SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

Beauterham

Member Since
Jun. 27, 2018
Favourite Team
St. Louis Blues
Forum Posts
91
Posts per Day
0.0
Forum: Armchair-GMSat. at 11:57 p.m.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 25 at 3:02 p.m.
Thread: Based on Fans of Other Teams
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GMDannyB</b></div><div>You said St Louis, do you speak for the team/fanbase? That’s literally all I’m saying it’s ur opinion that St. Louis doesn’t do this not the teams opinion. GM’s say one thing then do another all of the time it’s called working the media</div></div>

Sigh...

Ok, If you're dead set on twisting my words, let me rephrase it in that case if it makes you happy. St.Louis Blues General Manager Doug Armstrong stated he isn't interested in deals like this in his his post season press conference. So it is to be expected that the St.Louis Blues (the team, not the fans and definitely not me) aren't interested in a trade as mentioned not only in this tradetopic, but also the other one you were refering to. Can he change his mind? Sure... Is it to be expected? Probably not.

Having said that. You do you, but I don't feel like playing these kind of childish games so I'm done responding to you. Have fun!
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 25 at 2:02 p.m.
Thread: Based on Fans of Other Teams
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GMDannyB</b></div><div>Yeah you can have ur own opinion but u can’t say Blues don’t want this and speak for the whole fanbase lol. You can’t say u can have ur own opinion but then say another Blues fan’s opinion is wrong lol</div></div>

Can anyone here speak for an entire fanbase? Can you?

I never mentioned I was talking for a fanbase or whoever, you're the one who's making that up. I merely said, and I quote: "Yeah, St.Louis isn't interested in a deal like this. The Sanheim to STL-deal died when Krug refused to waive his NTC". Can you point to me where I was talking for the fanbase in that sentence? I'm merely stating facts. Again Doug Armstrong specifically mentioned he wasn't interested in moving 1st round picks this time in the retool in his post season press conference (the trade offer included our 24 1st). If you don't believe me, check the piece about his press conference in the Athletic from last week. And yes, it's also my personal opinion this would be a bad trade for the Blues due to our timeline.
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 25 at 1:37 p.m.
Thread: Based on Fans of Other Teams
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>GMDannyB</b></div><div>This trade is based on a trade a St Louis fan made literally an hour ago that multiple St Louis fans on here liked so I’m not sure that’s so accurate maybe in ur opinion it is but doesn’t sound like others agree with you</div></div>

There was literally just one Blues fan in that topic who was happy with the trade (was the first post) and even then it wasn't clear if he was talking specifically about the Sanheim trade (could be) or one of the other proposal deals. The other people that liked the deal aren't Blues fans or were refering to other deals.

But even if there are multiple Blues fans (as you stated) claiming otherwise, thankfully we're all allowed our own opinion and my opinion is that this would be a bad trade for the Blues. At least, at this time during the retool. It would also contradict what Doug Armstrong said last week where he specifically said he wasn't interested in moving 1st round picks and prospects for established players to add to our current core. He did say he hoped to find some good players and do some trades to try to stay competitive, so I guess a player for player trade is possible (potentially with none 1st round picks or top prospects added).
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 14 at 2:30 p.m.
Thread: Pens 2425 Realistic But Improbable Fixes
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Horny4Hornqvist</b></div><div>Yeahhh, definitely threw Ansons in there blindly, maybe someone like Joona Koppanen would be better. But I don’t think a return for Acciari is too far off from Walker, probably someone a little less known could work.

What do you think if you’re making that trade?</div></div>

To be honest, qualitywise there isn't a lot of difference between Walker and Acciari, however financially there is. Walker makes league minimum for 2 more years while Acciari is overpayed at 2 million for 2 more years, here lies the difference. Koppanen also isn't a desirable asset, so we're still not making that trade.

I'm not totally against Acciari moving back to us, as it's unknown how and when Sundqvist will return from his ACL-injury and we could use a veteran plug. However, Acciari has some negative value IMO. You'll neet to add a decent pick or prospect/young player.

Walker on his own probably will cost a 4th/5th round pick. What about a 3rd for Walker and us taking on Acciari's contract?
Forum: Armchair-GMApr. 14 at 2:07 p.m.
Thread: Utah might honestly be really good
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>The value is there, but it's everything we don't want. If some team needs five pieces in an unretained Buch offer, it's an instant no. A gaggle of deferred 2nds and two wingers isn't going to be considered unless the winger if Konecny or something.

Army would immediately say one word: "Simashev".</div></div>


Yeah, and BA will hang up the phone immediatly. ;)

No, I understand that we'd rather get a 24 first and / or a really good defensive prospect, however, if there isn't a deal to be made with any team that is able to offer such a package, I'd gladly accept this one if offered. See (some of) the assets involved as trade chips that we can package and flip for a desirable prospect/young player/higher pick.