please please please sell

sell all 3 please

Can Sprong Hockey?

First off, I appreciate the thought you've put into considering this from different sides.

I think Seattle may hold some interest in a defenseman like Perunovich, as special teams is still a work in progress and they could still use some more people in the Blueline Pipeline. That being said, I'm not sure they'd want to give up Sprong to make that happen, as he's carved out a regular role with the team and still has RFA control, meaning he has the potential to be a long term piece of the Kraken puzzle. I think if Seattle went after Perunovich, they'd rather use draft capital or move Donato or Geekie before Sprong. I guess we'll see though.

I really hope Army sees that this year's team is more than likely not going to win a cup! 3? I would sell ROR, VT91, Barbie, Accarri and Mikkola. If someone wants Leivo, Greiss or Pitlick move them too. Retain on 3 of those contracts and I feel Army could set up this franchise for success for many years to come.

I think Tarasenko is all but certain to be traded, seeing as he's not re-signing here and the Blue are playing fine without him. But the other guys, it might be a toss up. There's a lot of guys on the market, and there's a lot of teams that are (rightfully) more focused on moving as high up in the draft as possible. People are unwilling to move 2023 picks. They should still sell because I don't really want them to re-sign any of these guys but I don't know if there will be the market that will allow Armstrong to radically reshape the franchise like he did in 2017/2018. Really depends on if he can talk up O'Reilly despite his mediocre play and how aggressively Tarasenko will use his NTC against the Blues.

Sprong scores a lot of goals for the ice time he gets. He's a good player.

But he's a bottom sixer, and the Blues have a lot of young bottom sixers lying around, either as prospects like Neighbours and presumably Bolduc/Snuggerud soon or as "this is what they probably are" guys like Alexadrov, Brown, Toropchenko. The Blues also don't exactly have trouble scoring. If they're going to be kind of a middling team for the next couple years, why invest in a soon-to-be 26 year old bottom six player who scores over giving your younger guys that opportunity? They stand a better chance of actually being here once the Blues build back to contention.

Perunovich might just end up being a less good Torey Krug on a team that already has Torey Krug but considering how poor our defense is, that Perunovich's value has crated after all these injuries, and the fact that we have zero other defense prospects with top four upside in the system the Blues are probably better off just seeing what they got. Seems like the worst case scenario is more or less the status quo, where he either doesn't stick at the NHL or becomes a third pairing offense guy. Even if he becomes Torey Krug 2.0, there's a demand for that kind of player at a lower age and contract that would probably net you more than Sprong in the future.

I can understand that! I'm hoping that the Blues do sell and maybe they can move Perunovich for Lind and a pick. What's your take on Kole Lind? I feel he hasn't gotten a real shot in the NHL and was wondering why?

Just trading UFAs and 4th liners isn't enough. One of Krug or Leddy has to go. Both is better.

No idea how that’s gonna happen. Buyout is the only way I’m seeing.

I would have to politely disagree. If ROR and VT come back and look healthy, I think they both net a 1st rd'r +. I think Barbie and the rest could net at least a 2nd, 3rd and maybe another prospect. VT is a goal scorer that all teams should covet, the others play a tough style that teams like in the playoffs and all have more than enough o-fence to help any playoff team. Just my opinion.

Those NTC's don't help! I've heard that Krug would like to stay around MI, don't know how accurate that is but maybe STL North (DET) would be an option? Wonder if Krug and a 2nd (too much?) for say Zadina? Who knows. I think we might be stuck with Leddy. Ugh, what was Army thinking with that!!

I don't have a full scouting report on Lind, but he's a big physical power forward who's a prolific scorer at the AHL level. However, his skating speed was a bit of a concern if I remember correctly, and he wasn't quite able to translate his offensive production to the NHL level. I think one of the biggest reasons Lind hasn't been in the NHL more is the Kraken's offensive depth, with the bottom six forwards ahead of him providing more offensively while still being capable defenders. I believe Lind still has a shot at being a full-time NHL player, but that opportunity may have to present itself elsewhere.

With Leddy, yeah, presumably. And his buyout ain;t that bad, but we all know Army is not going to swallow his pride to do it. However, there are going to be some teams who need to step up their LD and PP1 game this summer. It's still a minor longshot, but I could see a Krug taker emerging. Of course, he needs to get fit and finish the season strong for that to happen.

