...

Why do you think the team needs Kreider ?

Deal

Uhh, no. Zero chance.

You literally **** on everything people post

I literally said accept to two trade ideas yesterday. But the reality is 90% of the trades posted here are eminently delusional.

Not that he needs defending, but the Rangers don't need/want Steen...

People acting like Kreider is going to save this team or something.

No team has won the cup with a pure rental top six forward since the Kings traded for Marian Gaborik five years ago. And they only gave up a second and a third. High impact/ high priced rentals rarely result in a cup win, folks.

I don't think anyone thinks that Kreider is the savior of the Blues. However, Kreider's 24 goals would lead the Blues and we need goal-scoring not knowing how Tarasenko will look when he comes back.

If you think he's worth giving up a 1st, our best prospect, and our longest tenured player, you obviously think he's the missing piece to win the cup again. I disagree, I think the Blues winning the cup and the Blues having Chris Kreider are very loosely related for a few reasons. One, there is no guarantee that his offense carries over to the Blues- we see this with rentals constantly, last year alone had Mikael Granlund and Matt Duchene significantly underform after the TDL on the new team (Columbus almost missed the playoffs!). Second, his expected goals against are terrible, which leads me think he won't be able to adjust to the defensive minded system the forwards play in the two months he would have here to adjust.

We won without Kreider, we've been winning without Tarasenko. I like Kreider I just do not believe it is worth blowing future guys who have years of cost controlled contracts such as Kyrou or whoever that first round pick would be to chase this fever dream of a repeat cup, and especially if we're chasing it like this. This is exactly part of the reason the Chicago Blackhawks became the Chicago Blackhawks.

While I won't argue the point of bad contract decisions dooming the Blackhawks. I would also say loyalty to ineffective, overpriced players such as an Alex Steen or a Brent Seabrook, is just as culpable. First-round picks are crapshoots and for every Robert Thomas who has come through our system, we have a Ty Rattie. The risk isn't that great in giving up Kyrou and a 1st for a proven veteran scorer. I appreciate the articulate debate by the way. Not just verbal jabs because we are on opposite sides of the fence on this.

I agree that Steen is overpriced, but I would push back on that he is ineffective, at least not Brent Seabrook levels of ineffective. While he doesn't have quite the offensive punch anymore, he still plays very well defensively. Steen also only has one year on his contract versus Seabrook who has, like, infinity I think. Also doesn't help that Steen has full NTC until February next year, so he'd have to willingly go off a contender onto a rebuilding team. I'm usually on the same page that loyalty to old players is generally a bad thing, but I don't think Steen's contract is what is screwing us here, because we haven't yet had to ship out any young talent to accommodate his contract like the Blackhawks have to accommodate Seabrook's.

I think people forget that Ty Rattie was never that hyped of a prospect in the national eye- he was hyped for us because our prospect pool was not very good and he was the best of the bunch, and then hyped even more as he had a few hot stretches, but Rattie never had the respect that Kyrou and Thomas had through their Junior careers. I think the ceiling on Kyrou is way higher than Rattie's had ever been. First round picks are generally a crapshoot, true, but I don't know that they are less of a crapshoot than rental forwards. I've done some research on this because I have no life, and only one team in the last five years has won the cup after spending a first round pick on a pure rental like Kreider- The Blackhawks in 2015 with Antoine Vermette. And I would argue that Vermette didn't contribute that much to that cup. Meanwhile, our scouting department has been pretty good with their first round picks, the only one I would label a bust would be Jordan Schmaltz, and that was years ago.

And I would just look at the Kevin Shattenkirk trade as proof the other way- we got a first round pick and Zach Sanford for that trade, and both of those pieces were integral to our cup run (the first rounder going to Philly for Schenn, who had three years of term). Both of those players scored in Game 7. Shattenkirk, also a proven veteran goal scorer, albeit a defenseman, did pretty much nothing with the Capitals, they went out in the second round, and then he walked.

Sometimes you'll find people on Capfriendly to have discussion, but not very often. However, I'm always happy to respectfully debate when we're on opposite sides or lend support if on the same