In a move that’s raising eyebrows across the hockey world, the Minnesota Wild have placed defenseman Matt Kiersted on waivers—again. But here’s where it gets controversial: is this a strategic roster shuffle or a sign of deeper organizational uncertainty? Let’s break it down.
Earlier this week, the Wild made headlines by running veteran forward Tyler Pitlick through waivers, not to demote him, but to reset his 10-game, 30-day exemption period. Now, they’re seemingly repeating the tactic with Kiersted, as reported by Sportsnet’s Elliotte Friedman. This isn’t the first time the 27-year-old has faced waivers this season—he also cleared during training camp. So, what’s the play here?
Kiersted, who signed a two-year, two-way contract with the Wild last summer (carrying a $775K AAV), was expected to be a cornerstone in Iowa while providing depth for the NHL squad when needed. And that’s largely how it’s played out. In 23 games with Iowa, his offensive stats are modest (three assists), but his defensive contributions have been significant. That earned him a call-up in early December, and he’s been with the Wild since.
However, ice time in Minnesota has been scarce—just four games so far, with one assist and five blocked shots in limited minutes (13:42 per game). While he hasn’t hit the 10-game mark, his 30-day waiver exemption has expired, forcing the Wild’s hand. And this is the part most people miss: if Kiersted clears waivers (again), the Wild have a choice to make. Do they keep him in his current reserve role, or send him back to Iowa to free up roster and salary cap space?
Here’s the controversial question: Is the Wild’s reliance on waiver resets a clever loophole or a symptom of roster mismanagement? On one hand, it’s a strategic use of NHL rules. On the other, it suggests a lack of long-term planning for players like Kiersted. What do you think? Is this a smart move, or are the Wild playing with fire? Let us know in the comments below!
