HFBoards

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

Why not Clutterbuck???

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-11-2010, 11:02 PM
  #1
North Metro Peewees
Registered User
 
North Metro Peewees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Philly Stupid
Country: United States
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Why not Clutterbuck???

If the Wild are truly interested in improving for next season why not use Cal Clutterbuck as a chip in addition to Sheppard, Cuma, Schultz and Burns? I mean he brings an element that is valuable and I believe he can develop into a 20 goal scorer.

The reason I believe you look at dealing him if you can get a top flite center (Patrick Sharp); mostly because Richards used him as a 4th liner with Shep and Boogie late last season. I proposed Clutterbuck and pick #56 for Sharp on one of the threads tonight.

North Metro Peewees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 07:21 AM
  #2
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,490
vCash: 50
unwritten rule you don't trade someone you just signed

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 10:13 AM
  #3
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
And Clutter at $1.4M for the next 3 years is a pretty good deal for us. I don't like the idea of giving him up either, he's been a great player.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 12:27 PM
  #4
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
If he was the main piece in a deal, we're obviously going to pull the trigger. He hasn't shown much skill in his 3 years of pro hockey, which is why he played on our 4th line. Sure hes a fan favorite and plays a nice bottom-6 game, but it is replaceable.

Just don't see another team viewing him as a potential top-6 guy, which makes his value unimpressive.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 12:42 PM
  #5
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,490
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by saywut View Post
If he was the main piece in a deal, we're obviously going to pull the trigger. He hasn't shown much skill in his 3 years of pro hockey, which is why he played on our 4th line. Sure hes a fan favorite and plays a nice bottom-6 game, but it is replaceable.

Just don't see another team viewing him as a potential top-6 guy, which makes his value unimpressive.
For a team lacking hitting power *cough* Detroit *cough* he is a perfect pickup for an aging team

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 02:12 PM
  #6
North Metro Peewees
Registered User
 
North Metro Peewees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Philly Stupid
Country: United States
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
I view him as a 2nd/3rd line winger depending upon who he is with. If you had him with Tavares or Crosby to me he's a 25-30 goal guy who would be invaluable because of his hitting ability. I think he has value around the league because he's willing to hit and create opportunity by his aggressiveness.

Even without a top flite center I believe he will be a consistant 20 goal scorer in the league. Remember he just turned 22 which means his best days are likely a few years down the road and he already has 25 goals in two seasons.

I just believe if you could get a Patrick Sharp for Clutterbuck + you would be foolish not to consider it.

North Metro Peewees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 02:16 PM
  #7
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Jarick and I got into it over Clutterbuck's "shot" on the WMBs.

While I like the kid, it's nowhere near as accurate as a lot of fans think.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-12-2010, 02:30 PM
  #8
North Metro Peewees
Registered User
 
North Metro Peewees's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Philly Stupid
Country: United States
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Jarick and I got into it over Clutterbuck's "shot" on the WMBs.

While I like the kid, it's nowhere near as accurate as a lot of fans think.
He has a very good release but needs to work on accuracy.

North Metro Peewees is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 01:47 AM
  #9
Vashanesh
My best outfit
 
Vashanesh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 2,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Jarick and I got into it over Clutterbuck's "shot" on the WMBs.

While I like the kid, it's nowhere near as accurate as a lot of fans think.
I know I've gotten into it with someone here on that one too. If he played as much as Miettinen, those two would fight for the missed shots lead...

In regard to the thread... I kind of doubt that Fletch would move him. I think we're still betting on him becoming a second/third liner who makes room for softer playmakers *cough* Butch *cough*. If he can become a steady 20 goal skater, and still keep up his physical game... We really can't lose.

Off topic, but man, I'm seeing a LOT of familiar names here. I've been lurking for a little bit, but with all these folks I'm already familiar with, I may need to start posting a bit more. The official boards are dive-bombing (even more, yes Talon ) in a HURRY...

Vashanesh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 02:27 AM
  #10
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Jarick and I got into it over Clutterbuck's "shot" on the WMBs.

While I like the kid, it's nowhere near as accurate as a lot of fans think.
I blame Mittens on this one.

