wabit

Member Since
May 14, 2016
Favourite Team
Minnesota Wild
2nd Favourite Team
Buffalo Sabres
Forum Posts
3777
Posts per Day
2.65
Forum Threads
152
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 11:27 pm
Forum: Armchair-GMTue at 9:42 pm
Thread: wild playoff
Forum: Armchair-GMSat at 8:02 pm
Forum: Armchair-GMFri at 8:22 pm
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Paul13</b></div><div>I get the length of Spurgeons contract being a bit long, but I'm sure you agree is is a very good defenseman and defenseman seem to age better than forwards plus towards the end of the contract if the injuries to pile up Wild will likely be able to LTIR him and if they don't I wouldn't expect his game to fall off terribly.
On the other hand Wild must find a way to move on from Zuccarello.</div></div>

He's a good d-man, yes; but he's not a $7.5m/yr d-man. He's not a shutdown d-man, he's not really an offensive d-man, and he can't carry a d-pairing. He's a complimentary d-man.

Some d-men age well others don't. I don't see Spurgeon aging well; too many injuries and he's a finesse player. Plus he has a full NMC for the expansion draft, and MN has too many d-men worth protecting. It'll force a Brodin/Dumba trade or lose one for nothing. I'd much rather have Brodin, Dumba, and Suter over Spurgeon, Suter, and one of Dumba/Brodin after next season. Spurgeon also has no tangible effect on the team. Their win/loss and points percentages are the same with his or without him in the lineup.

Zucc's contract is better than Spurgeon's because MN can afford to lose a FWD (Donato) in the expansion draft, it's shorter (only 2 years left as a full NMC), and he's cheaper. I want both their contracts gone. Big contracts to players 30+ are almost always bad ideas, they are getting paid for what they have done, not what they will do.