SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

BluesReport18

Member Since
Feb. 6, 2023
Forum Posts
220
Posts per Day
0.5
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 12 at 8:51 p.m.
Thread: Playoffs
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>CaseyFlyman</b></div><div>Voronkov is also an ideal player the Jackets need, so I can't see us trading him.

Probably even more unlikely, but Columbus needs a middle-6 two-way vet winger to play with the kids IMO. Gaudreau, Marchenko, Johnson, and Chinakhov are all top-6 wingers, at least by style. There's one specific younger top-6 RW with term that could use a change of scenery. He's not playing right now, and there's no way we move him before he comes out of the player assistance program, but would a Laine-Saad swap make sense?

STL would need to add, not sure how much (a 2nd?), and I'm not sure he's a fit, but that's more the move I'd be looking at in a STL-CBJ trade.</div></div>

I would be slightly interested in Laine but at the end of the day I just don't think he's a good fit for the Blues style of play. The Blues want their wingers to be physical and in on the forecheck and that's never been Laine's style. On top of that, we have Snuggerud coming who will be our sniper. Lastly, I don't think we could afford the 4 million increase in cap especially if we try to sign Buch to a long term deal. Maybe if Columbus retained the Blues would be interested but there's no real reason for Columbus to retain on Laine just to make a deal happen.
Forum: Armchair-GMFeb. 4 at 2:49 p.m.
Thread: What couldve been
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>AC14</b></div><div>This is the pain of trying to remain competitive long-term.

1. Walman, Dunn, Fabbri - Jake Walman could barely crack the lineup for us. At the time of the trade we had desperately needed a LD that could play with Parayko post Jbo (Which we still do). Walman could not do that at that time. Dunn was not trusted by the coaching staff hardly at all. He was stuck on the 3rd pair because he was unreliable in the defensive zone (which is comical because now 4 of our defenseman fit that mold). There wasn't really much they could do in that front to avoid Seattle taking him in the Expansion draft. Fabbri was traded as a favor to the player. He needed an opportunity to play and we needed to continue winning.

The biggest blunder armstrong had was Pietrangelo and always will be Pietrangelo. You could even say it started when they traded for Faulk. Just the sequence of moves doesn't make alot of sense to go from Pietrangelo to Faulk and Krug and expect good results.</div></div>

Yeah I agree I think everything started when contract negotiations fell through with Pietrangelo. That led to the Faulk trade and all of these other poor defensive moves happening. Looking back, I was a huge fan of all 3 of Walman, Dunn, and Fabbri. To me, Walman has always been the same player, it wouldn't have mattered if he was 22 or 27 he was pretty much ready for an NHL role but then got passed over for Dunn, who had a higher ceiling. They are different dmen though and I remember for a few games that they played together, Walman and Parayko looked great. The Blues expect perfection from their young defenders but have no accountability for their veteran defenders. That should really be flipped, you should put your young defenders with a veteran defender expecting the young guy to make mistakes and the vet to cover for him, the Blues want the opposite.

With Dunn, that was just a blunder. The blues hated his style of holding the blue line defensively. It worked 95% of the time, but the 5% of the time it didn't work, it led to a breakaway. The Blues couldn't handle this and yet on Seattle Dunn does the same thing and is still excellent at doing it. The only difference is Seattle encourages him to do it and they have Larsson there for the 5% of times that Dunn gets burned.

You're probably right about Fabbri, but I'll never understand why they didn't get more for him. At the end of the day it's a business, if Army couldn't get more for Fabbri, he should've tried harder to make it work in St. Louis. A lot of times Army is just being nice to the player which hurts the team.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 19 at 5:15 p.m.
Thread: Start the rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mediumyeet</b></div><div>I think they likely took the quantity over quality because nobody is willing to give up their top prospects. I agree with your breakdown of a trade comparable though (Kuzmenko would have to be involved or moved elsewhere without any cap coming back). You need to factor in that Meier was 26 at the time of the trade turning 27 in October plus 50% retention (retention could be offset by the remaining year on Buch though) and Buch is 28 turning 29 in April.

Canucks would prefer the package you suggested over giving up Lekkerimaki though it might be too rich of package for them still. It would potentially be dependent on what type of return they can get for Kuzmenko in a separate deal. If they can actually get something of value there then this is a little more palpable.</div></div>

I think to me San Jose took the quantity over quality because of how thin their prospect pool was. The Blues have a lot of prospects and would probably prefer to go with a high end prospect over a bunch of middle end prospects. I agree that Meier being 2 years younger boosts his value but then again Buch has the extra year on his deal and will likely come with a cheaper extension because of his age. As for Kuzmenko, I feel like he could get around a 2nd to maybe a team like Arizona that has a ton of picks and could take a chance on him. To the Blues he would be more of a cap dump but even in the quantity over quality trade you could probably put him in over the 2nd round pick and the Blues could move him from there or just keep him and give him a chance.
All good thoughts though I think at the end of the day it makes a lot of sense for Vancouver to be interested in Buch and it makes a lot of sense for St. Louis to be interested in what Vancouver has to offer.
Forum: Armchair-GMJan. 19 at 4:45 p.m.
Thread: Start the rebuild
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Mediumyeet</b></div><div>Blues won't get a top prospect for Buch. It is very rare that a team trades their top prospect. You referenced the Meier trade but even that didn't have any of NJD top prospects involved. If you are looking at Vancouver the best prospect you will get will be from that second tier after Lekkerimaki and Willander which is Brustewicz, D-Petey, Raty, Podkolzin.

At best you are probably looking at something like 2024 1st + Kuzmenko + Brustewicz + a conditional pick.

If Buch is Van's primary target they might be willing to do something like 2024 1st + 2025 2nd(becomes a first if Van makes the conference final) + Kuzmenko + Brustewicz FOR Buchnevich + Kapanen(50% retention).

I'm not sure Van would be willing to give all of that up but I think it is in the ballpark IF they are locked in on getting Buch.</div></div>

Fair but in the Meier deal San Jose took quantity over quality. They got a TON in return for him. Nothing that would scream first liner but still a lot of important pieces for a team. I think if I was looking at a one for one comparison of the trades it would be something like:
To Vancouver:
Buch = Meier
Kap 50% retained = all the AHL players that got moved from San Jose to New Jersey
To St. Louis:
Podkolzin = Zetterlund
Woo = Okhotiuk
Brzustewicz = Mukhamadullin
2024 1st
2025 2nd

Again, that's a TON. I feel like they would almost rather lose Lekkermaki than all that but maybe not. I would take the above offer as the Blues as well if they want to go the quantity over quality approach.
Forum: Mock-DraftJan. 17 at 11:24 a.m.
Thread: January 2024 Mock Draft (Top 15)
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>YeahRighttt</b></div><div>In a few years I think you will be eating your words about Eiserman. In last years under 18s, he showed he had more than just his shot, which is wicked. That was when he was only 16, he has a lot of growing &amp; improving in front of him.</div></div>

I thought highly of him last year. It's this year that concerns me. Him also not make the U20s team is very concerning. I have no doubt he could and should be a 40 goal scorer in the NHL but it will just take the right team to develop him and some defensively responsible linemates. For that reason I think he falls on draft day. He falls in my rankings because at the moment I view him as a one dimensional player. But again this is really early in the draft process and a lot can change by draft day. To me I would compare him to like a Wahlstrom or Vrana type player right now. I think he has a higher ceiling then those 2 but that could be his floor.