HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Notices

Here's a crazy idea: Trade Backstrom and Schultz together

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-02-2010, 10:33 PM
  #51
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UMD Bob View Post
Bouchard's NTC was a verbal/handshake deal with DR... there shouldn't be anything for him to waive.
It also ended after the season, but like Talon said the best hope is early retirement or some sort of Mike Rathje deal.

__________________
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.

"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
-Doug Woog
1974 1976 1979 2002 2003 2014?
GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 12:10 AM
  #52
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
Which is absolutely true, but his concussion along with his salary and term of contract make him virtually untradable at this point. The Wild's best hope when it comes to Butch is early retirement.
And that's not going to happen. We might have him on LTIR if we're lucky.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 12:27 AM
  #53
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
And that's not going to happen. We might have him on LTIR if we're lucky.
The problem with him being on LTIR, is you have to plan as if he will be back. If the Dr.'s clear him to play and you haven't planned ahead, you are SOL and have to find a way to clear space immediately.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 09:56 AM
  #54
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,521
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
The problem with him being on LTIR, is you have to plan as if he will be back. If the Dr.'s clear him to play and you haven't planned ahead, you are SOL and have to find a way to clear space immediately.
Which is exactly why we need to have him go away. The last thing this team needs anyways is another "playmaker" who gets scared to shoot the puck.

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 10:57 AM
  #55
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,591
vCash: 500
If Minnesota trades for Huet and Campbell, the NHL should have the right to relocate the team again. What a terrible, terrible idea.

Bouchard won't retire early...he'll lose salary. It's much better for him to just wait it out. The Wild will have him on LTIR indefinitely and his contract is insured, so they don't lose too much money in the deal and can just spend over the cap by his hit.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 11:52 AM
  #56
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,521
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
If Minnesota trades for Huet and Campbell, the NHL should have the right to relocate the team again. What a terrible, terrible idea.

Bouchard won't retire early...he'll lose salary. It's much better for him to just wait it out. The Wild will have him on LTIR indefinitely and his contract is insured, so they don't lose too much money in the deal and can just spend over the cap by his hit.
Like I said....it would make for a good discussion

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 03:42 PM
  #57
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
The problem with him being on LTIR, is you have to plan as if he will be back. If the Dr.'s clear him to play and you haven't planned ahead, you are SOL and have to find a way to clear space immediately.
Problem is, how do you force a player to retire if he doesn't want to?

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 09:07 PM
  #58
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
Problem is, how do you force a player to retire if he doesn't want to?
He wouldn't be the first player to retire due to injury while still under contract. Wouldn't he be eligible for some sort of disability compensation from the league if he had to?

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 09:35 PM
  #59
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,296
vCash: 50
before he came back, what was berard's situation? didn't he retire after hossa poked him in the eye? I think the team's insurance pays for it if the injury is deemed career ending--i don't know but i'm guessing it's the amount of the current contract + some formula to figure out how much they would make in their career. if the player comes back, i guess the player has to negotiate with the underwriter (NHL self-insured?) as to how much of the original settlement needs to go back.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 11:20 PM
  #60
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
He wouldn't be the first player to retire due to injury while still under contract. Wouldn't he be eligible for some sort of disability compensation from the league if he had to?
No, I mean if Bouchard still believes he can play. Like we can't physically make him go, retire now. It's the player's decision.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 11:43 PM
  #61
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 21,296
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
No, I mean if Bouchard still believes he can play. Like we can't physically make him go, retire now. It's the player's decision.
there has to be recourse for the team though. you'd think after a while they'd get sick of this hanging over their heads and ask for the NHLPA to sponsor a neutral fitness assessment and prognosis. Great for him if he believes he can play again and has the will and upbeat attitude. Sincerely, i hope he has that attitude no matter what he's told by the experts.

I'd be fine with it all if that happened and they said "sure, he has a 80% chance of being fit enough to play pro hockey again". if, however, they said it was unlikely...insurance. get him off the books.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-03-2010, 11:49 PM
  #62
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
No, I mean if Bouchard still believes he can play. Like we can't physically make him go, retire now. It's the player's decision.
He would have no basis for sitting himself on the shelf for 4-5 years and say that he plans on a come back. At some point, it would be obvious he can't return and the team would be able to get out from under him whether he likes it or not.

It would not benefit Bouchard himself either to try to sit for years knowing he has to retire.