Prolific is a bit of a stretch and he's about average size, but yes, his skating is what holds him back from being a genuine NHLer.

If that is what happens that would be awesome, of course. I'm just pessimistic because I feel there's some warning signs- a few contending teams without firsts (Dallas, Tampa), a few contending teams in undesirable locations (Calgary, Winnipeg), a few contending teams with seemingly little interest in a big forward upgrade (Carolina, LA, Seattle), a few teams so close to the bubble they might not buy (Colorado, NYI, Washington, Pittsburgh), a crowded market at forward (Horvat, Kane, Meier, Toews) and the fact that the guys we're selling haven't played very well. And the feeling I have that if Armstrong doesn't get what he wants for O'Reilly and Barbashev he's absolutely going to just turn around and offer them a contract instead of taking a bath on those trades. The best case scenario is that Armstrong's able to talk up the O'Reilly intangibles like Montreal did with Chiarot, but there was 1st Round Pick buzz around him for awhile that isn't there for O'Reilly right now.

This is one of the big reasons I'm so adamant about being open to trading with Winnipeg, with Dallas, with Colorado. Some people have such an aversion to that, but if Winnipeg is offering us a 1st and Heinola for O'Reilly and Carolina is offering us a 2nd and like, Noel Gunler...you gotta take the first one, even if it means trading in Division.

Leddy I think you just have to ride out, it's 3 more years and the cap hit isn't awful and if you get some younger defensemen to supplant him he can be a sheltered 3rd pair guy and it's ok, especially if they're going to spend half of that time reloading anyway. Not an ideal use of cap space maybe but it's probably going to be more difficult to move him than is worth it. I'd rather just ride it out than spend a 2nd for Arizona to take him.

Krug is such a tough one. You simply can't ride out a 6.5 million dollar contract for four more years, especially when you're probably going to be riding out declines for Faulk, Parayko, Schenn and, from the looks of it, Binnington at roughly the same time (Some would say those declines are already here). And he has pretty much total control. You probably have to take a bad contract back. Maybe if you can catch Chuck Fletcher in one of his moods you can orchestrate a Krug for Provorov swap of some ilk. I don't care for Ivan Provorov (he's been even worse than Krug this year) but it's at least only two more years instead of four.

Anyone saying don't trade with them is not thinking correctly. So what if ROR dominates us when we play him this year as we would have already thrown in the towel. How sweet would it be if the guys we got back tormented those teams for years!! If your going to sell, you sell for the best package. PERIOD!

Muh huh. Go check the Blues trade history and find us all the times they traded high impact players to rivals for anything less than a wild overpay. Pack a lunch, bro.

I have no idea what you're talking about. This team basically never sells high impact players because they're always in it, there's not a long list, you can do it without scrolling through the trade history if you've been following the team since 2010. There's like 4 guys, maybe 5 or 6 if you count goalies, that you would consider "high impact players" that we've sold.

Erik Johnson - traded to a division rival for not a wild overpay
TJ Oshie- traded out of conference
Brian Elliot, I guess?- traded to a conference rival for not a wild overpay
Kevin Shattenkirk- traded out of conference
Paul Stastny - traded to a division rival for not a wild overpay
Jake Allen, I guess? - traded out of conference

So half of those are within conference, a third within division. And no, one of the Brian Elliott picks becoming Jordan Kyrou does not count. Brian Elliott- who had been stastically very good (three consecutive seasons above .915 and coming off a .921 playoffs) for a high second is if anything an underpay.
A 50-60 point center for a 1st and middle six prospect is not a wild overpay, that's a classic deadline package.
A hurt Erik Johnson AND the #11 pick for a second, a good if one dimensional rookie defenseman and a 30 point winger seems mostly fair.

So where are all these wild overpays under Armstrong's tenure that supposedly exist?

i disagree with some others here, krug isnt at all needing to go, hes not an amazing fit but a buyout would not make sense at all

First of all, I said nothing about wild overpay during Army's tenure, I was talking about the franchise as a whole doesn't do such trades unless it's a big overpay However, the Statsny deal was definitely an overpay, and might have been a wild overpay had Foley not suffered that career ending injury shortly after the deal. I could also debate whether Statsny qualified as high impact, seeing as how he was down to the 3rd line and barely playing like it - but he's close enough to one. Also, Colorado was neither in our division or a rival at the time of the EJ trade. And the most recent rival fleecing I always bring up for reference is the Federko-Oates deal.

