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

Christensen Anyone? UPD: Headed to Europe

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-03-2012, 10:50 AM
  #26
Circulartheory
@danccchan
 
Circulartheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 5,131
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
Christensen sucks. Veilleux sucks. Ortmeyer sucks. Peters sucks. Powe sucks. Johnson was semi-good for the first 20 games, now he sucks.

None of these guys are top-9 material on a decent team, and none would be on the 4th line for a playoff team, except for maybe Powe. They are bodies, and that's it.

Christensen only saving grace is his shootout skills. He'll have 5-10 good games, and 10-30 invisible game. Not somebody to rely on in the top-6. During injuries next year, I rather give guys like Phillips or Coyle shots in the top-6 instead of Christensen.

You want to sign Christensen as "13th-man shoot-out specialist"? Well, that would first require Yeo to predict which games will be going to shoot-out, and then slot him into a roster spot, where he will be inferior to pretty much everybody or take away a chance from one of the prospects who are actually in the Wild's long-term plan.
I don't agree with these at all. I think Powe is a great bottom six player and Johnson is a solid bottom six player.

Veilleux and Ortmeyer are decent 4th line players, Peters is meh for me.

Christensen, for me, isn't worth it. If he plays mostly on the 3rd line as he has been doing most of the time, I rather see a guy like Zucker (high energy, speedy) or Larsson (reliable two-way) get those roles and develop.

Circulartheory is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 10:50 AM
  #27
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,906
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Christensen is a depth forward. A literal 13th forward in the "swapping tough guy" sense. Kassian isn't going to play every game. Is there any reason to suit Kassian up when we're playing against Montreal? No, so you put EC in instead. It's not a "13th forward for shootout specialist" mentality, it's a "depth forward who you consider for situational use and emergency injury replacement."
well, now that they have Staubitz...

EC: offer him what he's making now. if he hold out, just plan on him not being around. He does have the talent. If nothing else he can slide in when one of our prospects fails or our other scoring forwards get derailed by mental problems or injuries.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 10:52 AM
  #28
Avder
Global Moderator
Reliable NonSequitur
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Location: Location.
Country: United States
Posts: 36,394
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
I think the issue is that we have different priorities in building a team. You're looking at Christensen and saying "how can we get the most out of him" while I'm looking at the available lineup pieces and saying "where can we get the most value, both for this year and going forward?" I'm also putting a lot more weight on a Lats/Butch return. Remember, even if Lats/Butch aren't available at the start of the season, one is likely to appear a month or two in. Then what do we do with your lineup? The logical move is to put Christensen in the press box. If we're already planning on him ending up there eventually, should we really be tailoring our lineup around him? In my setup, Christensen technically has the chance to compete against rookies for that last roster spot. I just assume he'll lose out.

I think we can all agree we don't want to sign EC before 7/1. If we manage to pick up a forward in free agency, EC is certainly squeezed out of the lineup. Given that we wouldn't sign him prior to 7/1, is it ensured he'll even be available?
If we're going to waste a contract slot on Christensen I absolutely want to get the most value out of him, and that means he has to be in the lineup because he cant help us in shootouts from the pressbox. And if he is in the lineup he has to be in the top 6 because he is total garbage on the 4th line. I would rather see our current 4th line than a 4th line with Christensen on it.

The way I see it is if we sign him we sign him with the intention that he earn his top 6 spot against everyone else. If he does not do that then I say we risk waivers to try to get him down to Houston because otherwise he's just going to be a wasted spot up here. If he is claimed we get the contract slot back. If he makes it down to Houston he works on his game and we can potentially call him back up if and when he is ready again. Win-win provided he does not get claimed off re-entry. He is 2nd line or bust the way I see it. If he plays like he is playing now? Great, we've got a legitimate top 6 player and we can finally say we won the Wellman trade. If not? Well hey we tried and we gave him his shot. It's not like we have not seen tons of busts around here already.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 10:57 AM
  #29
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,015
vCash: 500
I say we can grade guys after the year but...

EC - too much upkeep, not enough reward. If we sign him, I'm pretty much tuned out for next year because it shows we're not serious about winning.

Veilleux - meh, nice energy the first couple weeks but nothing else. Replaceable. Better than the AHL scrubs we had but not a reliable NHL'er.

Powe - meh. Decent 4th liner, not a great hockey player, but he's under contract for two more years so he stays.

