It’s really only for a few years the other years it’s minimal most teams carry some sort of dead cap space. They didn’t want to lose youth with expiring contracts. They biting the bullet. Not ideal by any means but propably smart move in the end
- Stayin alive

Imo, there is a crippling absence of risk-taking in hockey. Its like football in the 90s, when every team would punt at 4-and-1, even inside the opponent's 40 yard line, even though stats suggested conversion chances were high.

Now the %s have shifted dramatically, because analytics have caught up with strategy.

But they gained very little. Keeping Dumba is a plus for sure. They removed the players but are basically saving nothing over the next three years. They did not even ask them to waive the NMC's.

That is bad management in my book. Other than keeping Dumba they did basically nothing with these two moves. I get it's a flashy move but offers very little in terms of relief.
- mickel25

My take is that they have written off the next 3 years. Of course they will never come out and say that. Its bad for ticket sales. This move was, on the face of it and based on Guerin's statements, squarely made for a horizon beyond that.

Now look beyond that 3 years:

1. The dead cap hit will remove both ability and pressure to be in the competitive death spiral they were mired in. They can't be competitive being forced to be much closer to floor than cap.

2. They are absent two pretty good player contributions.

Above 2 means: high draft picks.

3. Also, during the rebuild, as guys like Kaprisov, Rossi etc come into their own, there will be no ancient former superstars clogging up the culture. I think the hiring of Evason last year, a guy with a long track record working with young players, reflects that as well.

Will it work? Gee I dunno. But I like what I think they did a lot. Its nice to see a franchise having the balls to risk competitiveness for higher aspirations.

But they gained very little. Keeping Dumba is a plus for sure. They removed the players but are basically saving nothing over the next three years. They did not even ask them to waive the NMC's.

That is bad management in my book. Other than keeping Dumba they did basically nothing with these two moves. I get it's a flashy move but offers very little in terms of relief.
- mickel25

I don't think they/he needed to ask them to waive them...there was not going to be a team that was taking on those contracts, esp before the ED. No team was going to lock in to those contracts and then be stuck with a NMC...because the player can ask to have the NMC retained even if they waive it for the trade (at least that is how I understand it.) Waiving it can be conditional.

I don't think they had a ton of options, so he made the call to cut bait now. It is a gutsy call...only time will tell if they can manage it. Hell if you look at some of our contracts, you could say we are carrying 14M in dead cap too.

Can someone explain why Suter and Parise were bought out? The cap implications are insane.
- ClaudeFather

I've seen some rumors recently about them both being pretty difficult to deal with. With their contract length and NMCs, they knew they would outlast all their coaches. Apparently some questionable behavior from both of them over the years.

Suter hung up on Guerin when he informed him of the BO, lol.

My take is that they have written off the next 3 years. Of course they will never come out and say that. Its bad for ticket sales. This move was, on the face of it and based on Guerin's statements, squarely made for a horizon beyond that.

Now look beyond that 3 years:

1. The dead cap hit will remove both ability and pressure to be in the competitive death spiral they were mired in. They can't be competitive being forced to be much closer to floor than cap.

2. They are absent two pretty good player contributions.

Above 2 means: high draft picks.

3. Also, during the rebuild, as guys like Kaprisov, Rossi etc come into their own, there will be no ancient former superstars clogging up the culture. I think the hiring of Evason last year, a guy with a long track record working with young players, reflects that as well.

Will it work? Gee I dunno. But I like what I think they did a lot. Its nice to see a franchise having the balls to risk competitiveness for higher aspirations.
- PT21

My real issue with it is Guerin did not even address waiving the NMC's. Perhaps he had other options he did not explore? We will see what happens.

I don't think they/he needed to ask them to waive them...there was not going to be a team that was taking on those contracts, esp before the ED. No team was going to lock in to those contracts and then be stuck with a NMC...because the player can ask to have the NMC retained even if they waive it for the trade (at least that is how I understand it.) Waiving it can be conditional.

