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

A season in review...

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-13-2011, 02:09 PM
  #76
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
On the other side, let's say we sign Burns to a 5-year deal worth $6.5m per and he puts in 15g and 40pts but continues to play horrible defense and is a -15 to -20. Is that worth it?

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 02:21 PM
  #77
Generic User
Moderator
Generic Moderator
 
Generic User's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Country: United States
Posts: 7,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
On the other side, let's say we sign Burns to a 5-year deal worth $6.5m per and he puts in 15g and 40pts but continues to play horrible defense and is a -15 to -20. Is that worth it?
Not at 6.5 per... Consistency nets you $6+ million long term contracts. Might be naive of me, but I'd like to see Fletcher offer him $9-9.5 over two years. Burns probably wouldn't agree of course, but like Latendresse, that contract is short, is fair and opens the door for a big payday if he consistently steps up his game over two seasons.

Generic User is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 02:22 PM
  #78
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,897
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
On the other side, let's say we sign Burns to a 5-year deal worth $6.5m per and he puts in 15g and 40pts but continues to play horrible defense and is a -15 to -20. Is that worth it?
Its a huge gamble, but who are we going to find a year down the line? Zid will be gone (probably) as well. I'd do it. Who knows what sort of coach we're getting...it could make all the difference in the world in covering up for the mistakes that made him a -15.

I think his stint on Team Canada coming up might alter his price one way or the other; at least it will show what he can do if the team in front of him is more capable.

edit: in short, i think he's looking for his big contract now, and thinking TC will pump his value up after it took a hit with a crap team.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 03:05 PM
  #79
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
That's why, if I were Fletch, I'd offer him a 1-year extension to try and prove himself (a la Semin), otherwise shop him if he balks.

You can't sign someone to a HUGE contract based off "what ifs", it has to be based off production. His actual offensive numbers are great, and his actual defensive play is not.

On the bright side, he was one of the best defensemen under Hitchcock at Worlds last year, and he was really solid under Lemaire and when Wilson had more impact. So I would believe that he could be better under a defensive coach. But I'd want to see that before opening up the wallet.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 03:31 PM
  #80
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,897
vCash: 50
as would i. Another bonus to that it would ensure the player "stays hungry". Nothing motivates better than knowing a lack of focus could cost you $1m or more per year the next contract.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 03:33 PM
  #81
J22
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 2,505
vCash: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
That's why, if I were Fletch, I'd offer him a 1-year extension to try and prove himself (a la Semin), otherwise shop him if he balks.

You can't sign someone to a HUGE contract based off "what ifs", it has to be based off production. His actual offensive numbers are great, and his actual defensive play is not.

On the bright side, he was one of the best defensemen under Hitchcock at Worlds last year, and he was really solid under Lemaire and when Wilson had more impact. So I would believe that he could be better under a defensive coach. But I'd want to see that before opening up the wallet.
The only way Burns would ever sign a 1 year deal is if he starts next year without an extension and then gets hurt or has a down year. If the Wild only offer him 1 year this summer, he will just play out his contract and go to UFA.

J22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 04:22 PM
  #82
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
I don't think he'll sign for less than $5m. I think he wants north of $6m on a long term deal. That's my gut.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 05:38 PM
  #83
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,897
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
I don't think he'll sign for less than $5m. I think he wants north of $6m on a long term deal. That's my gut.
that's also the assumption i'm operating off of.
This Team Canada stint could alter his expectations a little, though. I suppose we can pray for a bad go of it...

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-13-2011, 09:39 PM
  #84
Dampland
Registered User
 
Dampland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: town
Country: United States
Posts: 2,448
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timothy Freitag View Post
On many of the plays where Burns dives, most players in the NHL wouldn't have the wheels to get into even a desperation position. I think people are piling on Burns right now because they need a scape goat. The whole team played horribly in the last month of the season.


I am not looking for a scape goat. But right now BURNS has the greatest abilty of ANYONE on the WILD team to either help them (by signing to 3-4 year contract at 3.5 per year, or by being traded for a decent return.)

or he can hurt the WILD more than anyone, by demanding big money that he is not worth, thus maxing out the Wild's salary cap and thus preventing the WILD from bringing in the forward scoring, they so desperately need.