Ortmeyer - AHL'er

Peters - AHL'er

Johnson - yeah he was nice for a few weeks then turned to crap offensively AND defensively. Don't care for him but Fletch will probably re-sign.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:10 AM
  #30
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I say we can grade guys after the year but...

EC - too much upkeep, not enough reward. If we sign him, I'm pretty much tuned out for next year because it shows we're not serious about winning.

Veilleux - meh, nice energy the first couple weeks but nothing else. Replaceable. Better than the AHL scrubs we had but not a reliable NHL'er.

Powe - meh. Decent 4th liner, not a great hockey player, but he's under contract for two more years so he stays.

Ortmeyer - AHL'er

Peters - AHL'er

Johnson - yeah he was nice for a few weeks then turned to crap offensively AND defensively. Don't care for him but Fletch will probably re-sign.
- Christensen = Let him walk.
- Ortmeyer = Let him walk.
- Peters = Escort him out to the sidewalk, buy his cab fare and airfare to get him out of town.

- Powe = Good PKer. That is it. Trade him.

- Veilleux = Also a good PKer, way more energy than Powe. Sign him to a cheap 1- year, two way contract. Better than Peters, Ortmeyer, and Powe. More value.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:17 AM
  #31
BuddyMcCormick
Registered User
 
BuddyMcCormick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I say we can grade guys after the year but...

EC - too much upkeep, not enough reward. If we sign him, I'm pretty much tuned out for next year because it shows we're not serious about winning.

Veilleux - meh, nice energy the first couple weeks but nothing else. Replaceable. Better than the AHL scrubs we had but not a reliable NHL'er.

Powe - meh. Decent 4th liner, not a great hockey player, but he's under contract for two more years so he stays.

Ortmeyer - AHL'er

Peters - AHL'er

Johnson - yeah he was nice for a few weeks then turned to crap offensively AND defensively. Don't care for him but Fletch will probably re-sign.
Quoting for future reference.

BuddyMcCormick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:18 AM
  #32
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,015
vCash: 500
Shouldn't be hard as, I've been pretty tuned out the last few months, regardless of my posts here.

And a good chunk of my posting is over at The Rink forum, where I'm pretty much the one mod (come over and say hi!).

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:24 AM
  #33
Avder
Global Moderator
Reliable NonSequitur
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Location: Location.
Country: United States
Posts: 36,394
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
Shouldn't be hard as, I've been pretty tuned out the last few months, regardless of my posts here.

And a good chunk of my posting is over at The Rink forum, where I'm pretty much the one mod (come over and say hi!).
Planning to once I can manage to get into shape.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:36 AM
  #34
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
If we're going to waste a contract slot on Christensen I absolutely want to get the most value out of him, and that means he has to be in the lineup because he cant help us in shootouts from the pressbox. And if he is in the lineup he has to be in the top 6 because he is total garbage on the 4th line. I would rather see our current 4th line than a 4th line with Christensen on it.

The way I see it is if we sign him we sign him with the intention that he earn his top 6 spot against everyone else. If he does not do that then I say we risk waivers to try to get him down to Houston because otherwise he's just going to be a wasted spot up here. If he is claimed we get the contract slot back. If he makes it down to Houston he works on his game and we can potentially call him back up if and when he is ready again. Win-win provided he does not get claimed off re-entry. He is 2nd line or bust the way I see it. If he plays like he is playing now? Great, we've got a legitimate top 6 player and we can finally say we won the Wellman trade. If not? Well hey we tried and we gave him his shot. It's not like we have not seen tons of busts around here already.
Sunk cost. If we sign him, that contract spot is lost. We shouldn't harm the rest of the team to somehow squeeze some extra value out of him. It's like driving your truck that gets 12mpg "because you bought it and want to get the most use out of it" when your 35mpg car would do the job. Maybe you're somehow subjectively "getting more use out of" the truck, but you're better off overall if you just ignore the cost you sunk into it.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 11:48 AM
  #35
Dee Oh Cee
Registered User
 
Dee Oh Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Farmington
Country: United States
Posts: 7,570
vCash: 500
I guess I like Powe a lot more than others do.

Dee Oh Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:00 PM
  #36
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dee Oh Cee View Post
I guess I like Powe a lot more than others do.
Yep.

I didn't like the trade that brought him in, and I think he is still easily replaceable now.

I would have preferred to see Madden brought back for a single year than give up a 5th rounder, not that i place a lot of value on 5th rounders...

