Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 83
  1. #16
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    vCash
    1500
    Tg1 I agree with many of your points. But now its more important then ever to hold onto prospects. They sign for cheaper and we can extend them +1 year then a FA. ALL of our big contracts are off the books before Granlund, Coyle, Zucker, Phillips, Brodin, Larsson need a new contract. We could not be in a better position. We also finally have a deep group of forwards.

    We should be able with the cap space created next year to resign Spurgeon, Scandella, Falk, Clutter and PMB and Backstrom...Everyone else can walk imo.

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    8,186
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    Backstrom isnt a core player? I have no idea who is then...Harding was just diagnosed with MS, and while it hasnt affected his career to this point there is no way I trade our starter and #1 goalie for prospects when we already have the best prospect pool in the league. We have no idea what is going to happen with Harding. Hackett is next in line and he is NOT NHL ready. He has shown some inconsistency at Houston and needs a year or two more there. And Kuemper is behind Hackett so I shouldnt have to say more about how he is not NHL ready. Also there is no reason to dump his contract when it is up in 6 months.
    I never said he isn't a core player, but he is expendable. Regardless, with the new cap we might not have a choice. Harding has MS but MS is a very manageable disease. We have him for 3 more seasons, and there is no reason for me to think he won't be able to take over for Backstrom when he is gone. Backstrom is getting old and will only regress at this point. We should sell while he still has value.

    So what if we already have the best prospect pool in the league? All it takes is a few off drafts and we are right back where we were a few years ago. You also forget about Johan Gustafsson who was fantastic last season. With the new cap we are going to need to make a decision whether or not Backstrom is worth all the money he will probably require to resign. I don't think he is.
    Last edited by Wisdom Listens; 01-09-2013 at 07:57 PM.

  3. #18
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    vCash
    1500
    He is NOT expendable. Harding is not a proven #1 yet and with this new illness we have yet to see how he will respond (MS can be very treatable, so can any other illness/injury but everyone responds differently we have no idea how Harding will perform and that is a ridiculous risk to take). We have no other goalie that is even a proven backup in the NHL. Kuemper and Hackett are fighting for the starting job for Houston, so how will they be ok to play in the NHL? Remember a back up should play anywhere from 10-20 games a year, last year when both Backstrom and Harding were healthy and pretty much splitting time they were the best in the NHL, why break that up?

    I absolutely also did not forget about Johan Gustafsson at all...He is simply so raw of a prospect that I dont even put him on the AHL radar right now (hence why he is not in the AHL). There is a huge step from doing good in WJC and Europe and playing in the AHL and another huge step to the NHL. Also Backstrom will not require the type of contract he has now once he is a FA because his numbers dont support it. And your right about our prospects but we dont need to add C grade 7.0 prospect for a starting can be top 10 goalie. He will fetch us nothing in a trade because of his current cap hit and that there is not a huge market for goalies right now and there wont be at the deadline. If there is a market Kiprusoff and Bernier will get attention before Backstrom and we will again get little to no value. Your also right you didnt say he was not part of our core but you did say we should trade anyone not part of the core and then in the next sentence mentioned trading Backstrom, so you can see how I was lead to believe you do not think he is part of the teams core.

    Im not saying we sign him after this season, but I am saying we cannot trade him this season even if we are out of playoff contention we cannot risk having only Harding with Hackett as our fall back plan. Wild management has rushed too many prospects and that was the downfall of the old regime and of this team...so why do you want to rush the prospects that usually require the most time and development?

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    88
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisdom Listens View Post
    I never said he isn't a core player, but he is expendable. Regardless, with the new cap we might not have a choice. Harding has MS but MS is a very manageable disease. We have him for 3 more seasons, and there is no reason for me to think he won't be able to take over for Backstrom when he is gone. Backstrom is getting old and will only regress at this point. We should sell while he still has value.

    So what if we already have the best prospect pool in the league? All it takes is a few off drafts and we are right back where we were a few years ago. You also forget about Johan Gustafsson who was fantastic last season. With the new cap we are going to need to make a decision whether or not Backstrom is worth all the money he will probably require to resign. I don't think he is.
    Why do you keep saying "with the new cap we may not have a choice???" The cap for this year is 70.2mill (ish) and the wild are under that... The cap next year is 64.3mill and WITH NO TRADES AT ALL the wild will be under that next year by 10 million dollars...

