Tony Dean: MNWild Summer Hockey Blackhole in Full Effect WildHBcommunity: MNWild Summer Hockey Blackhole in Full Effect




Follow Me on Twitter @TonyDeanHB


Follow WildHBcommunity on Twitter @WildHBcommunity


Also Like the WildHBcommunity of FaceBook here: WildHBCommunity on FaceBook

I wonder if the Robin Lehner deal (3 years, $6.675 million) will help set the market for Kuemper. They are about the same age and I think they have similar numbers, but Lehner has more games played.

I wonder if the Robin Lehner deal (3 years, $6.675 million) will help set the market for Kuemper. They are about the same age and I think they have similar numbers, but Lehner has more games played.
- Chinaski

Yeah, I'm not sure. $3 million per seems way to high for Kuemps at this point. Harding is only making $1.9. I'd say Darcy has a lot more to prove before he even gets' the kind of money Josh is making.

I think Kuemper's agent is pushing it to think Darcy has done enough to earn a 3-4 yr deal for more than $2.5MIl per.

I think Kuemper's agent is pushing it to think Darcy has done enough to earn a 3-4 yr deal for more than $2.5MIl per.
- Tony Dean

Agreed. As of right now, healthy or otherwise Harding is STILL the best tender the Wild have and he fought tooth and nail for a lot of years to get that starting job and settled for a lower salary in order to stay in Minnie.

Granted Darcy does seem to have a lot of potential, but you can't hand guys 3 and 4 year deals worth upwards of $10 million based solely on potential.

If anything I should think a modest bridge deal should be acceptable for Kuemps and his agent. I'd be okay with a 2 year $3-4 million "show me" contract. I think that's as high as Fletch should go though.

It sort of appears that both sides are playing a little poker here...I like Fletch's approach of standing pat on this one. To Gumps point...It seems like a good move to give him the 'prove it' deal if Darcy will settle for that(?) I wonder if it was a big surprise to Fletch that he didn't opt for arbitration? Smart move by Darcy if you ask me. I don't think that Darcy would stand up to the $2M+/yr category based on his limited stats...He probably would have settled for much less that he will likely end up getting when this is done (although, with the salaries being given this off season...who knows???).

It will interesting to see how this plays out.

Agreed. As of right now, healthy or otherwise Harding is STILL the best tender the Wild have and he fought tooth and nail for a lot of years to get that starting job and settled for a lower salary in order to stay in Minnie.

Granted Darcy does seem to have a lot of potential, but you can't hand guys 3 and 4 year deals worth upwards of $10 million based solely on potential.

If anything I should think a modest bridge deal should be acceptable for Kuemps and his agent. I'd be okay with a 2 year $3-4 million "show me" contract. I think that's as high as Fletch should go though.
- MnGump

I agree that Harding is this teams best goalie. Undoubtedly he will be out sometime this year and for how long we don't know. I am pretty sure I read somewhere that he does have to change medications at least once a year, not sure if that is true or not, but after he did that last year he was out indefinitely, we will have to wait and see.

As for Kuemps I think Fletch is pushing a 2 year deal 3 at max for a bridge deal I personally wouldn't go higher than 3 years. I like his potential and maybe down the road a ways he could be this teams solid #1.

Seems like Kuemper and his agent are both "difficult" to deal with. The guy hasn't even broken the 50 games mark and is looking for a huge raise. Don't get me wrong, he was a huge reason the team made it to the playoffs and is badly needed given the other 2 question marks in goal, but he hasn't proven a damn thing yet. Anything other than a bridge deal could be a costly mistake.

Seems like Kuemper and his agent are both "difficult" to deal with. The guy hasn't even broken the 50 games mark and is looking for a huge raise. Don't get me wrong, he was a huge reason the team made it to the playoffs and is badly needed given the other 2 question marks in goal, but he hasn't proven a damn thing yet. Anything other than a bridge deal could be a costly mistake.
- SotaPopinski

Would be... a costly mistake. Fletcher would be setting a dangerous precedent, making the Wild look desperate as well as giving a relatively unproven goalie more years and money than qualified and proven veterans like Backstrom and Harding.

He's a 6th round pick for crying out loud. Potential or not he can prove himself before he gets the big long term payday.

I think Kuemper's agent is pushing it to think Darcy has done enough to earn a 3-4 yr deal for more than $2.5MIl per.
- Tony Dean

What, seriously? I stopped my buddy on two breakaway shots last winter with my ballsack. Could I get 2.5 million a year as well?? (It was just a tennis ball, but that shat hurt!)

Not that I'd like to see this happen...but if he wants more than Fletcher wants to pay... How do we feel about severing ties and picking up a FA goalie for this season to play the role of 'safety net' in the event that we have injury troubles again? Sub-optimal to say the least, but I would say it's also impracticable to throw big numbers at Darcy at the risk of not being able to keep somebody who has already played a 'prove it' year or two and deserves those dollars.

