HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Minnesota Wild
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Should the Wild consider going after Vanek?

View Poll Results: Should we try and sign Vanek next year?
Yes, absolutely. We need him. 20 19.80%
Yes, it couldn't hurt. 51 50.50%
No, doesn't matter. 19 18.81%
No way, he wouldn't even fit in our lineup. 11 10.89%
Voters: 101. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-13-2013, 08:26 PM
  #51
Minnewildsota
Registered User
 
Minnewildsota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
Putting him on his off side creates one-timer chances off his stick, which is perfect next to a guy like Suter who is able to pull the puck to the middle and create from the top of the zone. That means if he showed up tomorrow, he would displace Parise or Spurgeon from their current spot on PP1. I'd rather leave Parise where he's comfortable (on his 'correct' wing, low in the zone) and get Spurgeon's 80 MPH changeup out of there in that scenario, but that's just me.

I'm surprised to hear anyone would be less than thrilled at the prospect of adding an elite shooter to a team that's lacked legit scoring punch from the time the doors opened at the X. As far as established top-six forwards go, what better options exist to compliment the pass-first games of Koivu and Granlund? More shots = more goals.
Personally, I don't get it either. You see "We need another Gaborik" all the time on these boards. However when we have the opportunity to add something similar to that to the team. He's not quite as explosive as Gaborik but he sure is more dependable. If you have the opportunity to add someone that averages 30-40 goals a season, you add that person. Prospect are nice and all but 1 in the hand is worth two in the bush.

Edit: I also want to add, could you imagine how the culture would change surrounding this team? Other players could view it as a place that's good to play. Parise and Suter sign in Minnesota, "Ok, even a blind squirrel finds a nut, or two". Vanek signs in Minnesota, "Hrmmm, maybe there's something good going on there".


Last edited by Minnewildsota: 10-13-2013 at 08:33 PM.
Minnewildsota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:31 PM
  #52
J22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
Putting him on his off side creates one-timer chances off his stick, which is perfect next to a guy like Suter, who is able to pull the puck to the middle and create from the top of the zone. That means if Vanek showed up tomorrow, he would displace Parise or Spurgeon from their current spot on PP1. I'd rather leave Parise where he's comfortable (on his 'correct' wing, low in the zone) and get Spurgeon's 80 MPH changeup out of there in that scenario, but that's just me.

I'm surprised to hear anyone would be less than thrilled at the prospect of adding an elite shooter to a team that's lacked legit scoring punch from the minute the doors first swung open at the X. As far as established top-six forwards go, what better options exist to compliment the pass-first games of Koivu and Granlund? More shots = more goals.
He would take Heatley's spot and Pominville would play the left D spot. It would instantly give the PP a ton of more options on player rotations and allow for more movement

J22* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:31 PM
  #53
Engebretson
The Bruce is Loose
 
Engebretson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 9,444
vCash: 1387
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
If you're going to spend the money on a defender, get a player like Girardi who plays a quiet game. That's what this team needs back there.
I'd almost prefer this instead of spending big bucks on Vanek. Our defense would be on its way to being very solid.

Engebretson is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:32 PM
  #54
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
What young guys? Even with Coyle, Granlund and Nino in the lineup I still see room for a guy who was on pace to tuck 40 last year.

It's nice to finally see my favorite team stockpiling usable prospects throughout the draft, but a lot of those guys are just that: usable. It's nice to be able to turn to guys with a skill set when injuries dictate callups, but a lot of our mid-tier prospects aren't about to become everyday NHLers.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:35 PM
  #55
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J22 View Post
He would take Heatley's spot and Pominville would play the left D spot. It would instantly give the PP a ton of more options on player rotations and allow for more movement
Heatley was on PP2 last game against Dallas. He set Dumba up with that saucer pass from up high.

I don't get why Pominville isn't still manning the left point. Spurgeon angers me to the point where I almost hope they surrender a shorty every time he takes the ice with the first PP unit, but I settle for cheering to break even until Granny and co. jump the boards.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:36 PM
  #56
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
Putting him on his off side creates one-timer chances off his stick, which is perfect next to a guy like Suter, who is able to pull the puck to the middle and create from the top of the zone. That means if Vanek showed up tomorrow, he would displace Parise or Spurgeon from their current spot on PP1. I'd rather leave Parise where he's comfortable (on his 'correct' wing, low in the zone) and get Spurgeon's 80 MPH changeup out of there in that scenario, but that's just me.

I'm surprised to hear anyone would be less than thrilled at the prospect of adding an elite shooter to a team that's lacked legit scoring punch from the minute the doors first swung open at the X. As far as established top-six forwards go, what better options exist to compliment the pass-first games of Koivu and Granlund? More shots = more goals.
Again, Vanek up top on the PP having to 1) move to create space for himself/others 2) support the play into the zone and 3) cover up for any breaks the other way is pretty nonsensical. There's more to a player than what he provides on a PP and all but you're way off base on what he'd provide.

It's not that I'm completely against the idea of Vanek joining this team. It's just I'm not at all interested in a trade of any valuable assets for him and I don't see the value in giving him a large contract in FA; whether it's term, money, or both. He's always been a scorer but given the trend of scoring forwards, he's already past his scoring prime and he's slowing down, foot speed-wise, too much for my liking. Not to say under no circumstances would I want him here, but things would have to be pretty favorable for the Wild for me to buy in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by J22 View Post
[/B]
Seriously?
You dont see how Vanek and Pominville could combine with a small but skilled center to make a great 2nd line? because they were a quality first line playing with Roy in Buffalo.

You dont see how good the PP could be with Vanek in the Slot and Parise at the side of the net? Two of the best players in the NHL within 10 feet of the net
Most quality players slotted in together look good on paper with no variables at play.

However, given the needs, strengths, money, and future of this team; I don't believe he's a perfect fit. No.

__________________

After Meaningless Win - 3/29/12 - Game 77 | SoH-"Who knows, that could have cost us a Cup tonight." | Dooohkay
this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:39 PM
  #57
J22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Engebretson View Post
I'd almost prefer this instead of spending big bucks on Vanek. Our defense would be on its way to being very solid.
Only problem with Girardi is that he's a RD, you would either have to move Spurgeon or split up Suter/Brodin.

Getting a Girardi like dman to play with Dumba would set up the D to be very good for years though.

J22* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:40 PM
  #58
Victorious Secret
Torchetti 4 Prez
 
Victorious Secret's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Matt's Meat Market
Country: Ireland
Posts: 13,723
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by J22 View Post
Only problem with Girardi is that he's a RD, you would either have to move Spurgeon or split up Suter/Brodin.

Getting a Girardi like dman to play with Dumba would set up the D to be very good for years though.
If so many pairs of D are LH-LH, what's wrong with having a RH-RH?

Victorious Secret is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:44 PM
  #59
J22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Victorious Secret View Post
If so many pairs of D are LH-LH, what's wrong with having a RH-RH?
nothing if they can handle it, but the number of right handed dmen that have/do play the left side is miniscule. People need to realize that LD and RD are two different positions and just because some can play both doesnt mean that everbody can.

J22* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:48 PM
  #60
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
Again, Vanek up top on the PP having to 1) move to create space for himself/others 2) support the play into the zone and 3) cover up for any breaks the other way is pretty nonsensical. There's more to a player than what he provides on a PP and all but you're way off base on what he'd provide.

It's not that I'm completely against the idea of Vanek joining this team. It's just I'm not at all interested in a trade of any valuable assets for him and I don't see the value in giving him a large contract in FA; whether it's term, money, or both. He's always been a scorer but given the trend of scoring forwards, he's already past his scoring prime and he's slowing down, foot speed-wise, too much for my liking. Not to say under no circumstances would I want him here, but things would have to be pretty favorable for the Wild for me to buy in.



Most quality players slotted in together look good on paper with no variables at play.

However, given the needs, strengths, money, and future of this team; I don't believe he's a perfect fit. No.
I get what you're saying, but with a deeply skilled 1-5 making up your PP and one of the best babysitters in the game in Ryan Suter, I don't think you worry about breakdowns the other way. The opposition knows it will be lucky to get the puck against that group and will want to ice it the second they gain possession. If a unit manned by Koivu-Parise-Pominville-Vanek-Suter ended up surrendering odd-man rushes, there's bigger problems than having pure offense at the left point.

And as far as valuable assets go, that's where I would debate what is valuable. A team drafting in the 20-30 range can afford to cough up a first round pick every year if a 30-40 goal scorer is on the table, and I don't see any of the current AHL forwards having a future in the Wild top six. Given the fact that we already have a gnarly potential third line (24-21-17) on the hook for 2014-15, that makes every one of our current minor league forwards very moveable.

I'd be absolutely giddy over landing Vanek in the spring and sending Heatley + Zucker + Scandella + 1st round pick. GIDDY.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:48 PM
  #61
J22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
Again, Vanek up top on the PP having to 1) move to create space for himself/others 2) support the play into the zone and 3) cover up for any breaks the other way is pretty nonsensical. There's more to a player than what he provides on a PP and all but you're way off base on what he'd provide.

It's not that I'm completely against the idea of Vanek joining this team. It's just I'm not at all interested in a trade of any valuable assets for him and I don't see the value in giving him a large contract in FA; whether it's term, money, or both
. He's always been a scorer but given the trend of scoring forwards, he's already past his scoring prime and he's slowing down, foot speed-wise, too much for my liking. Not to say under no circumstances would I want him here, but things would have to be pretty favorable for the Wild for me to buy in.



Most quality players slotted in together look good on paper with no variables at play.

However, given the needs, strengths, money, and future of this team; I don't believe he's a perfect fit. No.

I completely agree with the bolded.

As for the underlined, Vanek/Pominville isnt just something that looks good on paper, they have a proven history.

J22* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:51 PM
  #62
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
I get what you're saying, but with a deeply skilled 1-5 making up your PP and one of the best babysitters in the game in Ryan Suter, I don't think you worry about breakdowns the other way. The opposition knows it will be lucky to get the puck against that group and will want to ice it the second they gain possession. If a unit manned by Koivu-Parise-Pominville-Vanek-Suter ended up surrendering odd-man rushes, there's bigger problems than having pure offense at the left point.

And as far as valuable assets go, that's where I would debate what is valuable. A team drafting in the 20-30 range can afford to cough up a first round pick every year if a 30-40 goal scorer is on the table, and I don't see any of the current AHL forwards having a future in the Wild top six. Given the fact that we already have a gnarly potential third line (24-21-17) on the hook for 2014-15, that makes every one of our current minor league forwards very moveable.

I'd be absolutely giddy over landing Vanek in the spring and sending Heatley + Zucker + Scandella + 1st round pick. GIDDY.
Are you ok with the defense as currently constructed? Because adding Vanek will likely hinder our ability to make significant upgrades on the backend.

Dr Jan Itor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:54 PM
  #63
Minnewildsota
Registered User
 
Minnewildsota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Are you ok with the defense as currently constructed? Because adding Vanek will likely hinder our ability to make significant upgrades on the backend.
I'm ok with our defense as it currently stands, I'm more concerned about our goaltending. I think this would look pretty decent/good next year:

Suter-Brodin
Dumba-Ballard
Spurgeon-Stoner
Scandella

Minnewildsota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:56 PM
  #64
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
I have no earthly idea why you'd be excited about giving up 4 assets for one player who could just as easily walk if there's a hick up in negotiations for a new contract.

Quote:
Originally Posted by J22 View Post
As for the underlined, Vanek/Pominville isnt just something that looks good on paper, they have a proven history.
I was more or less referencing the economics of the entire situation. Not just about what would be provided on the ice.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 08:58 PM
  #65
MuckOG
The Brodin Effect
 
MuckOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: In a tree stand.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 133
Yeah, as much as I want to see Vanek sign with the Wild, I'm against the idea of sending Buffalo anything of value in a trade.

MuckOG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:00 PM
  #66
Minnewildsota
Registered User
 
Minnewildsota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 500
I think we can all agree. Sign Vanek = possibly good. Trade for Vanek = bad.

Minnewildsota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:10 PM
  #67
J22*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,165
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuddyMcCormick View Post
I think we can all agree. Sign Vanek = possibly good. Trade for Vanek = bad.
the only way I would even consider trading for Vanek would be if the Wild were looking like a top 2-3 team in the West at the deadline. Even then, I'm not sure I would want to pay "pominville price"

J22* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:17 PM
  #68
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Are you ok with the defense as currently constructed? Because adding Vanek will likely hinder our ability to make significant upgrades on the backend.
I don't know if that's necessarily true. Vanek isn't going to bring in a cap figure larger than Heatley's current $7.5M, making him a lateral move on the books if and when he's acquired.