    I really don't understand your logic on the seeming "Need" to trade away players now?

    Please help me understand..

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    8,186
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Tg1 View Post
    Why do you keep saying "with the new cap we may not have a choice???" The cap for this year is 70.2mill (ish) and the wild are under that... The cap next year is 64.3mill and WITH NO TRADES AT ALL the wild will be under that next year by 10 million dollars...

    I really don't understand your logic on the seeming "Need" to trade away players now?

    Please help me understand..
    Just trying to drive conversation. They will not be under by 10. We are currently sitting at 57 next season, even before resigning Scandella, Falk, Spurgeon, Bouchard, and Clutterbuck. Tell me, where is the cap space for Backstrom in that? If we really wanted to keep Backstrom we could find a way to make it work. I am not asserting they need to trade him, simply that they should, especially if we see good development in at least one of our goaltending prospects.

  6. #21
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    vCash
    1500
    Technically the wild are not "under" the cap but we have I think 16 forwards (17 including Palmieri once he is signed) so someone will be cut/traded/in the AHL and will put us under the cap.

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    8,186
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    He is NOT expendable. Harding is not a proven #1 yet and with this new illness we have yet to see how he will respond (MS can be very treatable, so can any other illness/injury but everyone responds differently we have no idea how Harding will perform and that is a ridiculous risk to take).
    I disagree. He has proven when healthy ha can be the #1, the problem is he hasn't been healthy. Sure it's a risk, but the last thing I want is for Harding to come on and be stuck with Backstrom (who we will probably overpay for) who won't have much trade value due to his contract.

    What kind of contract do you think we would need to offer to keep him? Perhaps that will help me to gauge how far apart we actually are here.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    We have no other goalie that is even a proven backup in the NHL. Kuemper and Hackett are fighting for the starting job for Houston, so how will they be ok to play in the NHL?
    They are both fighting for the starting job, sure, but they are both playing good hockey. Just because there is no clear cut starter between the two says nothing about the readiness for the NHL with either player.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    Remember a back up should play anywhere from 10-20 games a year
    Hackett played well in 12 games with the Wild last season. Do you really think it is so far fetched Hackett being a backup in 2014?

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    last year when both Backstrom and Harding were healthy and pretty much splitting time they were the best in the NHL, why break that up?
    Need I remind you of Fernandez and Roloson where we traded the seemingly better of the two goaltenders which turned into a first rounder which turned into a trade for Demitra?

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    I absolutely also did not forget about Johan Gustafsson at all...He is simply so raw of a prospect that I dont even put him on the AHL radar right now (hence why he is not in the AHL).
    Need I not also remind you that Backstrom was playing in Europe before we signed him to a 1-year contract? Just because he isn't in the AHL does not mean he is not ready to contribute.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    Your also right you didnt say he was not part of our core but you did say we should trade anyone not part of the core and then in the next sentence mentioned trading Backstrom, so you can see how I was lead to believe you do not think he is part of the teams core.
    I understand why you would think that.

    "I would like to see us dump some of our bigger salaries who are not core players for prospects as well. I would like to keep Harding because he is cheap, but we definitely are going to need to move Backstrom."

    These were two different thoughts not meant to be interconnected. I was speaking of players like Heatley/Gilbert.
    Last edited by Wisdom Listens; 01-09-2013 at 09:35 PM.

  8. #23
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    vCash
    1500
    He has never proven he is a number 1. He has put up good numbers while splitting time with Backstrom ONE SEASON. He has never proven he can put up those number while playing 60+ games. He has also (besides his first when he played 3 games) never had more wins then losses in a season. As a matter of fact he has never made it through a full season while being healthy and having a large work load. So I have no idea where you are getting this he can be a healthy #1. The most games he played in the NHL was last season with a .916 sv % and a 2.62 GAA which is good/average, 2nd to that was a 29 game season with a .908 SV % and a 2.94 GAA. And to you those are legitimate #1 stats? There is a huge difference between 34 games (what he played last year) and a full load of ~65 games. If Harding this year proves he can be better then Backstrom then how is it a waste? He takes over and we let Backstrom walk in FA while having a good #1a and 1b this year. If Harding is injured, has setbacks with his MS or cant hold #1 time then we have Backstrom. If I re-sign Backstrom next year it really depends. If we need him cause Harding isnt a #1 your looking more at a 2 year deal of 8-9 mil. If Harding steps up and proves he is a #1 and Backstrom regresses because of age you look at a 2 year 5-6mil. 2 years is the perfect time for Hackett to develop to where he can come and challenge for a starting job (or Kuemper)

    Im going to jump around a little because I dont know how to quote like you did so just stick with me ill go point by point haha.