Last year really was an anomaly with regards to the injury situation at goalie. There is a chance (albeit unlikely) that Darcy could only play a handful of games this season if Backs and Harding stay healthy. He really could end up being the number 3 goalie all year.

I like him, and think we need to keep him, but at what cost? Either way, we may very well need to work a trade for a goalie this season or during free agency (depending on what happens with Josh and Backs this year).

Not that I'd like to see this happen...but if he wants more than Fletcher wants to pay... How do we feel about severing ties and picking up a FA goalie for this season to play the role of 'safety net' in the event that we have injury troubles again? Sub-optimal to say the least, but I would say it's also impracticable to throw big numbers at Darcy at the risk of not being able to keep somebody who has already played a 'prove it' year or two and deserves those dollars.

Last year really was an anomaly with regards to the injury situation at goalie. There is a chance (albeit unlikely) that Darcy could only play a handful of games this season if Backs and Harding stay healthy. He really could end up being the number 3 goalie all year.

I like him, and think we need to keep him, but at what cost? Either way, we may very well need to work a trade for a goalie this season or during free agency (depending on what happens with Josh and Backs this year).
- mngopherguy

While last year was an anomaly, we still have a goalie with MS and another who has a history of injuries and is another year older. Not to mention the lack of goalie depth in the system. Cutting ties with Kuemper should only happen if a replacement can be found with the same skill and potential as him... which will be very difficult to find, I think.
Fletcher got them into this mess. I'm curious to see what his long term plan is for the goalie position.

While last year was an anomaly, we still have a goalie with MS and another who has a history of injuries and is another year older. Not to mention the lack of goalie depth in the system. Cutting ties with Kuemper should only happen if a replacement can be found with the same skill and potential as him... which will be very difficult to find, I think.
Fletcher got them into this mess. I'm curious to see what his long term plan is for the goalie position.
- SotaPopinski

Hang on. How did Fletcher get them into this and why is this a mess?

Hang on. How did Fletcher get them into this and why is this a mess?
- Chinaski

Re-signed Backstrom, traded Hackett, had the opportunity to trade for a guy like Bernier but backed off. All I am saying is that the moves Fletcher has made and not made put the Wild in this situation. If you're okay with our goalies, so be it. I remain cautiously optimistic that one of the 3 will jump out front and have a solid year, but what if Harding is sidelined, Kuemper has the deer in headlights look again and Backstrom's body continues to fail him? I realize the goalie situation isn't nearly as dire as some fans make it out to be, but it is full of flaws.

Re-signed Backstrom, traded Hackett, had the opportunity to trade for a guy like Bernier but backed off. All I am saying is that the moves Fletcher has made and not made put the Wild in this situation. If you're okay with our goalies, so be it. I remain cautiously optimistic that one of the 3 will jump out front and have a solid year, but what if Harding is sidelined, Kuemper has the deer in headlights look again and Backstrom's body continues to fail him? I realize the goalie situation isn't nearly as dire as some fans make it out to be, but it is full of flaws.
- SotaPopinski

OK, not totally unfair. The Backstrom contract, in hindsight, may not be favorable. But at the time, I don't think Fletcher had a lot of choices in goal on the free agent market. And Backstrom did basically play the whole lockout shortened season. Part of Backstrom's health issues may stem from how much they played him during that condensed schedule.

As for trading for a guy like Bernier, it would be nice to know what opportunity was available. It's hard to say what LA was asking from the Wild. Given the Wild's uncertainty in goal at that time, it wouldn't surprise me if teams Fletcher was talking to about goaltenders were asking for more than what he was willing to part with and possibly more than what they took from another team. But I can't tell you what names got exchanged during those discussions, so I can't say it's an unfair criticism of Fletcher.

I won't disagree that the number of unfavorable scenarios we can come up with for the goaltenders outnumbers the favorable ones. But a lot of that has to do with unfortunate circumstances beyond Fletcher's control, in my opinion - Harding's MS, Kuemper and his agent possibly playing hardball in contract negotiations.

At this point, the Wild have two capable NHL goaltenders in Harding and Backstrom. Reportedly, they are healthy and we should expect to see them available to play when camp starts. If not, I think Fletcher has maintained enough roster and cap flexibility to make a move to address the situation.

OK, not totally unfair. The Backstrom contract, in hindsight, may not be favorable. But at the time, I don't think Fletcher had a lot of choices in goal on the free agent market. And Backstrom did basically play the whole lockout shortened season. Part of Backstrom's health issues may stem from how much they played him during that condensed schedule.

As for trading for a guy like Bernier, it would be nice to know what opportunity was available. It's hard to say what LA was asking from the Wild. Given the Wild's uncertainty in goal at that time, it wouldn't surprise me if teams Fletcher was talking to about goaltenders were asking for more than what he was willing to part with and possibly more than what they took from another team. But I can't tell you what names got exchanged during those discussions, so I can't say it's an unfair criticism of Fletcher.