__________________
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
06-13-2010, 03:29 AM
  #11
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NM Squirts View Post
He has a very good release but needs to work on accuracy.
Yes, and his "shots" that go 20' wide aren't counted as shots, either.



I like Cal.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 03:30 AM
  #12
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vashanesh View Post
Off topic, but man, I'm seeing a LOT of familiar names here. I've been lurking for a little bit, but with all these folks I'm already familiar with, I may need to start posting a bit more. The official boards are dive-bombing (even more, yes Talon ) in a HURRY...
The WMBs are broken. There is also a lot larger of a fan base here from other teams and quite frankly, the Trade Rumors are effin hilarious.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 03:49 AM
  #13
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 13,271
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vashanesh View Post
IThe official boards are dive-bombing (even more, yes Talon ) in a HURRY...
For some reason that doesn't surprise me at all...

As for Clutterbuck's shot... you aren't kidding on how inaccurate it is. That's really the only part of his game I've ever complained about.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 08:28 AM
  #14
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 12,490
vCash: 50
Clutterbuck plays a crapload out of position to make those hits bare in mind. He is a force and can easily make the other team change up lines when he hits the ice, but the fact that he will go for the hit typically can lead to some other bad outcomes. Saw it a few times with his numbnut ass

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 08:52 AM
  #15
Kari Takko
Registered User
 
Kari Takko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Metro, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 917
vCash: 500
Trading Clutterbuck is a mistake.

Clutterbuck's shot is innaccurate? Stop nitpicking. He'll never be Joe Sakic, but his shot is hard and his release is quick. For 1.5mil, he's a bargain. Now talk about something realistic.

Kari Takko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 12:33 PM
  #16
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,843
vCash: 500
The problem with Clutterbuck is that his style is very rough on his body. He's young now, but three more seasons like he goes, and who know how much damage he's going to do.

So, yeah, he's awesome now. But his value is currently higher than it's ever going to be.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 01:09 PM
  #17
GopherState
Repeat Offender...
 
GopherState's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: X Marks The Spot
Posts: 22,774
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
The WMBs are broken. There is also a lot larger of a fan base here from other teams and quite frankly, the Trade Rumors are effin hilarious.
It's my favorite form of entertainment.

Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
The problem with Clutterbuck is that his style is very rough on his body. He's young now, but three more seasons like he goes, and who know how much damage he's going to do.

So, yeah, he's awesome now. But his value is currently higher than it's ever going to be.
That's something which can be said for the majority of the NHL. However, given Clutterbuck's contract, the Wild will either be making a killing over the next three years or will suffer a small loss given the size of the deal and fact that it isn't a cap killer. So even if Clutterbuck has peaked at the old age of 23, I believe things are fine.

GopherState is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 04:09 PM
  #18
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Since when is 1.4M for a sub-30 point player who will always be a bottom-6 forward a bargain?

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 04:30 PM
  #19
Kari Takko
Registered User
 
Kari Takko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Metro, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saywut View Post
Since when is 1.4M for a sub-30 point player who will always be a bottom-6 forward a bargain?
Since Jeff Finger got 3.5/yr.

Saywut... what would make you happy? You make it seem as if no one on the team is good enough and is paid too much money.

Kari Takko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 05:49 PM
  #20
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kari Takko View Post
Since Jeff Finger got 3.5/yr.

Saywut... what would make you happy? You make it seem as if no one on the team is good enough and is paid too much money.
Actually not everyone. Koivu outperforms his contract(for one more year), as does Brunette. Miettinen(dislike the player), Kobasew, Clutterbuck, and Zanon are market value deals IMO.

Burns' contract was based on potential, and hasn't really lived up to it due to injuries. Barker's deal is based on potential which IMO he'll never reach. Nick Schultz was signed for too many years, as teams were making mistakes then, 3.5M was the going rate for a player of his caliber but 6 years was too many.

Backstrom's contract was terrible, as it was clear his stats were because of the Lemaire system in front of him. Bouchard's contract was a panic move because DR didn't expect to lose Rolston, and turned out to be terrible.

Brodziak's deal is a bit of a weird one when you consider we gave him 3 years, despite the fact that he'd shown nothing other than 4th line ability in his career. Zidlicky, well I guess Todd Richards must really like him, as they feel he is a top-4 guy. I'd prefer to have gone in a different direction there as well.