I understand we can't make him retire now... I'm just saying our best hope for getting out of the cap issues with him is if he did retire. Obviously he's going to try anything he can do first.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2010, 02:16 AM
  #63
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 18,317
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
He would have no basis for sitting himself on the shelf for 4-5 years and say that he plans on a come back. At some point, it would be obvious he can't return and the team would be able to get out from under him whether he likes it or not.

It would not benefit Bouchard himself either to try to sit for years knowing he has to retire.

I understand we can't make him retire now... I'm just saying our best hope for getting out of the cap issues with him is if he did retire. Obviously he's going to try anything he can do first.
No but if he can do limit practice and play for a few years. See how it goes.

And he's skating right now. He could stay with the team for another two years.

While it might not benefit Bouchard in the long term, short term it is beneficial for him and his contract is running out.

Our best situation with the cap would be to move Backstrom, stick Bouchard on the shelf and go from there.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2010, 02:26 AM
  #64
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
No but if he can do limit practice and play for a few years. See how it goes.

And he's skating right now. He could stay with the team for another two years.

While it might not benefit Bouchard in the long term, short term it is beneficial for him and his contract is running out.

Our best situation with the cap would be to move Backstrom, stick Bouchard on the shelf and go from there.
I agree, Bouchard still believes he has a future, I'm not denying that.

I'm saying the best case scenario for the Wild would be for him to realize otherwise. As long as he feels he has a chance, this team has to prepare as if he has a chance of playing, thus cannot really spend his cap money on anything legit.

Again, not saying it is going to happen, just saying that would be the best outcome for the Wild.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-04-2010, 02:59 PM
  #65
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Of course, if Bouchard misses a large amount of time, insurance eventually kicks in at 80 percent, I believe.
There's your answer.

GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 09:34 AM
  #66
grN1g
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
the only thing your doing by moving backstrom is opening the #1 spot to our youngins in hopes of them taking that spot and running with it... it's to much of a gamble. What if we do move him, and somehow next season we are a solid team in playoffs possibly and our problem with competing is we have no solid goalie? id rather keep him now even tho he's overpaid and hope in the next 2 seasons fill the few spots we have to fill and be a competing or contending playoff team.

grN1g is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 07:03 PM
  #67
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by grN1g View Post
the only thing your doing by moving backstrom is opening the #1 spot to our youngins in hopes of them taking that spot and running with it... it's to much of a gamble. What if we do move him, and somehow next season we are a solid team in playoffs possibly and our problem with competing is we have no solid goalie? id rather keep him now even tho he's overpaid and hope in the next 2 seasons fill the few spots we have to fill and be a competing or contending playoff team.
Disagree, you are also creating a crap-ton of cap space to help improve the team in other areas. In the cap era, you cannot afford to overpay a player that by normal operations standpoint, will automatically sit on the bench for at least 1/3 of the season.

Look at the top 4 tenders of this year's playoffs. Only ONE of them was a previously proven goaltender. On top of it, look at even the proven tenders in the playoffs... all of them have at least proven themselves in the past IN the playoffs... which is something Backstrom has never even done!

Backstrom is a proven goaltender in a Lemaire system, and a complete waste of cap space without Lemaire's system. His $6mil/yr combined with Butch's $4mil/yr cap hit is killing this team cap-wise.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 07:22 PM
  #68
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by grN1g View Post
the only thing your doing by moving backstrom is opening the #1 spot to our youngins in hopes of them taking that spot and running with it... it's to much of a gamble. What if we do move him, and somehow next season we are a solid team in playoffs possibly and our problem with competing is we have no solid goalie? id rather keep him now even tho he's overpaid and hope in the next 2 seasons fill the few spots we have to fill and be a competing or contending playoff team.
Harding isn't a "youngin". And in the case that we did move Backstrom, I'd assume we'd bring in a veteran to platoon with Josh(this offseason example would primarily be Marty Turco, as I don't believe he'll get a #1 offer).

Like Talon said, Backstrom has proven himself as a successful goaltender in Jacques Lemaire's system. We lost both playoff series which he was the goaltender in.

For Backstrom, there is only one way he's gone by next year, and thats if Josh Harding stays and supplants him as the #1 goalie of this team. Even then, it would be an extremely difficult "sell" as I don't expect him or Harding to put up great numbers next season, especially with our questionable defense.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 07:32 PM
  #69
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,551
vCash: 500
I just don't see any way that the Wild could realistically move Backstrom. I think they'll just have to bite the bullet with him in particular. At the very least until his contract is more manageable.

