Dan Wallace: Who Do You Want to See the Wild Target?

I want to see you target no one. Stay just the way you are.

Okposo? If, they can get someone to take on Vanek's contract (it will take an asset or GMs will simply wait for his inevitable buyout and get him on the cheap) it's a done deal, but they'll probably have to do some clever movement before that. As for Dumba/Brodin . . . I don't see how they can keep both of those guys with expansion coming up (see the Ducks-Leafs deal for how confident GMs that expansion is coming).

Where does the ask from the Oilers for a guy like Dumba start? How about Brodin? Scandella?

There are rumors of a Dumba for Stepan swap. How would you feel about that?

The rumor also says that Tuch or your 1st will be included with Dumba...which sounds like a substantial overpayment on your end.

Where does the ask from the Oilers for a guy like Dumba start? How about Brodin? Scandella?
- MaximumBone

I don't think one of the Wild defenseman is enough to get the type of player back from the Oilers that the Wild really need. But I wonder if two defensemen is enough to get Draisaitl out of Edmonton. So, Dumba and Scandella for Draisaitl and one of Edmonton's 2016 3rd rounders?

I'm not a fan of one of those defenseman for Nugent-Hopkins, but I could see it happening.

I wouldn't trade for Stepan personally only because I don't think that trade alone does anything to really improve the team. If other trades go down, that might not be bad, but I do think Dumba will be a solid player in this league.

Also, unless Taylor Hall is the one in discussion, there's not much about Edmonton that intrigues me since we know it won't be McDavid.

There are rumors of a Dumba for Stepan swap. How would you feel about that?

The rumor also says that Tuch or your 1st will be included with Dumba...which sounds like a substantial overpayment on your end.
- rangerdanger94

I don't like it. I've heard some talk of Stepan being available and the Wild being interested. But Stepan is a big ticket for a long time and I'm not sure how he will fare playing predominantly in the West. If that was the only deal the Wild could make, it would hamstring their cap situation even worse over the next few years and deplete their depth.

However, if Fletcher is working multiple deals to move other guys around and free up some cap space, a Stepan deal may be more palatable.

Expose Suter in the exansion draft.

I don't like it. I've heard some talk of Stepan being available and the Wild being interested. But Stepan is a big ticket for a long time and I'm not sure how he will fare playing predominantly in the West. If that was the only deal the Wild could make, it would hamstring their cap situation even worse over the next few years and deplete their depth.

However, if Fletcher is working multiple deals to move other guys around and free up some cap space, a Stepan deal may be more palatable.
- Chinaski

As a Rangers fan, I can tell you that Stepan is without a doubt our most important offensive player. If you do acquire him, you will love him.

He is captain material. He players in EVERY situation: PP, PK, protecting a 1 goal lead in the final minute, trailing by a goal in the final minute. He can match up against the oppositions top offensive player. He shows up in the playoffs.

Out of every player on the team outside of McDonagh, he would hands down be the most difficult player to let go in a trade.

A trade with Edmonton seems most logical. If you are all in, why not just buy out Vanek and take a run at Backes? Then you have some solid depth at center and still have tradeable assets to further improve on forward.

Wild trade Coyle, Dumba and their 2016 1st round pick for Malkin

I for one hope the Wild dont sign Okposo. They need to get away from signing guys who are at the tail end of their prime to long expensive contracts, i.e. Pominville. As for a trade partner either Edmonton, Florida or the Islanders make the most sense to me. They all have good center depth and are in need of more D. I think the Wild will target RNH, Bjugstad and Nelson. Whether they can pry any of them away is another question?

If you sign Dumba, Zucker, and Kuemper there is no money. Kuempler and Prosser have to go to add inexpensive, young forwards. Vanek's contract keeps you from doing more this year. The cost of dumping him would be prohibitive (plus the no movement clause).

I don't know about other Oiler fans or Chiarelli, but I'd certainly entertain the idea of taking on the at least part of the last year of Vanek's contract if it meant getting Dumba and another smaller piece (varying based on how much of his $6.5mil we take back).