I really am amazed how people get all hung up on Burn's ROUGHLY 15 goals a year he scored ...... in the grand scheme, too much value is being put on this stat. Remember he was still a -10 for the year ..... And for the supposed best D-man on the team, that is horrible! Only one other D-man was that bad, and that was everyone's favorite - CAM BARKER.

So I say again .... why would the WILD pay 5+ million a year for a player that is -10 with only 17 goals, and is supposed to be your topline player?

I just don't see anything to justify paying him that. We already have too many overloaded contracts.

Dampland is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 08:32 AM
  #85
nickschultzfan
Registered User
 
nickschultzfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 6,464
vCash: 500
Offer him Havlat's contract. 30 million, 6 years.

If he wants more, look to trade him.

nickschultzfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:13 AM
  #86
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
+/- is a wacky stat in and of itself, and when you're playing against the top line on a team that can't score, it's always going to be bad.

Let's look at the Wild's Corsi numbers for this year (shots taken for less shots taken against):

Burns - 9.5
Spurgeon - 6.4
Schultz - 5.5
Scandella - 1.4
Barker - (3.7)
Zidlicky - (3.8)
Falk - (6.4)
Stoner - (6.7)
Zanon - (12.2)

This number would measure how effective that player is at breaking the puck out and keeping the puck in the offensive zone rather than in the defensive zone and getting pummeled by shots. I'm actually fairly surprised Burns is that high, as is Spurgeon. These are 5-on-5 numbers by the way. You can see the defensive minded guys are lower on the list, and just how awful Zanon is in that regard. Surprised about Stoner though, but maybe not since he was with Zanon for much of the year and neither is much of a puck mover.

So maybe I'm being too hard on Burns, or maybe his numbers before the ASG were way higher than the final numbers.

On the flip side, look at Goals against per 60 minutes:

Scandella - 4.37
Burns - 2.85
Falk - 2.83
Schultz - 2.57
Zidlicky - 2.53
Barker - 2.44
Zanon - 2.15
Spurgeon - 1.92
Stoner - 1.67

Smaller sample size aside, Scandy looks like he might not be ready for prime time yet. Burns is leading the regulars. Zanon and Stoner are actually very good in this regard, and so is Spurgeon, surprisingly.

Spurgeon by the way is excellent at breaking out the puck and keeping offensive zone pressure as well as preventing goals. That's why he was in the lineup every night.

Finally, let's look at quality of competition:

Schultz - .011
Burns - .003
Zanon - (.008)
Stoner - (.020)
Zidlicky - (.024)
Scandella - (.036)
Spurgeon - (.043)
Barker - (.064)
Falk - (.090)

Okay these numbers I'm less familiar with, but basically, Schultz and Burns are out against the top guys, Zanon and Stoner against a mix, and as it goes down the list, those players are being "hidden" or "protected" against the better players.

The higher up on that list you are, the harder the competition, and you should take that into account when looking at both the Corsi and the GA/60 numbers. So Spurgeon's great numbers are a little less impressive if he's been playing against 3rd/4th liners. While Schultz and Burns are more impressive since they've been doing it against the top players.

What I can take from this so far is that:
- Burns is probably better at applying pressure and breakouts than I give him credit for
- Burns is still on the ice for a LOT of goals against, even if he's against the top lines
- Schultz's numbers are close as he's been paired up with Burns
- Spurgeon has great numbers, though he isn't playing against top lines
- Zanon and Stoner are somewhat similar players but should be split up IMO
- Zidlicky had an unimpressive year
- Falk and Barker are not that good at all
- Scandella is not ready for a full time NHL gig

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:21 AM
  #87
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
 
Beukeboom Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 12,137
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thespeckledkiwi View Post
The problem is, is the word competent player. As shown in his interview, Fletcher is looking for a younger, faster, more offensive team. But then sign guys like Cullen to a long term contract, Zidlicky to a long term contract, and then Nystrom as well? I mean he's the master of double speak.

I'm not saying it's all Fletcher's fault, but Fletcher came in to get us to the playoffs and he hasn't delivered.

This is from an outsider - but I think those deals point to the lack of depth within the organization. If the Wild draft well from 2004-2008 - there's a bunch of young talent that is developing through the organization and pushing for icetime over the last couple of years. When that's not happening - GM's have to go sign guys as UFA's, or throw some young guy who is not ready into a role he can't handle. Then factor in that most UFA deals end up being poor value/contract $'s, and that path rarely works out well for teams.

