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
10-14-2013, 02:33 PM
  #151
thestonedkoala
Everyone! PANIC!
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 20,069
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuckOG View Post
Yes! Depth in scoring. Adding Vanek would give this team three legitimate scoring lines.

Parise - Koivu - Nino
Coyle - Granlund - Vanek
Cooke - Brodziak - Pominville
Mitchell - Haula - Fontaine.

This would be a deadly line-up. Each line has a set up guy, finisher and mucker. Two way play up and down the line-up.
Move Haula up to third line then. I don't want Brodziak playing with Poms or Cooke. But still, that's pretty offensive heavy.

thestonedkoala is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 02:33 PM
  #152
rynryn
Reluctant Optimist
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 26,461
vCash: 2500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nickschultzfan View Post
I think goal scoring has been a "problem" for a very, very long time.
size was a huge problem before too and look what trading for and drafting that got us.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 02:34 PM
  #153
rynryn
Reluctant Optimist
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 26,461
vCash: 2500
i would bet heavily against Vanek taking anything but 7 years.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 03:06 PM
  #154
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rynryn View Post
i would bet heavily against Vanek taking anything but 7 years.
Me too, and he'll get it from somewhere.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 03:24 PM
  #155
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 20,021
vCash: 370
Vanek on this team takes them from playoff contender to cup contender imo...so yes, get him signed in the offseason!

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 04:13 PM
  #156
Generic User
Moderator
How's your burger?
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 9,742
vCash: 500
I wouldn't want anything more than a 5-year term at a $6.0-$6.5 cap hit.. Which means that I most likely wouldn't be happy with the signing if he came here since that's clearly a pipe dream.

Generic User is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 04:28 PM
  #157
BigT2002
Registered User
 
BigT2002's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: some other continent
Country: United States
Posts: 14,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Generic User View Post
I wouldn't want anything more than a 5-year term at a $6.0-$6.5 cap hit.. Which means that I most likely wouldn't be happy with the signing if he came here since that's clearly a pipe dream.
This. Anything more and we basically hold onto the man until he's 40. He's good but he isn't Sakic or Lidstrom good.

BigT2002 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 04:48 PM
  #158
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Crap, the more I think about it, the more I'm becoming ok with a sixth year for Vanek. Still don't want to go any more than $6m, I don't think that extra year would do too much damage.

Reason: our "young core" (Brodin, Dumba, Coyle, Nino, Granlund) are 20-21 years old, not 23-24. Therefore we don't have to worry about UFA status for them (and the accompanying leverage) until around 2019-20; they will still be team controlled for another 5, 6 or 7 years. Do any of them, especially Brodin or Coyle, seem like the type to hold-out for a large 2nd contract? They don't to me. I think we can get relatively reasonable 2nd contracts out of them, say... Brodin for $5ish, Coyle for $3ish, Granlund and Nino for $2.5 to $3ish (assuming that they all progress how we expect them to).

Add to that Koivu's $6.75m per year ending after 2017-18 (he'll be 35 so if he comes back, it should be at a reduced role and cap hit) and Pominville's $5.6m per year ending the year after, by the time the young cores' 2nd contracts are up, the cap space should be re-established, not even taking into account the likelihood of the yearly cap increase.

All this is to say that I think it's feasible from a cap-management standpoint.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 05:21 PM
  #159
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Crap, the more I think about it, the more I'm becoming ok with a sixth year for Vanek. Still don't want to go any more than $6m, I don't think that extra year would do too much damage.

Reason: our "young core" (Brodin, Dumba, Coyle, Nino, Granlund) are 20-21 years old, not 23-24. Therefore we don't have to worry about UFA status for them (and the accompanying leverage) until around 2019-20; they will still be team controlled for another 5, 6 or 7 years. Do any of them, especially Brodin or Coyle, seem like the type to hold-out for a large 2nd contract? They don't to me. I think we can get relatively reasonable 2nd contracts out of them, say... Brodin for $5ish, Coyle for $3ish, Granlund and Nino for $2.5 to $3ish (assuming that they all progress how we expect them to).

Add to that Koivu's $6.75m per year ending after 2017-18 (he'll be 35 so if he comes back, it should be at a reduced role and cap hit) and Pominville's $5.6m per year ending the year after, by the time the young cores' 2nd contracts are up, the cap space should be re-established, not even taking into account the likelihood of the yearly cap increase.

All this is to say that I think it's feasible from a cap-management standpoint.
Now you guys are getting somewhere. Whoever gets Vanek is going to have to sink a million or more annually above what he should ideally be worth. Whatever slight inconvenience that creates from a cap standpoint is eased away by his scoring ability. Take into account that Heatley will be gone next year, creating $7.5M in cap space alone. Plus the cap ceiling is slated to jump significantly next year, and the Wild will be left with only role players to replace -- possibly with resources already under contract in the AHL.

