Yep, you don't have to listen to Russo to figure out that the Wild's roster is full. We need a right shot forward desperately, though. I'd prefer a center (Russo wants a winger) but ideally we add a right shot wing and a right shot center. We'll probably have to move Eriksson Ek along with Zucker to make that happen.

As for your contracts, I don't think Sturm deserves a penny over $1M, same for Belpedio, Eriksson Ek's contract is a year too much but the money is fine, same for Donato, and Fiala definitely isn't signing that. I think Fiala either signs a 5-6 year deal at around $5M (which I don't think he deserves but it'd be similar to Arvidsson's deal) or he signs a 2 year bridge around $2.5M.

That D-core is still beautiful

If thats the case I don't know if I want Fiala if that's the price? Also for length of contacts I wanted them to be offset as much as possible to avoid to many UFA's in the same year.

Yea but for how long??

Aside from Dumba they are aging

Well, he's an RFA so you either sign him or trade his rights and there's no way Fenton trades him. I'm fine with giving him a long term deal as long as the money is at or under $4.5M. He has tons of skill, he just needs to figure out how to not turn the puck over. I see what Fenton means when he thinks he can be a 30+ goal scorer. I'm not sure I'm sold that he can do that, but 20+ is not out of the question (and Fiala did that in Nashville). $5M is pretty much about what it costs to get a 20+ goal scorer nowadays.

Even if you sign them to 3 year deals they're all still RFA's (you are an UFA in the NHL after either 7 seasons or you turn 27, and none of our current RFA's would hit that point prior to a 3 year deal). I just don't think any of them would want to wait 3 years to potentially be paid big money. I could be wrong, of course.

Yea it's just that if we are spending 5 Mil or more a season I want the guy to be more proven and there are UFA's like that but the flip side is that they are older and would probably cost a lot more than 5Mil.

Ok I did not know it was that long in the NHL that's almost Baseball like control lol.

I don't think Wild fans should be too upset if we sign Fiala to $5M. The problem as fans is that whenever we judge contracts we go by the $ amount, but the reality is most agents go by cap %. Each year the cap rises so it's a lot easier to compare other contracts by using the amount of cap the player takes up when they signed their deal. $5M is only 4.15% of the cap (assuming the 83M is what the cap turns out to be next year) which is not much at all. A bridge can be better or worse for a guy like Fiala since if he proves that he is a 30 goal scorer, he'll probably want around $7-8M. If you lock him up at under 5, that will turn out to be a bargain. The risk, of course, is that he doesn't become a 30g guy but even if he's a 20+ goal scorer I think $5M is fine, especially after next year when the cap will rise again.

Yep its a long time! That's why players generally want to sign deals that have them end right when they are UFA's since they get paid a ton more. Deals that "eat up" UFA years generally cost a lot more since the player is foregoing the opportunity to earn more money as a UFA.

I’m with you - no chance I would sign him to anything but a bridge deal. Problem is, when you give up big time assets for a player needing a new contract, you have less leverage and you usually end up having to overpay them. If I’m GM and Fiala’s camp is demanding a 5-6 year deal...I’m trading him, period!

Thats fine... I tend to be a fan of bridge deals too, but then you risk him walking after that bridge...I think he would have to be signed to a 2 year bridge because he'd be a UFA after 3... but then you know that if he does score even 25-30 (and expecially if he scores 30+ like Zucker) he would end up with a 6-6.5MM contract two yeas from now instead of the 5MM we could pay now to buy several of his UFA years.
And as Far as TanSor's other comments... if Zucker and Ek could get a RH-C would a UFA (like a Donskoi or something) be good enough? I get the sense that most people agree that this roster isn't fixable all at once, so Fenton has to choose Center or RW for his target because he likely can only get one top 6 RW OR one top 6 C this year... I guess it is a decision on whether Staal and Koivu can hold down the middle next year so you target a RW in trade or if Staal and Koivu (esp if he is on IR) are jut not good enough then you target a C and pick up a middle 6 RW and hope that Kunin can produce or that Greenway or Fiala or Donato can produce on their off wing.

Of course that assumes that Spurgeon is not traded... If he actually is traded because he can't be re-signed long term, then that changes the complexity of the situation.

Seems fairly unlikely that Fenton would trade him. Fenton is more likely to think that with gambling coming into the game, the cap will only go up and the longer he can lock up Fiala the better it will be... so get ready to be disappointed because while I think a 2yr x 2.5MM makes the most sense as @TanSor said, I could very much see a 6yr x 5MM. Fenton pushed in a lot of chips (Granlund and only to Nashville) with Fiala so he definitely doesn't trade him now... But thats just my opinion based on how I read the published articles.

It's probably not fixable all this year unless you do trade Zucker & Spurgeon but I think the more important thing is to find a Right shot C since Koivu probably will start the year in IR and him and Staal are not getting any younger although good centers just don't grow on trees.

Yea I guess that makes sense with the cap continuing to go up by the time the deal is done if Fiala is any good at all it will be a steal.

I know Fenton won’t trade Fiala...I’m just saying what I would do. The fact is, I just don’t believe in Fiala enough (yet) to invest in him long-term.

Personally I like 2yrs now even if it costs more in 2 years... just like what we did with Zucker