flames decline

"Without giving up top assets in return"

They're not giving up a 2nd. They'll find a bargain bin pickup like Bogosian was.

I interpreted that as we pay now for a guy and then flip him
for relatively the same price, thus not giving up any assets. You could be correct though. Side note, looking through the list of right handed UFA defensemen it's pretty limited and most are on playoff contenders already.

Just keep in mind this will be like the 37th overall pick, nothing too different than a 1st rounder from a playoff team. Maybe if this actually happened the Wild would add a prospect like Adam Beckman or something. Just keep in mind the sticker tag of a 2nd shouldn't mean an automatic decline.

So they trade pick 37-38 + another prospect in the hopes that they get pick 50 something and maybe as good a prospect back in a month?

It just makes no sense for the Wild.

Too big of a risk in spending actual assets trying to play flipper.

It has to be a buy low player.

This is a bad idea. Are you really going to get more than the top-40 pick you're giving up for Tanev at the TDL? Is it worth the risk of giving away a top-40 pick and then the guy gets injured and is untradeable?

I see spending a 4th to get someone in hopes of flipping them for a 2nd or 3rd. Taking a cap dump (who is decent player, just overpaid) for nothing, then retaining half, and flipping them for something at the TDL makes more sense. You're not out anything if things go sideways.

id rather have that than our rookie defenseman play 30 minutes a night and have two replacement level defensemen below him on the 2nd and 3rd pairing

maybe thats just me

I mean this is a coaching issue. Nothing says Faber has to continue to play 30 minutes. We're currently in the bottom six teams in the league lol, it's probably prudent for the coach and GM to recognize the reality of the situation. It's not worth spending big to try to salvage this season. This team isn't going anywhere.

if you want to try and find a pending right handed UFA whos not on a contender and would cost less than tanev be my guest

Lyubushkin. Maybe you could get him for a 3rd retained?

Retain again at the deadline.

Tanevs too expensive and too likely to try and eat a 90mph puck.

i dont mind lyubushkin at all. i looked through a list and somehow missed him or passed over him somehow

See... ===>Dumba, Matt<====

Don't expect it's going to be something like that either. There's virtually no chance he gets flipped at the deadline for more than a 3rd, so we're taking a loss on that deal.

I dont care if we take a loss nor do I think management does as long as its nothing too bad. If we flip our 3rd for a 4th or whatever i personally dont care especially if we end up selling.

There's just no point then. Like I said, the team is bottom six in the standings right now, not much is going to change in a month, and all you're doing is acquiring a bottom pair guy. He's not going to move the needle.

It's a warm body so they don't have to regularly ice any of the prospects from Iowa. Like I said, a Bogosian type deal. A vet, someone with grit and sandpaper who can play second pair of absolutely necessary, but shouldn't actually be there on a good team.

Leafs are so desperate for RD you might be able to build a package. Take some of their junk, maybe retain on another deal of theirs.

Personally, it's not a gamble I would make. I would be more inclined to try and do the old hockey trade, under performer for under performer.

Columbus has someone with term they're begging to get rid of. Can't remember the name. But that might be a decent gamble?

I don't want to trade for any rental. Just get used to the taste of this poo samich of a team now because it's going to be the same team next year too. Spending assets now is just throwing good money after bad.

It's not like the team took a dramatic turn for the worse without Spurgeon in the lineup. MN was 5-9-2 (61.5p pace) with him in the lineup. Going into tonight's game they are 13-11-3 (88p pace) without him.

The whole point of this post was because Joe Smith stated that the Wild will be looking to acquire a defensemen to replace Spurgeon at the very least until the TDL. I didn't make this because I think the Wild shouldn't do it, I was just looking into a possibility of what could make that happen.

I read that, and it's been pointed out by a couple people on why this is a bad trade idea on a few different levels. The purpose of flipping is to make a profit, not take a loss. Buy low and sell high, not buy fair/high and sell fair/low.

Leipold and Guerin are certifiable morons, so…

Joe Smith wrote that crap as a favor to the Wild…assessing how the fanbase would react.

I don't know to what degree this is true, but I do know this organization and its fans can't get out of their own way. There's no reason this team should be adding anything right now, but they will, and no matter how big or small the addition is, a large portion of fans will be ecstatic about it because for whatever reason they always believe this team can be a contender, or that anything can happen once you get into the playoffs, despite the team proving over and over again that that's not true.

But they celebrate mediocrity as long as they're tricked into thinking there's an effort to win.

Spot on!