Harding is a bit redundant at this point and really isn't worth what the Wild are continuing to pay him. Especially if he's going to continue to find ways to get injured in the limited time he's asked to play. I'd much rather chase another back-up via FA or hope that Khudobin would be up to the task.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 07:43 PM
  #70
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
I just don't see any way that the Wild could realistically move Backstrom. I think they'll just have to bite the bullet with him in particular. At the very least until his contract is more manageable.

Harding is a bit redundant at this point and really isn't worth what the Wild are continuing to pay him. Especially if he's going to continue to find ways to get injured in the limited time he's asked to play. I'd much rather chase another back-up via FA or hope that Khudobin would be up to the task.
But you do realize Harding's trade value is not impressive(as seen by your proposal on the main boards). Considering he is an above average back-up, behind an average starter, why bother moving him for a mediocre return? He's only going to be making 500-700k more than a Sanford/Sabourin/Dubie/Khudobin, and IMO he's worth every penny of it. And as I've said before, I believe Backstrom is a better 50-60 game starter than a 70 game guy, as through his 20s he wasn't playing the NHL schedule. Do we want a fringe-NHLer playing 20+ games, or a goalie who has on occasion stolen games for us?

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 08:11 PM
  #71
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saywut View Post
But you do realize Harding's trade value is not impressive(as seen by your proposal on the main boards). Considering he is an above average back-up, behind an average starter, why bother moving him for a mediocre return? He's only going to be making 500-700k more than a Sanford/Sabourin/Dubie/Khudobin, and IMO he's worth every penny of it. And as I've said before, I believe Backstrom is a better 50-60 game starter than a 70 game guy, as through his 20s he wasn't playing the NHL schedule. Do we want a fringe-NHLer playing 20+ games, or a goalie who has on occasion stolen games for us?
But what good is that slight upgrade over Khudobin (or another back-up of the like) if Harding can't find a way to stay clean? Harding has been a guy who's always found a way to get nicked throughout the year. And for a guy who's only job it is to play 1/3 of the year that's not exactly ideal.

I'd just prefer to have back-up that can be counted on when you need him. Harding admirably fought through his hip last season but at the same time these hip injuries of his are adding up. Which isn't exactly a good thing for a goaltender. Yes, Harding's value surely isn't there but at this point the Wild aren't in a position to be turning their nose up at many prospects. Especially those who have proven they can produce.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 08:38 PM
  #72
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
But what good is that slight upgrade over Khudobin (or another back-up of the like) if Harding can't find a way to stay clean? Harding has been a guy who's always found a way to get nicked throughout the year. And for a guy who's only job it is to play 1/3 of the year that's not exactly ideal.

I'd just prefer to have back-up that can be counted on when you need him. Harding admirably fought through his hip last season but at the same time these hip injuries of his are adding up. Which isn't exactly a good thing for a goaltender. Yes, Harding's value surely isn't there but at this point the Wild aren't in a position to be turning their nose up at many prospects. Especially those who have proven they can produce.
Except prospects haven't proven themselves at the NHL level. Most goalies go through hip problems at one point or another. You want Khudobin to be our back-up, sorry I don't consider him reliable.

Harding getting moved will not significantly help the Wild elsewhere, whereas losing him will make us worse, I don't see why we should move him.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 09:58 PM
  #73
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
Look at the top 4 tenders of this year's playoffs. Only ONE of them was a previously proven goaltender. On top of it, look at even the proven tenders in the playoffs... all of them have at least proven themselves in the past IN the playoffs... which is something Backstrom has never even done!
As good as that sounds to have no-name goalies on your team, goaltending was a weakness of the top two teams all season long.
It was holding them back. So put me in the category that likes good skaters AND a good goalie.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-05-2010, 11:46 PM
  #74
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,367
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by State of Hockey View Post
As good as that sounds to have no-name goalies on your team, goaltending was a weakness of the top two teams all season long.
It was holding them back. So put me in the category that likes good skaters AND a good goalie.
I'm just saying, just because you have a proven regular season goalie, that doesn't mean jack in terms of playoff performance. You said that we'd be SOL in the playoffs without Backstrom, when we've already been SOL in the playoffs WITH Backstrom.

I would rather spend less on a goalie that can play ok most of the time and can step up on occasion, than pay an arm and a leg for a goalie that is considered above average in the regular season based only on stats, not by the fact of his ability to steal games (which he has none).

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:35 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.