Yes please, says every other team in the Central.

Agreed, this team is worse for the year but I think they have to transition to younger guys and shoot for 2/3 years down the road. Focus on getting draft capital and developing players for this year.

If we trade Granlund for Faulk, Fenton deserves to be fired on the spot. Swap Granlund with Nino and take out Foligno and Geekie and you have a much more fair trade. I don't like that Edmonton trade, swap Strome, Lucic and your 1st with Larsson and it would be closer in value.

And build from what in 3 years? The prospect pool isn't good. Maybe one of KEE, Greenway, Kaprizov, or Kunin turns into a top line player, none of them are can't miss players. Nino and Zucker are middle pair guys already. Parise/Suter are a $15m cap hit and 3 years older. 2-3 years will turn into 5-6 years easily.

JEE goes from AHL replacement level to big minutes 2C over the of the summer? Kunin and Greenay would be better off in the AHL and not trying to develop playing shutdown duties with Koivu.

yeah?

This was your trade I reversed

That's the point, build the prospect pool with picks and guys like Geekie or other prospects from trading the guys that have value but can't get over the hump. I think fundamentally we do not have the pieces now to seriously compete so you need to move guys. You can develop young guys in the NHL and it would keep people in the seats while they retool, but if they want them in the AHL that's fine. I get that Parise and Suter are not getting any younger but aiming to retool for 2 years down the road rather than delusionally going for it with the same guys seems smart to me.

Nino if they want him is fine with me, but I think the Foligno contract being moved and getting Geekie are the main things I liked. The EDM trade was @oilers4life 's trade, I hate taking on Lucic and didnt want strome but I went with his framework. Ideally I would go Puljujarvi for Spurge and work from there.

oh ok thanks, it gives me a perspective now

Prospects are nice on paper, but the chances of them being better than Coyle, Granny, and Spurgeon are slight imo. Really unless it's a Matthews or McDavid the rest really don't mean jack squat. Even teams with high draft picks yearly get stuck spinning their tires in the mud for a decade or so: EDM, BUF, AZ, etc.

I'd like Foligno's contract moved as well (especially if we took on Lucic), but not at the cost of Granlund. I'd love Puljujarvi, I think he will be a great player despite lackluster numbers last season. I really think a trade with EDM makes so much sense for both sides (which is why I've made a million trades with them in my armchair GM teams).

I mean NSH/WIN/TBL/BOS/WSH/PITT have all built through the draft, it works more often than not. Im not sure what your strategy is that would be better than letting the guy who helped turn around NSH and load up their depth try to do the same for MN. Let me know though.

Subban, RyJo, Turris, Forseberg were all trades by NSH, but those were all just depth guys.
Jets have been bad since their existence until last year. 3 total Playoff berths in 18 years. Not the level of suckatute I want to endure.
TBL has an excellent GM that wins a lot of trades. Everything he touches turns to gold it seems.
BOS has drafted well and didn't tank/selloff to do it.
WSH has drafted well, but they've been known as Playoff failures until this season.
PIT tanked and it worked. Crosby, Maklin, Staal, MAF in a 4 year span of 1 or 2 OA picks. Way different draft rules then. They have also missed on most of their picks since that 4 year run of awfulness (07 draft and later), only 2 of their draftees (Muzzin and Maata) have played 300+ NHL games.

Bos route is the way I'd prefer to go. Pens had 5 awful years, Kings had 6 awful years, Hawks spent a decade in the dumpster. Pit and Chi almost lost their teams too during that time. Winning the cup would be great, but having to watch 5-10 years of awful hockey to get there isn't worth it to me.

So basically you don't think its worth taking the risks needed to be great(because you could fail), so may as well be mediocre so it is watchable? I have literally never heard this take before, what a strange attitude. That last sentence in your post (which should read "Winning the cup would be great, but THE POSSIBILITY of having to watch an unknown number years of awful hockey to get there isn't worth it to me.") is something I can't relate with at all. Winning is what matters, and you have to take risks to get there. I bet you every WSH fan there is would say those years of playoff failures were all worth it. PIT fans would agree. If you don't believe you have a chance to win, reload, get younger and try again has to be the attitude.

Are you going to sit around and watch even 3 years of bad hockey; that's 246 NHL games in hopes that one day they might be a Playoff team; which they currently are. It's roughly 10 days a year spent on watching all 82 games a NHL team plays. $8k and 10 days on a nice vacation to a beach somewhere seems like a better investment.

$8k a year is what it cost for my pair season tickets. $24k down the drain for three years a garbage on ice product, double that if the rebuild plan doesn't work out perfectly. I'm not going to spend that money on tickets, or really even tune on on TV. I'll gladly take a Det type of run of 20+ years of Playoff quality hockey teams, even if it means 4-7 games of first round exit every year. The bar for me is making the Playoffs, they were a 100p team last year and half the top-9 was playing on 1 leg.

The Wild winning the Cup would be nice, but I didn't win it and there is no ring and parade for me. It's not going to complete my life and I can then die happy.