Tell me how many players in Chicago outperformed their cap-hits this year. Players on ELCs are key to success in this league, and that comes from good drafting or extremely high picks, which this organization has not had.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 07:05 PM
  #21
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saywut View Post
Brodziak's deal is a bit of a weird one


Here's some more of my negativity regarding Chuck Fletcher...

Trading a 4th and a 5th for Brodziak and a 6th. Going one for one, would you really consider Brodziak and Darcy Keumper to be of greater value than Olivier Roy and Toni Rajala? I know Edmonton drafted Kyle Bigos with that pick, however, the next best forward was the Fin, Toni Rajala. I know there are few 4th rounders that make a huge impact in the NHL, but for a rookie GM that was stating publicly that his intent was to "replenish the prospects", it's my opinion that two higher round picks were better than Brodziak.


This also led to the beginning of the season "center controversy", but it still left a major gap in our roster of a top-2 center. Without Brodziak, we had Koivu, Belanger, Sheppard and Pouliot. Granted, Pouliot did a lot better at wing in Montreal, but why trade the picks for a forward, who "could play wing" when there were several available on the market? Hell, if we wanted depth at center, I'm sure Kolanos would have been more than willing to re-sign for league minimum on a two-way contract. Of all the DR re-treads, this one made the most sense to me for the "new system" because of his speed and grit.

It baffled me a bit, because of all of the inconsistency. Were we going to try Bouchard at center? If so, then that makes that trade even more of a head scratcher. We then had Koivu, Bouchard, Belanger, Sheppard, and Pouliot at center. Yes, Bouchard went down to injury and we had to pick up Ebbett because Pouliot was being the floater that he is known for being.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 07:42 PM
  #22
saywut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Here's some more of my negativity regarding Chuck Fletcher...

Trading a 4th and a 5th for Brodziak and a 6th. Going one for one, would you really consider Brodziak and Darcy Keumper to be of greater value than Olivier Roy and Toni Rajala? I know Edmonton drafted Kyle Bigos with that pick, however, the next best forward was the Fin, Toni Rajala. I know there are few 4th rounders that make a huge impact in the NHL, but for a rookie GM that was stating publicly that his intent was to "replenish the prospects", it's my opinion that two higher round picks were better than Brodziak.


This also led to the beginning of the season "center controversy", but it still left a major gap in our roster of a top-2 center. Without Brodziak, we had Koivu, Belanger, Sheppard and Pouliot. Granted, Pouliot did a lot better at wing in Montreal, but why trade the picks for a forward, who "could play wing" when there were several available on the market? Hell, if we wanted depth at center, I'm sure Kolanos would have been more than willing to re-sign for league minimum on a two-way contract. Of all the DR re-treads, this one made the most sense to me for the "new system" because of his speed and grit.

It baffled me a bit, because of all of the inconsistency. Were we going to try Bouchard at center? If so, then that makes that trade even more of a head scratcher. We then had Koivu, Bouchard, Belanger, Sheppard, and Pouliot at center. Yes, Bouchard went down to injury and we had to pick up Ebbett because Pouliot was being the floater that he is known for being.
To add on top of that, GMCF declined qualifying offers on both Peter Olvecky and Dan Fritsche, players who in 08-09 appeared to be competent 4th liners for our team.

I understood the Brodziak trade, as Todd Richards did coach him and Chuck Fletcher watched him play for a year in Wilkes-Barrie, but to give a 4th line player 3 years is a large investment IMO.

saywut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 07:59 PM
  #23
Kari Takko
Registered User
 
Kari Takko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Metro, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Here's some more of my negativity regarding Chuck Fletcher...

Trading a 4th and a 5th for Brodziak and a 6th. Going one for one, would you really consider Brodziak and Darcy Keumper to be of greater value than Olivier Roy and Toni Rajala? I know Edmonton drafted Kyle Bigos with that pick, however, the next best forward was the Fin, Toni Rajala. I know there are few 4th rounders that make a huge impact in the NHL, but for a rookie GM that was stating publicly that his intent was to "replenish the prospects", it's my opinion that two higher round picks were better than Brodziak.