I don't think they had a ton of options, so he made the call to cut bait now. It is a gutsy call...only time will tell if they can manage it. Hell if you look at some of our contracts, you could say we are carrying 14M in dead cap too.
- JW98FlyerFan

They could have waived for the ED and opened the protection spots. Doesn't matter if the Kraken would have been interested or not. Either could have retired over the next four years as well. Then you would not have them on the cap for 8 years.

We will see if the moves bring added success.

My real issue with it is Guerin did not even address waiving the NMC's. Perhaps he had other options he did not explore? We will see what happens.
- mickel25

That is precisely part of what makes me suspicious.

I dunno much about Guerin, but I get the impression he is a smart guy. I am just speculatively connecting a whole lotta dots.

Alex tuch sucks as it’s been implied to me 🤷‍♂️
- Stayin alive

Yeah not wanting to trade Coots for Tuch a late pick and poop prospect means Tuch sucks. LOL delusional

What you are describing is a status quo logic. The kind that essentially maintains competitiveness and regular season standings. Guerin is aiming higher, and I personally applaud him for it.
- PT21

Aiming higher? They planning on a full rebuild? Because if not, having $13-15M less to spend on players for the next little while is really gonna put a dent in their ability to compete with their rivals.

Aiming higher? They planning on a full rebuild? Because if not, having $13-15M less to spend on players for the next little while is really gonna put a dent in their ability to compete with their rivals.
- Tomahawk

1.Yes.
2.Yes. Very sneakily and nicely done imo.
3.Yes. That's precisely the point, or at least, the way I see it.

They could have waived for the ED and opened the protection spots. Doesn't matter if the Kraken would have been interested or not. Either could have retired over the next four years as well. Then you would not have them on the cap for 8 years.

We will see if the moves bring added success.
- mickel25

I am sure we don't have the whole story...It could go like this...Bill talks to agents about waiving...Agents says get bent...Bill waives them...Therefore Bill never talked to "them"...

Honestly I couldn't stand either player when they both went to Minn. I felt like they were going home to play pond hockey...Neither guy wanted a challenge, they wanted comfort for them and their family...and it was their right to do that as FAs...It was Bill's right to cut them both...that is just my take on it. I think from the other reports of them not being good for the culture there backs my theory up.

1.Yes.
2.Yes. Very sneakily and nicely done imo.
3.Yes. That's precisely the point, or at least, the way I see it.
- PT21

The pain doesn't end until 25/26. What are the chances that Guerin will even still be the GM by then?

Suter would be a great short term addition to this team, but I think there will be a bidding war for his services. But perhaps the Fletcher/Minny Soda connection helps in that aspect.

The pain doesn't end until 25/26. What are the chances that Guerin will even still be the GM by then?
- Tomahawk

You would think he has the backing of ownership after making such a bold move. Perhaps he does not.

The pain doesn't end until 25/26. What are the chances that Guerin will even still be the GM by then?
- Tomahawk

24/25 really. After that, the cap hit will be more than absorbed by rise in salary cap.

Chances Guerin will be around after that? Oh I would personally say, 98-99%. No GM makes a huge move like that w/o ownership's full blessing. In today's age, ownership would be fully involved about ramifications, which likely means a string of very poor seasons coming up.

You only get fired for the unexpected bad, not the expected bad. Guerin's been given a carte blanche the way I see it.

You would think he has the backing of ownership after making such a bold move. Perhaps he does not.
- mickel25

We're talking the same owner that signed off on those two contracts in the first place. The same owner who fired the last GM after only one season.

Can someone explain why Suter and Parise were bought out? The cap implications are insane.
- ClaudeFather

One reason might be covid. Some teams have an internal budget. If the GM has been told not to go over a certain amount for the next few years ( let’s say 65 million)to make up for the lost revenue ….because the team lost a poop load of money in the last 1 1/2 years then it makes a little more sense to get some cost savings. If they weren’t going to go that high anyways then there is some cost savings in “real” dollars.