Everyone keeps barking about the team getting too old five years from now. There's some merit to those concerns, but seeing that as a reason to pass on a certified lethal, 30-year-old sniper in a 6-2 body is foolish. Koivu comes off the books at age 35, and who is to say the front office won't be savvy enough to gradually trade off a few of the high-priced veterans over time?

San Jose has been accused of letting its big guns get too old over the last few years. They've kept their core (Thornton, Boyle, Marleau, Pavelski) in tact for the long haul in addition to bringing in a couple other expensive pieces (Havlat, Burns) -- yet they're still in the thick of things every year. It's the beauty of drafting well and getting contributions from guys on rookie deals, allowing the GM to spew on premium talent and absorb the overpay.

The Wild finally have legitimate contributing youngsters for the first time in franchise history, and look to be following a similar model to their counterparts out West. The timing of paydays is staggered perfectly to allow for the occasional huge move. It's finally exciting to be a fan of this team. Hopefully they can grab the state's attention while the Vikings swim in their cesspool of mobbed up ownership, quarterback quandaries and inadequate coaching.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 05:41 PM
  #160
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
Now you guys are getting somewhere. Whoever gets Vanek is going to have to sink a million or more annually above what he should ideally be worth. Whatever slight inconvenience that creates from a cap standpoint is eased away by his scoring ability. Take into account that Heatley will be gone next year, creating $7.5M in cap space alone. Plus the cap ceiling is slated to jump significantly next year, and the Wild will be left with only role players to replace -- possibly with resources already under contract in the AHL.

Everyone keeps barking about the team getting too old five years from now. There's some merit to those concerns, but seeing that as a reason to pass on a certified lethal, 30-year-old sniper in a 6-2 body is foolish. Koivu comes off the books at age 35, and who is to say the front office won't be savvy enough to gradually trade off a few of the high-priced veterans over time?

San Jose has been accused of letting its big guns get too old over the last few years. They've kept their core (Thornton, Boyle, Marleau, Pavelski) in tact for the long haul in addition to bringing in a couple other expensive pieces (Havlat, Burns) -- yet they're still in the thick of things every year. It's the beauty of drafting well and getting contributions from guys on rookie deals, allowing the GM to spew on premium talent and absorb the overpay.

The Wild finally have legitimate contributing youngsters for the first time in franchise history, and look to be following a similar model to their counterparts out West. The timing of paydays is staggered perfectly to allow for the occasional huge move. It's finally exciting to be a fan of this team. Hopefully they can grab the state's attention while the Vikings swim in their cesspool of mobbed up ownership, quarterback quandaries and inadequate coaching.
Still don't want to trade for him, however.

And to the bolded, high priced veterans likely have or will have NTC's.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 05:51 PM
  #161
Avder
Animated to Explode
 
Avder's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: (_o)/
Country: United States
Posts: 39,006
vCash: 64
If we can part with expendable assets and maybe a draft pick, I think we can trade for him. However I really doubt that's likely because I'm sure Buffalo will be asking The Moon, Mars, and The Rings of Saturn for him. No way in hell they'll take Jupiter and its deadly radiation belts.

Avder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 05:52 PM
  #162
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Yeahhh the NTC aspect is something I overlooked a bit. Nice one, sir.

Still, this front office went through the disaster period of letting inherited bad contracts expire and won't end up handcuffing itself completely by grabbing Vanek. They'll always be tight to the cap -- like they were in the Risebrough years -- just with a balance of premium veterans and solid young guys within their first three years, as opposed to the prior era of a roster loaded down with one-way deals and veteran dollars spent throughout.

For the don't get Vanek now crowd, what would you like to turn Zucker into at the deadline? As mentioned above, he's set to re-up as an RFA in the offseason. I doubt the Wild brass want to risk getting into a pissing match with has camp over a one-way deal when it's becoming clear that Nino, Coyle & Granlund have left him in the dust.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:05 PM
  #163
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
For the don't get Vanek now crowd, what would you like to turn Zucker into at the deadline? As mentioned above, he's set to re-up as an RFA in the offseason. I doubt the Wild brass want to risk getting into a pissing match with has camp over a one-way deal when it's becoming clear that Nino, Coyle & Granlund have left him in the dust.
Zucker has 23 games and 7 NHL points, I don't think we're going to have to worry about him holding out. Only thing I'd be interested in is a similar-aged, similar potential LHD. Something like Zucker for Jake McCabe , but getting rid of him for the sake of getting rid of him is pointless.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:12 PM
  #164
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Zucker has 23 games and 7 NHL points, I don't think we're going to have to worry about him holding out. Only thing I'd be interested in is a similar-aged, similar potential LHD. Something like Zucker for Jake McCabe , but getting rid of him for the sake of getting rid of him is pointless.
Yeah I wouldn't take just anything in a return, but he would not be missed if used to make a sensible trade to help the big club in the short-term. It's going to be hilarious to see the WCHA passion light up the boards and social media when he does get moved.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:21 PM
  #165
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 20,021
vCash: 370
Zucker is our most valuable tradable asset at this point. Use him to upgrade the defense.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:26 PM
  #166
this providence
Chips in Bed Theorem
 