So yeah, again, feel free to correct me by noting these times when the Blues traded a star/high impact player to a division rival for less than a sizable overpay.

You are right about Colorado, forgot about when the division shift happened, though I would point out that that was still within conference- opening up trades to places like Vegas and LA, which you have been adamantly opposed to in the past.

Again you can't evaluate trades as overpays or underpays based on player development after the fact if you're talking about whether or not a "wild overpay" is going to happen at the trade deadline. You're going to evaluate that hypothetical trade as an overpay or underpay in the instant it happens, so if you're comparing previous trades you have to evaluate it when they happened. At the time Foley was seen as a middle six power forward. If he became a top line player, that's cool- but that doesn't mean the trade was an overpay at the time. The fact that he didn't become anything (not his fault) doesn't make it an underpay. A late 1st and a middle six prospect for a 2C at the deadline is maybe a slight overpay, but it's nothing crazy.

Also this idea that Stastny was a 3rd liner is complete revisionist history. He was playing perfectly fine when he got traded, he was our 2C at the time and before the Schenn trade he was our 1C. As far as role on the team goes it's almost exactly analogous to the situation the Blues find themselves in with O'Reilly, even if O'Reilly obviously had a higher peak, different skillset, and leadership intangibles that should in theory fetch more for the Blues if/when he's traded.

The GM and his staff are the ones that makes the trades. Talking about anything that happened under different GMs- and hell you're talking about different ownership groups entirely- is not relevant. If it didn't happen in Armstrong's tenure, it doesn't matter. Bringing up Federko-Oates like it has any bearing on the Blues' behavior today is obviously nonsensical. GMs are going to approach the job with different philosophies and I feel like Armstrong has more than proved he is open to trading in conference or in division for relatively fair prices. You should be more comfortable with the concept.

Lemme chop this up, if you don;t mind.

1 - Not only was Colorado not a rival or in the division back then, but they were also like the worst team in the league. There was zero competitive grind to be had with them at the time of the trade.

2 - I have no idea what you're talking about with LA, they have never been a rival and I don't recall any AGM trade I opposed for any other reason than an unsuitable offer.

3 - Yes, I would not piss on Vegas if they were on fire. While the franchise itself is likely not as vehement as I am about Vegas, I'm also pretty positive they do have a rival issue with the Tin Hats on a couple of levels. I stand by my assertion that they would stay away from any large deals with Vegas unless they knew it was really worth it. Could I be wrong about this? Conceivably... but I'm probably not. And to send them someone like Vova would be unthinkable.

4 - Heh. I think you need to go revisit the Statsny gamelog from that season.. His ice time was waaaaay down from when he started the season as 1C. And he had six points and a lot of defensive f-ups over his last 15 games with the Blues. The dude was dragging the team, and they won like nine of 12 right after he left. Don't you remember how Army made the trade thinking we weren't in the playoff race and then they damn near made it anyway?

5 - Foley was considered a solid A-/B+ prospect, with some rankings having him in the 30s overall. Folks were starting to talk about him as looking like a consistent 25-goal bruiser. That on top of a 1st for a few weeks of a guy Winnipeg definitely had on the 3rd line is a sizable overpay. It was A LOT at the time. Besides, while Winnipeg has usually been in our division, I would not call them a main rival.

Finally, this idea that there is no lasting franchise culture across management and even ownership regimes is what's beyond silly. You know better than that. There's probably one or two NHL teams with as much influence through eras from former players, former execs and coaches, current and former media, and yes even fans, all carrying on a similar enduring ethos. And that was there before we had to watch a list of former Blues heroes parading around carrying the Cup for hated rivals enough times for several lifetimes in a short span of time. Nobody wants to see that **** ever again.

But like I said... you don't have to believe me, just read the trade history. It's all documented right there.

I've read the trade history. I don't believe you. I think you're wrong about all of this, including all of the above chop. I guess we can leave it there.