Wild trade Coyle, Dumba and their 2016 1st round pick for Malkin
- Tweaterben

The Wild couldn't make that swap based on cap alone.

Okposo? If, they can get someone to take on Vanek's contract (it will take an asset or GMs will simply wait for his inevitable buyout and get him on the cheap) it's a done deal, but they'll probably have to do some clever movement before that. As for Dumba/Brodin . . . I don't see how they can keep both of those guys with expansion coming up (see the Ducks-Leafs deal for how confident GMs that expansion is coming).
- foghornleghorn

Nobody is taking Vanek. He's been regressing for the past 3 - 4 seasons. He'll be bought out.

A trade with Edmonton seems most logical. If you are all in, why not just buy out Vanek and take a run at Backes? Then you have some solid depth at center and still have tradeable assets to further improve on forward.
- MacPatty

Backes wouldn't be a bad sign, but I think the problem is he's going to want term and Backes beyond 2 to 3 years will be another Vanek type over paid player.

If you sign Dumba, Zucker, and Kuemper there is no money. Kuempler and Prosser have to go to add inexpensive, young forwards. Vanek's contract keeps you from doing more this year. The cost of dumping him would be prohibitive (plus the no movement clause).
- the_voice

Although I'm not against dumping Prosser, he's one of the cheapest players on the current roster. Kuemper will need to be moved because Fletch isn't going to pay him. Buying out Vanek will only help increase cap space not prohibit it. Plus I'm pretty sure a no move clause has no bearing whatsoever on a buy out.

The Blues offered Backes a 3-year/$5 mil contract over the summer which he turned down. Word on the street is he's looking for 6-year/$6 mil. He already put his house up for sale, which is probably a sure sign that the Blues aren't playing games. As great as he finally was in this season's playoffs, it would be asinine for the Blues to entertain that kind of contract. See ya, Backes.

The Blues offered Backes a 3-year/$5 mil contract over the summer which he turned down. Word on the street is he's looking for 6-year/$6 mil. He already put his house up for sale, which is probably a sure sign that the Blues aren't playing games. As great as he finally was in this season's playoffs, it would be asinine for the Blues to entertain that kind of contract. See ya, Backes.
- RobShouts

It would be for any team.

It would be for any team.
- Chinaski

He could potentially end up on a team trying to reach the cap floor. Carolina? Arizona? Unless a contender dumps some salary, Backes might be a basement dweller for the rest of his career, which is sad because he finally proved he can be a difference maker in the playoffs.

He could potentially end up on a team trying to reach the cap floor. Carolina? Arizona? Unless a contender dumps some salary, Backes might be a basement dweller for the rest of his career, which is sad because he finally proved he can be a difference maker in the playoffs.
- RobShouts

Yes, but I don't think those teams will need to do that for six years. With all the bad contracts out there it seems better to keep as much cap space available as you can. You may be able to trade for a bad contract and also get a good prospect/player or high pick out of it.

Backes may be one of those guys that lowers some of his demands if he doesn't get a big deal on July 1. I could see teams being wary of signing him with too much term. Then maybe he will be forced into a three year deal in the $5-6 million range. But that could open up a lot more teams that would be interested in signing him.

The Blues offered Backes a 3-year/$5 mil contract over the summer which he turned down. Word on the street is he's looking for 6-year/$6 mil. He already put his house up for sale, which is probably a sure sign that the Blues aren't playing games. As great as he finally was in this season's playoffs, it would be asinine for the Blues to entertain that kind of contract. See ya, Backes.
- RobShouts

Actually he took his house off the market. Blues supposedly offered 5.5m. Backes wants similar to what Kesler got, 6 years x 6.875m. He isn't worth that. But he might be able to get it from somewhere like Toronto if they strike out on Stamkos. Doubtful a team like MN can afford to sign him for more than Blues would be willing to, in which case it's likely he stays in St. Louis.

with how fast the league is right now i wouldn't touch backes with a ten foot pole!!! we already have a big slow center koivu we don't need another