I also don't see how Cullen or Zidlicky are examples of not trying to build a fast more offensively capable team.

Beukeboom Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:32 AM
  #88
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,897
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dampland View Post
I am not looking for a scape goat. But right now BURNS has the greatest abilty of ANYONE on the WILD team to either help them (by signing to 3-4 year contract at 3.5 per year, or by being traded for a decent return.)

or he can hurt the WILD more than anyone, by demanding big money that he is not worth, thus maxing out the Wild's salary cap and thus preventing the WILD from bringing in the forward scoring, they so desperately need.


I really am amazed how people get all hung up on Burn's ROUGHLY 15 goals a year he scored ...... in the grand scheme, too much value is being put on this stat. Remember he was still a -10 for the year ..... And for the supposed best D-man on the team, that is horrible! Only one other D-man was that bad, and that was everyone's favorite - CAM BARKER.

So I say again .... why would the WILD pay 5+ million a year for a player that is -10 with only 17 goals, and is supposed to be your topline player?

I just don't see anything to justify paying him that. We already have too many overloaded contracts.
i was trying to illustrate something with that Kovalchuk talk. that dude is -101 in his career. -26 this year under lemaire. You still give him ice because the chance that he creates a goal (or scores one himself) outweighs the risk of him messing up.
Burns also led the team in TOI/Game by quite a bit. over three minutes, i think. Why is that? Because we would probably have done a lot worse if those minutes were taken up by anyone else on the blue line. Which according to some would rely on no new arrivals but instead one of our call ups to fill the hole. In order for that to be even thinkable you'd have to count on Falk too look like the guy out of camp, Stoner to stay consistently solid the entire year, Zid to go back to looking like pre-injury Zid, and Barker to actually find some offense. You want a 20 goal scorer (+ stuff that won't matter until down the line--picks prospects) with potential for him? What would you do with the theoretical money you'd save? Guessing the 20 goal scorer is going to cost you around what burns makes now, so that extra $3 million is going to get you whom? That kind of player has to be out there. Adding this unnamed 20 goal scorer + resigning Mittens or Brunette isn't going to make up for Burns departure.


edit: those stats are nuts! lol i'm glad someone has the energy to research this stuff.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:41 AM
  #89
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
I also don't see how Cullen or Zidlicky are examples of not trying to build a fast more offensively capable team.
TSK's half a really knowledgeable fan and half troll, so it's hard to have a conversation. Cullen is fast (but has no skills) and Zidlicky's a pretty good puck mover. I'm guessing he was referring to their contracts instead of their skills.

And I think with the Burns trade, it wouldn't be for a 20 goal guy, it'd be for a 30+ goal guy. And we're not going to spend $5-6m on a 20 goal scorer in free agency, that's just dumb.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:47 AM
  #90
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
blah blah blah stats...
Quote humor aside, that's a great post Jarick.

What it tells me is that Rick Wilson is smart enough to recognize what he has in the D and to send the right pairs out there at the right time.

It wasn't really until March when FHCTR started micro-managing again that those pairings and match-ups got wonked. I seem to recall the night in San Jose where Spurgeon was out against Heatley and I sat there scratching my head like WTF. The next camera shot against the net had FHCTR over at the D with Rick Wilson sort of standing back.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 10:40 AM
  #91
Jarick
Doing Nothing
 
Jarick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: St Paul, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 25,010
vCash: 500
Bozak, where did you get that he started micro managing things again?


I just wanted to look at 2009-10 to see the difference without Rick Wilson.

All stats from BehindTheNet.ca.

Corsi:

Burns - 3.9
Zidlicky - 1.4
Hnidy - (1.2)
Barker - (2.1)
Stoner - (2.2)
Zanon - (3.1)
Schultz - (6.0)
Sifers - (7.3)

Burns and Zidlicky predictably led the way, as both did a good job moving the puck last year. Look at the difference in Schultz's and Zanon's numbers compared to 2010-11...we weren't imaging how they flip-flopped.