    Yes it does say something about them. Neither can clearly take over the #1 job on our AHL team because they have been inconsistent. Inconsistency is something you want to avoid if your going to be a goalie in the NHL. Hence neither is ready and needs more time. Do you really believe either is ready for the NHL? I mean really?

    If I remember correctly Hackett only saw action in 3 of those 13 games he was in the NHL. He played well in the middle of the season when teams are on coast-mode. I was not talking 2014 with you, because we would be having a different conversation then. Hackett can be a backup in 2014 but not a 30+ or even a 20+ game backup, meaning we would need Harding to be at an elite level to play the other 60+ games, I dont think Harding is elite level so next year we would need a true back up and give Hackett more time to develop. You dont rush goal tending prospects if you want them to be successful (Tuuka Rask, Cory Schneider, Jonathan Quick sorta, Jimmy Howard all come to mind as not being rushed and now are the next generation of starters).

    Ok? How is Manny and Rolly anything to do with this situation? We traded one of them because we knew we could not afford both of them. We dont need to trade because we cant afford one we can get under the cap for this season and let Backstrom walk next season if we must.

    Agreed on Gustafsson, but other goalies from Europe have been as catastrophic failures as Backstrom has been a surprise (Hello Monster in Toronto?). Do you REALLY believe that Gustafsson can come over and be an #1 at what 20 years old? Backstrom was MUCH older and more experienced. Jacob Markstrom was the best goalie prospect in the world (and still is IMO) when Florida brought him over and he wasnt able to crack the roster over Theodore and Clemmenson last year. Not because he isnt a great prospect, but because goalies need time. And sorry Gustafsson is no Markstrom.

    Ok haha thats just where my confusion in your first comment came from. I dont know about Heatley I think this year is his test and then we would have to buy him out because his contract next year will be un movable. Gilbert was an awful trade and I want Schultz back, but he also only has 2 years left and he was really our only true NHL D man last year so I want to see how he does this year. If he fails I am fine with moving him next year.

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Int'l falls Mn.
    Posts
    137
    vCash
    1500
    Do you think we could entice a team like Florida to trade Theodore and prospect/picks for Backstrom. I'm not sayin backs is washed up or of no value to us, I just think if we can get the right deal, the better value is in trading him.

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Int'l falls Mn.
    Posts
    137
    vCash
    1500
    I fully agree if we were to trade backs we would need to trade for sign a back up who could step into a starting roll. I am confident that Harding could be a number 1 but not sure what health issues will do to his psyche, if at all. Think physically will be ok.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    88
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wisdom Listens View Post
    Just trying to drive conversation. They will not be under by 10. We are currently sitting at 57 next season, even before resigning Scandella, Falk, Spurgeon, Bouchard, and Clutterbuck. Tell me, where is the cap space for Backstrom in that? If we really wanted to keep Backstrom we could find a way to make it work. I am not asserting they need to trade him, simply that they should, especially if we see good development in at least one of our goaltending prospects.
    OK, your right.. I didn't look at the numbers directly... But last I checked 56.9 million is still 7.5 million just about under 64.3 Cap.

    I guess I don't see them re-signing all of those guys and thats part of it for me.. Clutter for sure.. Scandella Yes, Spurgeon yes, Falk Maybe,(Probably not) PMB Only if its like 1mill incentive laden contract.. He has only played a hand full of games in the past 3 years... When he plays he has the potential to be a game changer.. but I don't think they are interested in just taking 4 mill off of what they could pay other guys especially when they need roster room at the big club for the AHL guys... Spurgeon and Falk (if resigned) would likely only be around 1-1.25 mill because they are RFA's and Not stud's by any means.. I could see scandella (Also a RFA) getting a little more because he has more upside and has been a slightly better performer. Clutter (Also a RFA) will be due a fairly long deal and probably 2.5-3 range. Resigning all of them puts us right around the Cap.. And thats correct, I'm not interested in resigning PMB with the youth we have coming up.. And I think Backs is gone probably just let go in the offseason or traded for peanuts in the off-season around the draft before free agency starts.. IF they re-sign him it would be a much more reasonable contract.. and would mean they let someone else walk. I could see them trading Seto and that gives us 3mill more..