/shrug

In my mind, he just about kills any offensive pressure when he touches the puck.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:01 PM
  #37
Dee Oh Cee
Registered User
 
Dee Oh Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Farmington
Country: United States
Posts: 7,570
vCash: 500
I think we used a 3rd rounder on him didn't we?

Dee Oh Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:02 PM
  #38
Avder
Global Moderator
Reliable NonSequitur
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Location: Location.
Country: United States
Posts: 36,394
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by squidz View Post
Sunk cost. If we sign him, that contract spot is lost. We shouldn't harm the rest of the team to somehow squeeze some extra value out of him. It's like driving your truck that gets 12mpg "because you bought it and want to get the most use out of it" when your 35mpg car would do the job. Maybe you're somehow subjectively "getting more use out of" the truck, but you're better off overall if you just ignore the cost you sunk into it.
Well lets stay with the Truck analogy for a moment then. Why did you buy the truck to begin with? Was it just to buy a truck or was it because you actually need a truck? If it was just to buy a truck then I think it follows that you might just be wealthy enough to drive around and get 12mpg and not give a damn. If you buy the truck to fill a day to day need like say, hauling stuff back and forth at your job then yeah I think it would be good to get a lot of use out of it.

If we sign Christensen the reasons we sign him are going to include his shootout skills and his goal scoring ability. If we have someone who can do what he does but better and/or more consistently then we should absolutely not sign him and save that contract slot. But if he is one of the best options for a top 6 player we have once the offseason really gets going then giving him a one year deal and doing our best to get the most out of him while he is here is a viable option.

Do I think the kids have a good shot at beating him for the job? I think they have as good a job as anybody, but I also think that most of them will not be NHL ready right off the bat and will need at least a little seasoning down in Houston. I think we see most of our new prospects for the first time as call ups when top-6 players go down with injuries or have strings of bad games and get scratched.

And I just want to say that I am still not sold on Christensen at all and I don't want my arguments taken in any sort of "sign this dude now wtf is wrong with you" kind of way. That's not it at all. But what I am saying is if we sign him we damned well better get the most use out of him or else we just bought that truck just to see it sit unused in the garage for months on end.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:22 PM
  #39
Northland Wild Man
Finnesotans?
 
Northland Wild Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Country: United States
Posts: 8,054
vCash: 500
I'm undecided on the Christensen situation so far. I love what the guy brings to the shootout, but outside of that what has he done. He's scored a few goals in games with no pressure to perform. I guess if he stays for league minimum I'm ok with it, but if the Wild choose not to keep him I won't lose sleep over it either.

Northland Wild Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:42 PM
  #40
vitogor
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Minnesota
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 3,588
vCash: 500
I think Russo nailed it in his latest blog. Wild will try to go for the bigger and better fish on July 1st, and if it doesn't work, then they'll call EC.

vitogor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:42 PM
  #41
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
Well lets stay with the Truck analogy for a moment then. Why did you buy the truck to begin with? Was it just to buy a truck or was it because you actually need a truck? If it was just to buy a truck then I think it follows that you might just be wealthy enough to drive around and get 12mpg and not give a damn. If you buy the truck to fill a day to day need like say, hauling stuff back and forth at your job then yeah I think it would be good to get a lot of use out of it.

If we sign Christensen the reasons we sign him are going to include his shootout skills and his goal scoring ability. If we have someone who can do what he does but better and/or more consistently then we should absolutely not sign him and save that contract slot. But if he is one of the best options for a top 6 player we have once the offseason really gets going then giving him a one year deal and doing our best to get the most out of him while he is here is a viable option.

Do I think the kids have a good shot at beating him for the job? I think they have as good a job as anybody, but I also think that most of them will not be NHL ready right off the bat and will need at least a little seasoning down in Houston. I think we see most of our new prospects for the first time as call ups when top-6 players go down with injuries or have strings of bad games and get scratched.

And I just want to say that I am still not sold on Christensen at all and I don't want my arguments taken in any sort of "sign this dude now wtf is wrong with you" kind of way. That's not it at all. But what I am saying is if we sign him we damned well better get the most use out of him or else we just bought that truck just to see it sit unused in the garage for months on end.
You bought the truck because it was cheap, and sometimes the car needs to go to the shop. Also, once in a while you just prefer to drive the truck instead because the car doesn't really fit the situation correctly.


