HFBoards

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

Trade Deadline Deal/Rumor Discussion--Mods will create thread for Wild Trade(s)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-27-2012, 11:11 AM
  #101
Avder
Global Moderator
Sleep? What's that?
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The ANGRY DOME
Country: United States
Posts: 31,371
vCash: 50
I feel like we should have taken a swing at Clitsome off waivers, especially if we are planning on moving one or both of Zanon and Schultz.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:12 AM
  #102
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
No need to move him at the deadline, but if there's a good return, why not?

And then package some picks/prospects for a defensive upgrade this summer.
Yes. As I had mentioned originally, if the offer's right, do it. However, I can't see any teams out there who can both make a fair offer, and would actually be inclined to do so. Chicago's one of the only teams that I can see being interested, and I can't see them coming close to making a "fair" offer.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:12 AM
  #103
forthewild
Registered User
 
forthewild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 500
the only way we should move shultz is if we are getting a defensive prospect who's nearly ready for the NHL or just a package we can't refuse.

i am fine with him on the roster he is what he is and he is a decent vet presence on the back end. there is no sense in moving him just for the sake of moving him.

forthewild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:13 AM
  #104
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avder View Post
I feel like we should have taken a swing at Clitsome off waivers, especially if we are planning on moving one or both of Zanon and Schultz.
I wonder if Fletch is trying to keep contracts low to go after other names and/or college players?

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:13 AM
  #105
Wild48
Our Savior
 
Wild48's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Duluth
Country: United States
Posts: 1,534
vCash: 500
I think Shultz is a guy you trade in the off-season. There's no benefit to moving him now, and with Lundin and Stoner still hurt... you run the risk of running out of bodies at the blueline.

Wild48 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:14 AM
  #106
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
You've got that horribly backwards.

Value is far far far higher in the offseason. Why? Because at the deadline, you're lucky if there are two teams that can take his contract. Deadline day is for deadline deals. You don't move a guy with two more years on his contract at the deadline unless you have absolutely no other option.

The idea that Schultz could even remotely come close to having more value today than at the draft is so ludicrous, it's difficult to even reply to that claim.
Brian Burke disagrees. So, agree to disagree.

__________________

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
02-27-2012, 11:14 AM
  #107
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,525
vCash: 500
Would be interesting to call up Cuma and see how he looks.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:15 AM
  #108
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Avder View Post
I feel like we should have taken a swing at Clitsome off waivers, especially if we are planning on moving one or both of Zanon and Schultz.
Can't see spending our last (we didn't know Staubitz was claimed until after) contract spot on him. If we had a deal lined up for Zanon and just needed to pull the trigger? Fine, but I'd like to at least have the option to make a stab at college UFAs or a value pickup if the right player at the right price came along before 2PM.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:15 AM
  #109
Avder
Global Moderator
Sleep? What's that?
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The ANGRY DOME
Country: United States
Posts: 31,371
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I wonder if Fletch is trying to keep contracts low to go after other names and/or college players?
That sounds like a possibility. But Clitsome stuck me as an extremely capable plug for whatever holes we might be creating on defense today, and quite possibly an upgrade over whoever we may end up shipping out. Sometimes I just dont understand GMCF's approach to waivers. We passed on Yip earlier this year, now we pass on Clitsome when we need depth at defense and are quite possibly about to trade 1-2 D-Men away.

I guess if he has someone he is absolutely in love with as far as college free agents go, well, more power to him. But I would have liked to have seen Clitsome picked up.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:17 AM
  #110
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
We're not putting a rookie on the top pairing off the bat, but is Schultz over Falk really going to be that much of an upgrade on the third pairing?
They can easily be shuffled. Put Spurgeon there and pair Brodin differently. The point is, we can upgrade the top 4 without moving Schultz, and moving him definitely jeopardizes any semblence of depth we might have otherwise. Quite literally, if we move Schultz, we desperately have to fill a hole and have Brodin make the team.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:19 AM
  #111
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
Brian Burke disagrees. So, agree to disagree.
Link or it didn't happen. Considering Burke's position has always been to not do deals at the deadline unless he has to...

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:19 AM
  #112
Jarick
Moderator
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,525
vCash: 500
Same reason you don't spend to the cap. You need some flexibility.

This morning Wild had 54 contracts with 5 sliding, so they had 49 players under contract. Staubitz is gone, meaning they have 48. If he was still here and they claimed Clitsome, they'd be at 50 and unable to make any move if a better prospect came along via trade.

To me it says he is actively looking for deals and not just stand pat. Which is a good thing.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:20 AM
  #113
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Link or it didn't happen. Considering Burke's position has always been to not do deals at the deadline unless he has to...
Wonder why? Because the price is artificially high on players teams are selling? Huh. Weird.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:23 AM
  #114
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
Wonder why? Because the price is artificially high on players teams are selling? Huh. Weird.
Considering the Leafs have been sellers for his entire stay there...

Yay logic!

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:25 AM
  #115
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Yay logic!
Yay having no idea what quote you're commenting on!

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:27 AM
  #116
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,189
vCash: 500
Yeah, trade away the best defender on the team. The one that rarely misses a game, is reportedly a popular teammate, and brings the most experience back there of anyone.

I don't recommend it.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:28 AM
  #117
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
Yay having no idea what quote you're commenting on!
Yay continuing to make things up and act like it means something!


Seriously, if you can't comprehend the fact that UFA RENTALS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR AS NON-UFA NON-RENTALS, I don't know why you'd even bother to continue posting about the topic.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:30 AM
  #118
BuddyMcCormick
Registered User
 
BuddyMcCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,892
vCash: 934
/GrabsPopcorn

This scat is almost as exciting as the trade deadline itself.

Trading Schultz wouldn't hurt the team as much as it could possibly help. The return has to be right though.

BuddyMcCormick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:31 AM
  #119
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Yay continuing to make things up and act like it means something!


Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Seriously, if you can't comprehend the fact that UFA RENTALS DO NOT HAVE THE SAME ECONOMIC BEHAVIOR AS NON-UFA NON-RENTALS, I don't know why you'd even bother to continue posting about the topic.
Truthfully I'm not even sure why you're still responding.

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:31 AM
  #120
llamapalooza
Hockey State Expat
 
llamapalooza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: San Francisco
Country: United States
Posts: 7,186
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuddyMcCormick View Post
Trading Schultz wouldn't hurt the team as much as it could possibly help. The return has to be right though.
This is true of literally any player on any team.

llamapalooza is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:32 AM
  #121
forthewild
Registered User
 
forthewild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 3,614
vCash: 500
if wild are offered

clendening and 2nd+ cap dump for schlutz do we take it?

forthewild is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:32 AM
  #122
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post




Truthfully I'm not even sure why you're still responding.
It's never a good idea to let vocal ignorance go unchecked.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:33 AM
  #123
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 9,498
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by forthewild View Post
if wild are offered

clendening and 2nd+ cap dump for schlutz do we take it?
Clendening is better than Schultz right now, so, ah, yes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
It's never a good idea to let vocal ignorance go unchecked.
Reading into and responding to something you haven't heard/read qualifies as ignorance, correct?

this providence is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:33 AM
  #124
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 9,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuddyMcCormick View Post
/GrabsPopcorn

This scat is almost as exciting as the trade deadline itself.

Trading Schultz wouldn't hurt the team as much as it could possibly help. The return has to be right though.
Haha, yeah. This got out of hand fast. Let's not let Nick Schultz tear us apart.

Dr Jan Itor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-27-2012, 11:35 AM
  #125
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by forthewild View Post
if wild are offered

clendening and 2nd+ cap dump for schlutz do we take it?
Can't imagine the Hawks would do that. I'd be hesitant, but would settle if we changed the 2nd to a conditional 1st. If Chicago makes the conference finals, it's a 1st, if they don't it's a 2nd. I'd do the deal then. Does Chicago even have a cap dump though? Frolik maybe?

squidz* 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 04:03 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.