    I'm with you on the fact that if we don't have a "need" for Backs next year we try to get something for him.. I just don't think we do that until we know where we are in the playoff hunt.. If we are out.. OK Trade away, along with a hand full of others on the roster.. If we are remotely in the chase and he is part of that.. NO WAY do I trade him.. at least not during the season.. To me.. We roll with the roster we have now.. See how the season shakes out and act accordingly at the trade deadline..

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    6,140
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by Bronco1 View Post
    Do you think we could entice a team like Florida to trade Theodore and prospect/picks for Backstrom. I'm not sayin backs is washed up or of no value to us, I just think if we can get the right deal, the better value is in trading him.
    Jose is not getting any younger I wouldn't do that personally

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    743
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by PurpleJesus View Post
    Parise for Gretsky
    GRETZKY... Lol or is there someone I don't know about name Gretsky!!!
    \

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    20,728
    vCash
    2500
    Quote Originally Posted by Wild1414 View Post
    GRETZKY... Lol or is there someone I don't know about name Gretsky!!!
    no, you are just being an *** about a typo.
    Last edited by PurpleJesus; 01-10-2013 at 01:43 AM.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Minneapolis, MN
    Posts
    8,186
    vCash
    1500
    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    He has never proven he is a number 1. He has put up good numbers while splitting time with Backstrom ONE SEASON. He has never proven he can put up those number while playing 60+ games. He has also (besides his first when he played 3 games) never had more wins then losses in a season. As a matter of fact he has never made it through a full season while being healthy and having a large work load. So I have no idea where you are getting this he can be a healthy #1.
    That's because I never said that. I said I have seen enough from him to tell me he can be a #1, that is all. Of course the implication is that he stays relatively healthy, because if he isn't healthy he isn't playing. I also admit he has health issues and it is risky to trade Backstrom because of that, and what unfolds this season will dictate how confident I would be in moving Backstrom by the trade deadline.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    The most games he played in the NHL was last season with a .916 sv % and a 2.62 GAA which is good/average, 2nd to that was a 29 game season with a .908 SV % and a 2.94 GAA. And to you those are legitimate #1 stats?
    Legitimate #1 stats? Sure. Legitimate elite #1 stats? No. And why are you so high on Backstrom yet scoff at those numbers from Harding?

    Backstrom by year:

    2009-2010: 2.72 GAA / .903 SV%
    2010-2011: 2.66 GAA / .916 SV%
    2011-2012: 2.43 GAA / .919 SV%

    So what is this exponential leap in stats in comparison that makes you so confident in Backstrom and not Harding? That season when Harding was healthy and playing a good amount was comparable to Backstrom's 2009 and 2010 seasons. I would stick to the argument that actually holds weight, and that is the health issues with Harding. If you are going to make an argument form a statistical standpoint you won't get very far when you compare both players when they are actually healthy.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    There is a huge difference between 34 games (what he played last year) and a full load of ~65 games. If Harding this year proves he can be better then Backstrom then how is it a waste? He takes over and we let Backstrom walk in FA while having a good #1a and 1b this year.
    How is that a waste? You mean the difference between moving Backstrom for prospects/draft picks or getting nothing? Really?

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    Ok? How is Manny and Rolly anything to do with this situation? We traded one of them because we knew we could not afford both of them. We dont need to trade because we cant afford one we can get under the cap for this season and let Backstrom walk next season if we must.
    We can get under the cap at the expense of whom? What? We could have found a way to get under the cap before Trading Roloson as well, if you remember, but the better decision was to roll with Fernandez. Plus we got a great offer for Roloson, so they would have been crazy not to pull the trigger.

    Quote Originally Posted by pidg88 View Post
    Agreed on Gustafsson, but other goalies from Europe have been as catastrophic failures as Backstrom has been a surprise (Hello Monster in Toronto?). Do you REALLY believe that Gustafsson can come over and be an #1 at what 20 years old?
    Is that what I said? I thought the implication here was always that Harding would be the #1.
    Last edited by Wisdom Listens; 01-10-2013 at 11:50 AM.

Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •