2020-2021 St. Louis Blues: Generic Thread Titles Be Damned (Part II)

[WeWentBlues]

I may have said this already, but if we are thinking of trading Schwartz, then Tarasenko should be on the table too. I know the contract situations are different, but losing Schwartz is worse than losing Tarasenko in terms of impact to the team. If we are looking to move Schwartz then it’s a signal that we are either going heavy retool or abandoning being competitive. In that case let’s move on from Tarasenko too. It seems no coincidence to me that the Blues won the Cup when Tarasenko was no longer “the guy”. He is such a floater and boarder line statue these days that his goal scoring has become overshadowed by all the things that he doesn’t do, which are many. I personally view him as an anchor to the lines he is on. He is similar to Hoffman in that regard.

We don't win the cup without the contributions of 91

 

[Celtic Note]

We don't win the cup without the contributions of 91 so not sure what you are smoking

Well that’s not what I said.

 

[Novacain]

I may have said this already, but if we are thinking of trading Schwartz, then Tarasenko should be on the table too. I know the contract situations are different, but losing Schwartz is worse than losing Tarasenko in terms of impact to the team. If we are looking to move Schwartz then it’s a signal that we are either going heavy retool or abandoning being competitive. In that case let’s move on from Tarasenko too. It seems no coincidence to me that the Blues won the Cup when Tarasenko was no longer “the guy”. He is such a floater and boarder line statue these days that his goal scoring has become overshadowed by all the things that he doesn’t do, which are many. I personally view him as an anchor to the lines he is on. He is similar to Hoffman in that regard.

I just don't think there is anyone willing to touch 7.5 million a year for a guy with 3 shoulder surgeries who hasn't been healthy in 2 years. It would take us either taking on dead contracts with picks attached, but I can't see anyone risking multiple 1sts, and I'm not even 100% we could get 1 first.

 

[Celtic Note]

I just don't think there is anyone willing to touch 7.5 million a year for a guy with 3 shoulder surgeries who hasn't been healthy in 2 years. It would take us either taking on dead contracts with picks attached, but I can't see anyone risking multiple 1sts, and I'm not even 100% we could get 1 first.

Certainly a valid point, but I would have to wager that a player of Tarasenko’s ilk would garner some attention.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Taking this post here because the response is not well-suited for being in a GDT.

I can only imagine the personal lives of those saying "we're done, blow it all up." I envision some beer crushing hoosier in a rusted pickup, 300lb wife and a "nice house" in Wentzville, attempting to give professional advice to someone.

People please. It's an odd time. Next year will look very different. And who knows? If we sneak in, we all know anything can right itself.

Yes, it's possible we could right the ship and sneak in. Last night was the look of a team that was outhustled (again) and outworked (again) and which eventually threw in the towel (again). We're going to have ~15 more of those games the rest of the way, where we have to deal with fast, talented teams. At some point, this group has to regain its mental toughness and bring the game to them instead of them chasing it. Last night suggests we're not there, and I can't see us banking on it happening.

Are we at the "blow it all up" stage with this roster? No. Are we at the "tweak one or two things and we're back to Cup contenders" stage? IMO, no. Even if Parayko is healthy, I still don't like our defense. I don't like our mix of forwards. We have good pieces and they don't fit together. It's a lot like the 2017-18 roster where we looked at it the last 2-3 months and asked how can we be this consistently poor? Is it the system? Is it the players? Is it both? Whatever it is we're doing, it's not working and we need to spend time figuring out why and how we fix it.

What should we do? I suspect we're going to spend 3-4 months asking and trying to answer that question. Me, I'd start asking "who do we really want to build around" and "who can we live without" and look at moving a couple of guys out of that last group. Barring a miracle turnaround with this team, we're sellers. Park Parayko, get him healed up so he's 100% for next season. Ask Schwartz if he's got interest going somewhere for this postseason and coming back this summer, sell him off to the highest bidder and bring him back in UFA. Deal Hoffman. Get some pieces back, start to replenish the prospect pool, start to think about what we want the '21-22 team to look like and how we get it to play better against teams that have and utilize speed.

 

[BlueOil]

We have good pieces and they don't fit together.

while i generally agree with your sentiments from the rest of your post, i can't help but point out that i don't know how anyone can fully come to this conclusion. with how few games the roster has played as designed vs. how many games were played with what was available, you really can't say they don't fit together. they sure don't fit together with the replacements and many of them still look rushed back from injury, so how much of this weird season is in play? i agree we have a narrow version of success unless more chemistry and success comes soon

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I just don't think there is anyone willing to touch 7.5 million a year for a guy with 3 shoulder surgeries who hasn't been healthy in 2 years. It would take us either taking on dead contracts with picks attached, but I can't see anyone risking multiple 1sts, and I'm not even 100% we could get 1 first.

