It makes sense since Dumba will fetch a bigger return on the market.

6 mil is one thing ... the NMC means 5 are protected. Minns players are dictating who stays and who goes to Seattle.

One year too long on the deal, but the money is right. Not a fan of the NMC attached to it the deal. For a Brodin as a UFA it's probably less than he'd get on the open market. It's inline with Muzzin's deal for money and age when it ends.

Although Spurg is the better dman in a vacuum, he was 30 at the time of his signing, and he makes almost $2 million more. As a result, Spurgeon's deal has the potential to look really bad really quickly; Brodin will be 28 when the contract begins, so his play shouldn't drop off until he reaches the final season.

Fairly long but has a decent structure. It's all salary (as of now), the protections expire towards the end and the actual cash amount tapers off towards the end.

So instead of leaving Brodin unprotected as an UFA (whom wouldnt be picked) now they are forced to deal a dman before the end of next season- or lose them for nothing.....doesnt make much sense from a protection from expansion sense. If they have a deal almost in place for Dumba....then okay.
As for the $ and term... seems high on both, there isnt a lot of money to spend this year- and with the possibility of empty stands for next season, revenues could plummet, and that would put pressure on the cap. Not to mention even if the cap stays flat, some teams will lower their budget just to keep the owners from bleeding too much cash.

Such a good signing. great dollar value for one of the best dman (in terms of pure defense) in the league. The term may be a bit long but it is still a great signing

Good AAV but too much term.

I am so jealous, huge fan of Brodin.
Great signing.

Look at Minnesota's forward they are not going 7-3-1. They will go 8-1

They could, but IMO it is just bad asset management. It is as simple as 8<10. The more players you protect, the better.

MIN fowards are so weak, they can't afford to loose their 5th best foward...

So trading Dumba for a foward+futures makes so much more sense. Also, they have RHD ready to take his place.

I think the way teams look at this, who is more important the 5th forward or 4th defense

Correction: 5th+6th+7th fowards or 4th defense.

Seattle can only pick one player, so they will pick forward #5 or defense #4 facepalm

Numbers are subjective in a depth chart as we saw in the Vegas Draft. MIn #5 could be Seattle #8 and vice versa.(See Tuch, Alex).

With the 7-3-1 system, you still protect 3 more fowards assets, even if Seattle only pick in your roster once. Facepalm

Michael Russo wrote that it's his understanding that all current contracts don't expire until after the expansion. Therefore, they'd have to expose or protect Brodin. Now Brodin could very well let Seattle pick him and spurn them for a deal with the Wild, but that's an awfully big risk to take. It makes sense from our point of view but if you're the player, you want a sense of security. Either extend me and protect me, or expose me and I'll figure out what I want to do. Not sure that would've been Brodin's state of mind, but that's how I would've handled it.

At this point, I'd rather lose forward #5 than defense #4. But we have a RD in our system (Calen Addison) who we're very high on. So odds on we'll trade Dumba and do the 7-3-1 once it's all said and done.

Do you have to remind us of the Vegas debacle...

The Wild's management will figure who they are the most afraid to lose, the forward THEY BELIEVE is the 5th best or the 4th best defense IN THEIR MINDS

BTW Tuch wasn't available, they trade him to Vegas to protect other players

Almost overpay imo. I'd take Dumba anyday over Brodin.

This contract is looking much better 11 months later.