From there, the cap is slated to rise and most of the kids won't need raises until some of the other veterans come off the books. And even then, the first raise given to many players isn't that huge. Brodin will likely hit it big like Ekman-Larsson did a year ago, but Nino isn't going to break the bank when he re-ups as an RFA, and the same story will likely go for Coyle.

And, as we discussed before, truly solid defenders rarely hit the free agent market. I'm not sure if committing veteran dollars and cap space to the likes of Rostislav Klesla or Willie Mitchell is a great idea. Girardi I know a little less about, but I see him being in that same tier.

Next year you have to feel comfortable about having Suter, Dumba and Brodin set to eat up top-four minutes. Depending on who you ask, Daniel Gunnarsson will supposedly be ready to contribute as early as next year. Then there's 2013 second rounder Gustav Olofsson (currently a freshman at Colorado College), who may be another option as the No.4 d-man of the future. I'd rather see the Wild wait for one of those guys to pan out than pay for a defender on the open market. Grabbing a veteran under contract to fill out the top four for 2014-15 would be another option, but predicting who might be acquirable is impossible.

Trying to stay leak-free outside the top four is fruitless, and if Gunnarsson or Olofsson can play a second-pair role effectively someday soon, you already have Spurgeon signed on the semi-cheap. The front office and coaching staff love his game for whatever reason, but hopefully they find a way to make him anchor the third pairing and come up with some cheap lefty or a youngster to slot in next to the little man. Then I would hate his contract and cozy future with the team a lot less.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:20 PM
  #69
MuckOG
The Brodin Effect
 
MuckOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: In a tree stand.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,384
vCash: 133
I'm starting to like Spurgeon's game more and more. He's having a pretty good start to the season, IMO.

MuckOG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:23 PM
  #70
Randy BoBandy
Cheeseburger Party
 
Randy BoBandy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,788
vCash: 500
Vanek 30
Koivu 30
Parise 30
Suter basically 30
Pominville 30

Name a good team with that many players players north of 30 as their core. Especially non elite 30 year olds.

At least 32 mill would be tied up on those guys and we will have them all till they are 35 plus years old. That is a terrible idea. Every one of them besides Suter are on the downturn of their careers.

Signing Vanek to the big money long term deal he will inevitably get would be absolutely idiotic.

We need defenseman not another aging winger.

Randy BoBandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:23 PM
  #71
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
I have no earthly idea why you'd be excited about giving up 4 assets for one player who could just as easily walk if there's a hick up in negotiations for a new contract.



I was more or less referencing the economics of the entire situation. Not just about what would be provided on the ice.
A first round pick isn't worthless, but this isn't the NFL either. Heatley isn't an asset. Scandella is not somebody who would be missed. And Zucker potentially could turn into something, but his ceiling is that of a poor man's Parise.

Do you really want Parise and Parise Lite in the same lineup two years from now? There isn't room for these supposedly valuable assets so many fans fall in love with. How is our system doing top-to-bottom without Matt Hackett, Johan Larsson and whoever BUF wasted its first round selection on?


Last edited by tomthestone*: 10-14-2013 at 01:24 AM. Reason: fixing annoying typo
tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:24 PM
  #72
Minnewildsota
Registered User
 
Minnewildsota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 500
Let's not forget we will gain an extra million next year when Parrish's buyout comes off the books.

Neiderreiter and Fontaine will come up as a RFAs. Based on Capgeeks numbers we will have $14million to fill 8 spots with the cap going up $500,000. Granted most of these are bottom line/pairing signings.

Minnewildsota is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:26 PM
  #73
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
And the cap is going to go up a lot more than $500K...

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:26 PM
  #74
NHL1674
Whatever...
 
NHL1674's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 16,297
vCash: 165
1st priority: making sure we can re-sign the kids (being prepared should some of them really progress)

2nd priority: DEFENSE! As in upgrading it!

3rd priority: talking to Vanek ONLY as a FA....no trade route

NHL1674 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-13-2013, 09:29 PM
  #75
Minnewildsota
Registered User
 
Minnewildsota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NHL1674 View Post
1st priority: making sure we can re-sign the kids (being prepared should some of them really progress)

2nd priority: DEFENSE! As in upgrading it!

3rd priority: talking to Vanek ONLY as a FA....no trade route
not to single you out but how does everybody plan on upgrading the defense? Who is out there that we really want to sign without overpaying?

Minnewildsota 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 04:45 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.