We're talking the same owner that signed off on those two contracts in the first place. The same owner who fired the last GM after only one season.
- Tomahawk

That is a valid point

Yeah not wanting to trade Coots for Tuch a late pick and poop prospect means Tuch sucks. LOL delusional
- Richieattack18

First off I said a TOP D PROSPECT. How does that translate to a poop prospect? York is a TOP D PROSPECT if we traded him in a package would the other team consider him a poop prospect? COMPREHEND?

I've been listening to Zak Kindrachuk's "My Dad Used to Play Hockey" podcast all afternoon. I highly recommend it; especially for any of you who were around during the cup years.
- Dkos

I was not but I think the history is interesting, and Zak is easy to listen to and the interviews are fascinating.

Today, there is also a new Snow the Goalie podcast episode with an 30 minute interview of Chuck Fletcher that took place following his media availability. Plus Nasty Knuckles has a great interview of Sam Morin. I love that guy’s personality. Lastly, Bill Meltzer was interviewed on The Press Zone so I will be giving that a listen.

I've seen some rumors recently about them both being pretty difficult to deal with. With their contract length and NMCs, they knew they would outlast all their coaches. Apparently some questionable behavior from both of them over the years.

Suter hung up on Guerin when he informed him of the BO, lol.
- Tomahawk

FWIW, here's an article that details some of those rumors:

https://www.startribune.c...yan-suter-gone/600077722/

First off I said a TOP D PROSPECT. How does that translate to a poop prospect? York is a TOP D PROSPECT if we traded him in a package would the other team consider him a poop prospect? COMPREHEND?
- Stayin alive

Also it’s not a late pick. You act like it’s some random 7th round pick. ITS STILL A FIRST ROUND PICK EVEN IF TOWARD END OF ROUND 1. ABSOLUTELY ZERO REASON TO ACT LIKE THATS GOT ZERO VALUE OR SOME THOWAWAY.

you keep saying trade coots for 3 garbage lesser pieces.

Who’s delusional?

I get it. You invested in coots Jersey. You might even had him sign it. Your emotionally and financially invested in the player. But you are the delusional one.

A simple I wouldn’t make that trade makes your point. You’re entitled to your opinion but saying it’s an awful trade proposal and everyone laughing in my face shows how much you’re a homer

One reason might be covid. Some teams have an internal budget. If the GM has been told not to go over a certain amount for the next few years ( let’s say 65 million)to make up for the lost revenue ….because the team lost a poop load of money in the last 1 1/2 years then it makes a little more sense to get some cost savings. If they weren’t going to go that high anyways then there is some cost savings in “real” dollars.
- landros 2

This is an interesting take. But one point against this is that actual salary for each of Suter and Parise for the next 4 years were 2.5m a year. The vast majority of the contract had been paid out.

This is an interesting take. But one point against this is that actual salary for each of Suter and Parise for the next 4 years were 2.5m a year. The vast majority of the contract had been paid out.
- PT21

But if they weren’t going to the cap # anyways…..then those #s really don’t matter. There are some teams that won’t be cap teams for a few years after the losses sustained….if the article is posted a few posts back is true then it has more to do with changing their “toxic” core.

I've seen some rumors recently about them both being pretty difficult to deal with. With their contract length and NMCs, they knew they would outlast all their coaches. Apparently some questionable behavior from both of them over the years.

Suter hung up on Guerin when he informed him of the BO, lol.
- Tomahawk

This wasn’t about protecting Dumba and a forward. This was about organizational conflict.

Parise was taken off the power play, sitting in the press box, and playing on the 4th line when playing. He expressed his displeasure.

Suter was the Wild’s 4th best D man this year. Suter still has value and skill but is definitely in decline. Going forward, Suter was going to end up being a 3rd pair D man further exposing his deficiencies by playing with someone not named Spurgeon Guerin likely concluded that like Parise, Suter would be unhappy with a reduced role. This was likely a move to avert a potentially poisonous room with 2 disgruntled vets.