this providence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: St. Paul
Posts: 10,358
vCash: 500
I don't see the sense in moving Zucker. He's one of the few shoot first players the Wild have in their entire organization. He's the type of player you wait it out on in their development. At 21, his next contract will be very team friendly as well.

__________________

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
10-14-2013, 06:41 PM
  #167
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by this providence View Post
I don't see the sense in moving Zucker. He's one of the few shoot first players the Wild have in their entire organization. He's the type of player you wait it out on in their development. At 21, his next contract will be very team friendly as well.
Where does Zucker fit in theWild lineup a couple years from now? He's fast and plays hard, but still has a long, long way to go. I'm not in the Casey Wellman 2.0 camp, but I definitely don't see him becoming a top-six player in the NHL, which is his only realistic shot at success.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:48 PM
  #168
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 20,021
vCash: 370
If the Wild sign Vanek, there's no room for Zucker. Zucker should be traded IF we sign Vanek, and I think we should sign Vanek.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 06:48 PM
  #169
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
Where does Zucker fit in theWild lineup a couple years from now? He's fast and plays hard, but still has a long, long way to go. I'm not in the Casey Wellman 2.0 camp, but I definitely don't see him becoming a top-six player in the NHL, which is his only realistic shot at success.
He's not a complete stranger to playing a 3rd line role, as I believe he did during one or two of his WJC appearances. He hasn't had to a lot, which comes from being one of the better goal scorers on the teams he's been on.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:01 PM
  #170
rynryn
Reluctant Optimist
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 26,461
vCash: 2500
same people okay with this are the same people who would complain hugely when we couldn't get rid of our aging vets in trade. say there is a very dramatic decline...who is going to trade for one of those contracts. how easy do you think it would be to get rid of Heatley if he had another two years on his?

Not saying Vanek isn't going to happen--it could very well be worth it to them for the short term success--but for the long term health it sounds like a bad idea.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:02 PM
  #171
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
He's not a complete stranger to playing a 3rd line role, as I believe he did during one or two of his WJC appearances. He hasn't had to a lot, which comes from being one of the better goal scorers on the teams he's been on.
He is not a third liner in the NHL I think we can make that call right now. What line somebody played on against kids or on the international stage isn't relevant.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:05 PM
  #172
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomthestone View Post
He is not a third liner in the NHL I think we can make that call right now. What line somebody played on against kids or on the international stage isn't relevant.
Seems premature. He's played 23 games. Anyways, I'd like us to re-evaluate what we're looking for in our bottom 6 anyways; more speed and skill and less "toughness" but that's just me.


Last edited by Dr Jan Itor: 10-14-2013 at 07:10 PM.
Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:08 PM
  #173
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rynryn View Post
same people okay with this are the same people who would complain hugely when we couldn't get rid of our aging vets in trade. say there is a very dramatic decline...who is going to trade for one of those contracts. how easy do you think it would be to get rid of Heatley if he had another two years on his?

Not saying Vanek isn't going to happen--it could very well be worth it to them for the short term success--but for the long term health it sounds like a bad idea.
I don't watch him all that much, so I guess the question is how well his skating will hold up in his mid-30's. His hands aren't going to go away, but if his skating falls off the planet, like Heatley, it would be catastrophic. If it doesn't, like Alfredsson, we should be ok. Or maybe he's not a very good skater at the moment anyways; not exactly sure either way.

Dr Jan Itor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:17 PM
  #174
tomthestone*
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Jan Itor View Post
Seems premature. He's played 23 games.
Watched a ton of him at Denver. I see every team in the NHL play. A small guy like Zucker, who tries to focus on the offensive side of the red line and play a game predicated on his wheels is not about to become an effective grinder type.

Zucker fancies himself a scoring-line player, and will try to crack an NHL lineup as such for the next couple years. The Wild should trade him this spring for immediate help instead of hoping he learns to play a defensive game. Small, fast guys like him aren't all that difficult to find.

tomthestone* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-14-2013, 07:27 PM
  #175
Dr Jan Itor
Registered User
 
Dr Jan Itor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: MinneSNOWta
Posts: 16,895
vCash: 500
Why does our 3rd line have to grind? Why not speed and skill?

Dr Jan Itor is online now   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 03:44 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2017 All Rights Reserved.