While not as extreme as Jarick is, I agree that if we're slating Christensen in as a top 6 player, we might as well skip the whole next year. You consider buying him because he's cheap and you can keep him around in case you need him. You don't buy him because you're planning on relying upon him full time.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:52 PM
  #42
tomgilbertfan
u wot m8
 
tomgilbertfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 10,381
vCash: 500
To echo some other sentiments here:

If we swing and miss on some players I could maybe see us re-signing EC.

But really, his ineptitude in the D zone means he has to be a top-6 player, and if we are counting someone who has had chances in the NHL but hasn't shown any sort of consistency or ability to be a top-6 player for us that doesn't give me any confidence going into the season.

tomgilbertfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 12:54 PM
  #43
Dee Oh Cee
Registered User
 
Dee Oh Cee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Farmington
Country: United States
Posts: 7,570
vCash: 500
I'm hoping our team is good enough where we don't need him (meaning we have a full top 9).

Dee Oh Cee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 01:32 PM
  #44
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,015
vCash: 500
The other thing that would worry me about EC in the top six is that Granlund will be there, and while Granlund is supposed to be Gretzky/Crosby/every#1pickintheirdraftyear, I'm not exactly looking forward to his defensive prowess. In other words, I don't think we can afford to have lots of top sixers with defensive question marks.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 01:38 PM
  #45
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,906
vCash: 50
regarding Powe...A lot of people complain about the team's lack of effort (whether through hindsight or "all along") but Powe was one of the guys you could count on every night to provide effort (if nothing else). they got rid of the other "character" guys and kept the one with the most utility. Powe remains useful going into next year.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 01:57 PM
  #46
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,571
vCash: 500
Next year's top-6: Koivu, Heatley, Setoguchi, Granlund. Two spots for: Bouchard, Lats, Coyle, any UFA forward, and, unfortunately, Cullen (). Is Christensen better than any of those guys? Nope. I rather have Cullen in the top-6 than Christensen, even if that pains me to say.


Last edited by nickschultzfan: 04-03-2012 at 02:48 PM.
nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 02:17 PM
  #47
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,015
vCash: 500
I wouldn't pencil in Coyle over Zucker and Larsson. Give them all a chance to get a roster spot. At least one of them has to be ready.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 02:23 PM
  #48
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
The most attractive thing about signing Christensen as a 13th forward is that (presuming there's no healthy Lats or Butch at the start of the season) we leave that 2W spot open for competition amongst rookies. If none of them can win the spot, we have Christensen to hold it over until Butch/Lats gets healthy.

To me, any signing of EC is contingent upon the assumption he will be a healthy scratch when the whole team is healthy.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 02:43 PM
  #49
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 12,179
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I wouldn't pencil in Coyle over Zucker and Larsson. Give them all a chance to get a roster spot. At least one of them has to be ready.
I think it's more a matter of the position that's open. Right now, in the top 6, we have Heatley at LW and Seto at RW, with Lats and Bouchard as question marks. If Granlund takes the open LW spot, then I think Coyle has the upper hand on the right side, as Zucker is a LW and Larsson is C/LW (I think).

Edit:

If you go with something like...

Heatley - Koivu - Coyle (2 vets and rook)
Granlund - Cullen - Seto (2 vets and a rook)
Zucker/Larsson - Brodziak - Clutterbuck (2 vets and a rook)

And then if Lats/Bouchard comes back, you send Zucker/Larsson down to Houson and adjust the lines from there.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
04-03-2012, 02:59 PM
  #50
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 Dr Jan Itor View Post
I think it's more a matter of the position that's open. Right now, in the top 6, we have Heatley at LW and Seto at RW, with Lats and Bouchard as question marks. If Granlund takes the open LW spot, then I think Coyle has the upper hand on the right side, as Zucker is a LW and Larsson is C/LW (I think).

Edit:

If you go with something like...

Heatley - Koivu - Coyle (2 vets and rook)
Granlund - Cullen - Seto (2 vets and a rook)
Zucker/Larsson - Brodziak - Clutterbuck (2 vets and a rook)

And then if Lats/Bouchard comes back, you send Zucker/Larsson down to Houson and adjust the lines from there.
I think it's more of a Bulmer/Larsson fight for 3LW. Even though he's a righty, I think Bulmer has the inside track for a roster spot. Also, Zucker is more likely to spend some time in Houston, if only because he needs to bulk up a bit more. They probably want to try develop his offensive game some more, because he could be a top 6 guy if he develops right, but throwing him to the NHL wolves probably stunts that growth a little.

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 04:37 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.