Goals Against per 60:

Sifers - 2.92
Zidlicky - 2.77
Burns - 2.73
Zanon - 2.51
Schultz - 2.49
Hnidy - 2.32
Stoner - 2.31
Barker - 2.28

Fairly close, which makes me wonder if Richards/Ramsey did much line matching or if there was much of any rhyme or reason to the defensive strategy?

Quality of Competition:

Zanon - .038
Zidlicky - .031
Schultz - .000
Sifers - (.032)
Burns - (.051)
Barker - (.057)
Stoner - (.058)
Hnidy - (.078)

Look at that difference...Zanon-Zidlicky were by far our top matchup line. Look at Burns being stuffed down the lineup a bit. Predictably, Stoner and Hnidy were hidden in terms of matchups.

Jarick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 10:55 AM
  #92
bozak911
Ignoring Idiots
 
bozak911's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
Bozak, where did you get that he started micro managing things again?
It is mostly about pattern matching.

But to answer your question;
1. Comments made by Richards himself.
2. Comments made by Russo.
3. Observations of actions/body language behind the bench both at games and on television.

#3 is probably the hardest to quantify without getting into silly psychology tricks or explanations.

bozak911 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 07:04 PM
  #93
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 16,286
vCash: 500
I'm not in favor of trading Burns. He brings skill to the backend that will take a long time to find again. Zidlicky is the guy I'd look to move if possible.

Burns is still young and reaching his prime. Trading him from the backend may help fill a hole on the front, but then you are left with another gigantic hole back there. Not a fan of that type of move.

Trade from strength not from weakness. Zanon, Schultz, Zidlicky, Barker... any of them could be moved with much less of a cost overall than would be Burns.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 07:11 PM
  #94
Casper
30 goal grinder
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
I'm not in favor of trading Burns. He brings skill to the backend that will take a long time to find again. Zidlicky is the guy I'd look to move if possible.

Burns is still young and reaching his prime. Trading him from the backend may help fill a hole on the front, but then you are left with another gigantic hole back there. Not a fan of that type of move.

Trade from strength not from weakness. Zanon, Schultz, Zidlicky, Barker... any of them could be moved with much less of a cost overall than would be Burns.
While I agree with your post the contract Burns is asking for and the offers we receive for him are significant factors as to whether or not we should resign him. Cf needs to do his research, listen to offers, and get the best price he can for him. His contract needs to reflect his inconsistency imo. If Burns isn't capable of accepting that then he needs to be moved.

Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 07:18 PM
  #95
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 16,286
vCash: 500
At this point we have no idea what Burns is going to be asking for... so until I hear he's asking for North of $6mil... I'm in favor of re-signing him.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 07:22 PM
  #96
Casper
30 goal grinder
 
Casper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MN
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaLoN View Post
At this point we have no idea what Burns is going to be asking for... so until I hear he's asking for North of $6mil... I'm in favor of re-signing him.
Fair enough. I have no issues with re-signing him at 5 or 5.5. I just want to make sure that CF and the wild are taking a look at all their options.

The only thing for certain is that a mistake with Burns will cost this franchise dearly for a loooong time.

Casper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 07:24 PM
  #97
TaLoN
All Hail the FBJ!
 
TaLoN's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Farmington, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 16,286
vCash: 500
I see no reason why he couldn't be had for $5... $5.5 at the most.

TaLoN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 08:11 PM
  #98
The Blue Llama
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Minnesota
Country: United States
Posts: 95
vCash: 500
And who woulda thunk it that Koivu would get 6.7...

The Blue Llama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 09:26 PM
  #99
State of Hockey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 11,373
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beukeboom Fan View Post
I also don't see how Cullen or Zidlicky are examples of not trying to build a fast more offensively capable team.
I think TSK was pointing at the age factor. They're both fast, and they do bring some offense, but they're both aging and not getting any better.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jarick View Post
TSK's half a really knowledgeable fan and half troll, so it's hard to have a conversation.
Jarick, please research what trolling is and isn't. I've read posts from TSK, and commonly disagreed with them, for many years, and I've never seen him troll.

State of Hockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-14-2011, 10:09 PM
  #100
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 23,897
vCash: 50
without calling anyone a troll...trolling is posting comments for the specific purpose of upsetting people. A good (well, proficient) troll will make it less obvious what he is doing, but...yeah. I'm not so sure you're on the right end of this particular point, SoH.

rynryn 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 07:37 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.