Then maybe he won’t need to be protected in the draft.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

while i generally agree with your sentiments from the rest of your post, i can't help but point out that i don't know how anyone can fully come to this conclusion. with how few games the roster has played as designed vs. how many games were played with what was available, you really can't say they don't fit together. they sure don't fit together with the replacements and many of them still look rushed back from injury, so how much of this weird season is in play? i agree we have a narrow version of success unless more chemistry and success comes soon

If you want to strictly go by "we have not had our entire ideal roster, 100% healthy, at any point this season" then I agree - we don't know if the pieces really don't fit together. We didn't have Tarasenko for ~60 games last year, we seemed to do fine ... so is he not a key piece to this roster functioning well? We've lost guys along the way and added most of them back, and we're still struggling; is the argument "Sundqvist and a 100% Parayko are the vital keys to this roster functioning well?"

How many times was it we just need _________ to get back in the lineup? And every time we add someone, things don't improve. Or, they improve marginally at best. At some point, you have to look at the guys here and ask why are they not clicking? And I don't think we can just say well, we just need everyone back and at 100%, then we'll be fine. Other teams miss guys and keep winning, so why can't we?

 

[BadgersandBlues]

If you want to strictly go by "we have not had our entire ideal roster, 100% healthy, at any point this season" then I agree - we don't know if the pieces really don't fit together. We didn't have Tarasenko for ~60 games last year, we seemed to do fine ... so is he not a key piece to this roster functioning well? We've lost guys along the way and added most of them back, and we're still struggling; is the argument "Sundqvist and a 100% Parayko are the vital keys to this roster functioning well?"

How many times was it we just need _________ to get back in the lineup? And every time we add someone, things don't improve. Or, they improve marginally at best. At some point, you have to look at the guys here and ask why are they not clicking? And I don't think we can just say well, we just need everyone back and at 100%, then we'll be fine. Other teams miss guys and keep winning, so why can't we?

This is the correct take. When everyone was injured it was fair to ask what we would look like when healthy. Now we're mostly healthy and it's still not working. No team is ever 100% healthy and you cannot bank on that happening for success to be sustainable. I think the real questions going into this off-season are something along the lines of:

1. Do we still believe in our core team building principals (Lot of wealthy players vs. a few rich players, top 9 vs. top 6 debate and all that)
2. Do we still believe in our style of play? (Blue-collar/Grinding/shutdown Defensive team vs. up-tempo, looser, willing to take more risks)
3. After answering 1 and 2 - who needs to stay and who needs to go? We have a lot of big, long term contracts on the books for a bunch of guys who fit one of these philosophies but not the other. If we want to switch it up, now is the time to cut bait while they still have some trade value.

 

[execwrite1]

The best approach - forget the Blues ever won the Cup. That was a once in a lifetime coming together, not a long-term core that had more Cup runs in them.

That's why the Binnington contract was such a mistake. He's a good goalie who had one great hot run. Not a perennial borderline All-Star who you can build a franchise around.

Four Players to Trade at Deadline

 

[Stealth JD]

The best approach - forget the Blues ever won the Cup. That was a once in a lifetime coming together, not a long-term core that had more Cup runs in them.

That's why the Binnington contract was such a mistake. He's a good goalie who had one great hot run. Not a perennial borderline All-Star who you can build a franchise around.

I tend to think we've seen the best Binnington has to offer (obviously), and it will be a steady gradual decline from there. Unfortunately, I don't know what alternatives Armstrong really had. If he lets Binner walk, after Petro did, it leaves Army open to criticism and second-guessing. The goalie crop in the pipeline isn't yet ready for harvest. A UFA worth anything will end up over-paid, and then has no guarantee of playing as well as the incumbent once he joins a new team. After searching for their home-grown goalie savior forever, are they really going to let the guy who played out of his mind and brought them a Cup leave over an extra year or two, or million dollars or two? Once Binner made it through a follow-up season last year backstopping his club to first-place in the West, there was zero chance of him not getting paid by Army.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Goalies all have cold spells. I trust Binny will rebound.

