that Alex Goligoski will wear a sweater #33 with the Wild this season but not #47. What was the reason? It was his request or a new comer will have #47? Initially I was thinking that because of Gustavsson , but our 2nd goalie number will be #32.