This also led to the beginning of the season "center controversy", but it still left a major gap in our roster of a top-2 center. Without Brodziak, we had Koivu, Belanger, Sheppard and Pouliot. Granted, Pouliot did a lot better at wing in Montreal, but why trade the picks for a forward, who "could play wing" when there were several available on the market? Hell, if we wanted depth at center, I'm sure Kolanos would have been more than willing to re-sign for league minimum on a two-way contract. Of all the DR re-treads, this one made the most sense to me for the "new system" because of his speed and grit.

It baffled me a bit, because of all of the inconsistency. Were we going to try Bouchard at center? If so, then that makes that trade even more of a head scratcher. We then had Koivu, Bouchard, Belanger, Sheppard, and Pouliot at center. Yes, Bouchard went down to injury and we had to pick up Ebbett because Pouliot was being the floater that he is known for being.
I'd much rather have Brodziak and Kuemper. Brodziak is in the NHL, and there's no guarantee that the 5th or 6th rounder will make the show.

How did adding Brodziak create a gap? Wouldn't we have had more of a gap if we didn't pick him up?

Kari Takko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 08:03 PM
  #24
mnwildgophers
Registered User
 
mnwildgophers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Country: United States
Posts: 4,497
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
Here's some more of my negativity regarding Chuck Fletcher...

Trading a 4th and a 5th for Brodziak and a 6th. Going one for one, would you really consider Brodziak and Darcy Keumper to be of greater value than Olivier Roy and Toni Rajala? I know Edmonton drafted Kyle Bigos with that pick, however, the next best forward was the Fin, Toni Rajala. I know there are few 4th rounders that make a huge impact in the NHL, but for a rookie GM that was stating publicly that his intent was to "replenish the prospects", it's my opinion that two higher round picks were better than Brodziak.


This also led to the beginning of the season "center controversy", but it still left a major gap in our roster of a top-2 center. Without Brodziak, we had Koivu, Belanger, Sheppard and Pouliot. Granted, Pouliot did a lot better at wing in Montreal, but why trade the picks for a forward, who "could play wing" when there were several available on the market? Hell, if we wanted depth at center, I'm sure Kolanos would have been more than willing to re-sign for league minimum on a two-way contract. Of all the DR re-treads, this one made the most sense to me for the "new system" because of his speed and grit.

It baffled me a bit, because of all of the inconsistency. Were we going to try Bouchard at center? If so, then that makes that trade even more of a head scratcher. We then had Koivu, Bouchard, Belanger, Sheppard, and Pouliot at center. Yes, Bouchard went down to injury and we had to pick up Ebbett because Pouliot was being the floater that he is known for being.
Brodziak is a center, and I'm sure GMCF and HCTR wanted to have a center that they trusted at the NHL level. Brodziak wasn't that great on faceoffs going just 48.4%, but for some reason he got a lot of minutes. I don't think anything was a sure thing for them at the center position (as it played out during the season and the end here) I wasn't thrilled with the pick-up, but I don't think that it was that bad of a value for Brodziak.

He could be a serviceable 3rd liner as he can take faceoffs, but will have to better next year. I'm fine with the trade and we don't know how these prospects will end up. Maybe Kuemper is amazing at the AHL level and we can trade him away for good pieces or something? We just don't know yet. While some of Fletch's moves have been questionable, I think that he will turn this team around.

mnwildgophers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
06-13-2010, 08:03 PM
  #25
Kari Takko
Registered User
 
Kari Takko's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Metro, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 917
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saywut View Post
To add on top of that, GMCF declined qualifying offers on both Peter Olvecky and Dan Fritsche, players who in 08-09 appeared to be competent 4th liners for our team.

I understood the Brodziak trade, as Todd Richards did coach him and Chuck Fletcher watched him play for a year in Wilkes-Barrie, but to give a 4th line player 3 years is a large investment IMO.
And who did Olvecky and Fritsche play for last year? I'll save you the trouble... they played for the Milwaukee Admirals and the Syracuse Crunch, respectively.

Boy, that was a bad decision.

Kari Takko 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 12:24 AM.

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.