I won't disagree that the number of unfavorable scenarios we can come up with for the goaltenders outnumbers the favorable ones. But a lot of that has to do with unfortunate circumstances beyond Fletcher's control, in my opinion - Harding's MS, Kuemper and his agent possibly playing hardball in contract negotiations.

At this point, the Wild have two capable NHL goaltenders in Harding and Backstrom. Reportedly, they are healthy and we should expect to see them available to play when camp starts. If not, I think Fletcher has maintained enough roster and cap flexibility to make a move to address the situation.
- Chinaski

All I got out of this was Fletcher has his hands full

Okay, so it's not as dire as I may have initially suggested...but that's what I do. I think Fletcher panicked a little when it came to re-signing Backstrom. Sure he put up above average numbers, but he has never been a guy that the team can count on to shut down an opponent when the rest of the team in front of him is having an off night. He needs a strong D with help from the forwards to keep the opponents away from the middle of the ice, otherwise he can be dreadful. Not the type of goalie that you make a deep run with, unless all other components are firing on all cylinders.
I guess I'm a little worried with the long term outlook in goal. Backstrom will be done soon, Harding will be forced to retire soon, and then there's Kuemper and his blood-sucking agent looking to squeeze every last penny out of the organization after a 30+ game audition??

So I'm just curious about how this works...I came across an article mentioning that Adam Wilcox, if not signed by Tampa would (or could) become a Free Agent...It also mentioned that Mike Reilly was in the same boat. I'm certainly not jumping on the homer bandwagon by thinking that Wilcox is a solution to any Wild issues....But I'm curious how that works? Do NHL teams have a certain amount of time to sign their draft picks or they become FA's again? Is that how we picked up Folin (last season) and Zucker few years back? Is it something that's designed to help or hinder a kids decision to stay in school verses sign? Is it only applicable for College kids, or all draft picks?

Sorry, a lot of questions, but I've never really paid attention to it in the past.
Just curious...

Learning is Fun!!!

So I'm just curious about how this works...I came across an article mentioning that Adam Wilcox, if not signed by Tampa would (or could) become a Free Agent...It also mentioned that Mike Reilly was in the same boat. I'm certainly not jumping on the homer bandwagon by thinking that Wilcox is a solution to any Wild issues....But I'm curious how that works? Do NHL teams have a certain amount of time to sign their draft picks or they become FA's again? Is that how we picked up Folin (last season) and Zucker few years back? Is it something that's designed to help or hinder a kids decision to stay in school verses sign? Is it only applicable for College kids, or all draft picks?

Sorry, a lot of questions, but I've never really paid attention to it in the past.
Just curious...

Learning is Fun!!!
- mngopherguy

Zucker was drafted by the Wild in the second round back in 2010.
Any player at least 22 years of age who has not been selected in the NHL Draft can sign with any team as a free agent (Folin is 23 years old).

The collective bargaining agreement gives an NHL team four years to a sign a player, so long as he remains a college student over that period of time. By the time the player is no longer a college student, the team has to sign him by 11:59 p.m. ET on Aug. 15 that same offseason. Failng that, the player becomes an unrestricted free agent.

Justin Schultz of the Edmonton Oilers and Blake Wheeler are among the players that didn't sign with the teams that drafted them and instead were able to essentially pick wherever they wanted to go. Schultz went to the Oilers after spurning the Anaheim Ducks, while Wheeler landed with the Boston Bruins after turning down the Phoenix Coyotes, which picked him fourth overall in 2004

I guess I'm a little worried with the long term outlook in goal. Backstrom will be done soon, Harding will be forced to retire soon, and then there's Kuemper and his blood-sucking agent looking to squeeze every last penny out of the organization after a 30+ game audition??
- SotaPopinski

Well, there's a reason to have some concerns. It's not as if the Wild have the depth in goal they seem to have at other positions. For me, I'm not quite as concerned with the goaltending situation. You need a pretty good goalie to make a deep run and it helps to have a superstar, but I don't think you absolutely need one to make that run. I think there's enough guys out there that they can work something out. Last year the goaltending situation was probably as chaotic and unstable as I've seen with the Wild. And they did OK with guys that were hardly superstar goaltenders. You're not wrong to have concerns, though. It could be their undoing. I just don't think the situation itself was something that is mostly attributable to Fletcher. In a cold-hearted way, if Harding didn't have MS, the Wild may actually look pretty good in goal.

Welcome back Justin Falk,

Signed,

Anthony Peluso

The players the kings reportedly wanted were Zucker and Kuemper.

Flipping through the channels last night and caught the game 7 playoff game against Colorado on the NHL network channel. That really was an instant classic. Hell of a a game!

Flipping through the channels last night and caught the game 7 playoff game against Colorado on the NHL network channel. That really was an instant classic. Hell of a a game!
- MnGump

I saw it as well...I found it just as exciting the second time around!

I saw it as well...I found it just as exciting the second time around!

- mngopherguy

yup