 

[execwrite1]

I tend to think we've seen the best Binnington has to offer (obviously), and it will be a steady gradual decline from there. Unfortunately, I don't know what alternatives Armstrong really had. If he lets Binner walk, after Petro did, it leaves Army open to criticism and second-guessing. The goalie crop in the pipeline isn't yet ready for harvest. A UFA worth anything will end up over-paid, and then has no guarantee of playing as well as the incumbent once he joins a new team. After searching for their home-grown goalie savior forever, are they really going to let the guy who played out of his mind and brought them a Cup leave over an extra year or two, or million dollars or two? Once Binner made it through a follow-up season last year backstopping his club to first-place in the West, there was zero chance of him not getting paid by Army.

Let him walk and go with the kids. Passing on Petro was tough but the right move. This team isn't going to win for a while, and locking up Binnington won't change that.

Time to tank (but keep the Tank).

 

[illinidave]

We don't win the cup without the contributions of 91 so not sure what you are smoking

I think 17 also had a lot of great contributions to the Cup run (deflection goal in last minute to win at WPG, couple of hatties).... Both were and are important role players IMO

 

[illinidave]

I think the rewicker of our D has driven some significant changes to team performance. In recent years, our strong defense has allowed our team to get by with winning with low scoring and not having our goalie peppered with high-danger shots. The loss of Pie and 55 injury, coupled with different play styles of Faulk and Krug, have allowed more GA and our forward lines haven't compensated with more GF.

For the life of me, still can't understand the logic behind letting Pie go and getting Faulk.

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

I think the rewicker of our D has driven some significant changes to team performance. In recent years, our strong defense has allowed our team to get by with winning with low scoring and not having our goalie peppered with high-danger shots. The loss of Pie and 55 injury, coupled with different play styles of Faulk and Krug, have allowed more GA and our forward lines haven't compensated with more GF.

For the life of me, still can't understand the logic behind letting Pie go and getting Faulk.

I think Faulk is a good defenseman, and I would like having him a lot more if it meant we had Pietrangelo-Parayko-Faulk down the right side, but yeah, he was likely grabbed because he came cheap (Edmundson+Bokk), and he was the most capable dman available with a chance to help mitigate the eventual loss of Pietrangelo. It was clear to everyone at the time that we should have signed Petro no matter what the cost, and if we were to add to the defense, we should have grabbed a LHD to better partner with him since Bouw-Parayko seemed to be our intention until Bouwmeester retired.

 

[Stealth JD]

For the life of me, still can't understand the logic behind letting Pie go and getting Faulk.

That one's easy. Army doesn't want $8M-$11M/year talent. Doesn't want to pay for it in dollars or in contract terms (NMC). His dream roster would have three 'second'-lines, a grinding 'fourth' line, four #2-3 defensemen, and two goalies making $8M or less combined.

 

[Ranksu]

I dont know what is acceptable for Faulk. Is he carrying team in his back? Producing vs Avs, Vegas and Wild. I havent seen anything on that.

He played hot hot early on season vs Anaheim, Kings and Sharks. And now he is ghost, Is that successful?

Now his last 16 GP 0+2 and -13, you call that good defenseman?

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

That one's easy. Army doesn't want $9M-$11M/year talent. Doesn't want to pay for it in dollars or in contract terms (NMC). His dream roster would have three 'second'-lines, a grinding 'fourth' line, four #2-3 defensemen, and two goalies making $8M or less combined.

That's probably true, and while I also subscribe to the importance of depth, it makes it really difficult to win games if you must win everything 2-1 or 3-2. In theory, having three 2nd lines would mean that they would all score at a second line pace -- we have never had that. You can't not pay for goal-scoring talent and then also not equip the roster with either the stringiest defense or gritty, cheaper, goalscorers. Our goal-scoring talent isn't gritty, and is too inconsistent to survive less than elite defense.

 

[Ranksu]

For the life of me, still can't understand the logic behind letting Pie go and getting Faulk.

Nobody doesnt understand it. Army didnt want to give security and didnt see having Pietro would help us be competitive and Cup window open next 5-years. He miserable made mistake let him go. You take away pineapple and add couple small grapes to fill that hole.

It will bite our arse in long time. No matter if Pietro last years would have been 'bad'. We could eventually have even bigger problems having Krug 6.5mill.$ and Faulk 6.5mill.$ last years of their contracts vs Pietro's.

As crazy as it has been noted Dom from athletic noted Pietro would most likely age well and wouldn't be bad in his last years of his contract.

This all fights against Army.

I'll give everything on Army, respect he created Cup team. It wont be taken away and it was blessing have him on GM job, but after 1-year, he destroy everything what he build.

It's going to be tough to watch your team grumble. We are yet again position we need something on back end in D-core. Before it was true #1 center and goaltender. We got those fixed and problem goes back.

Frustration times.

 

[MissouriMook]

I dont know what is acceptable for Faulk. Is he carrying team in his back? Producing vs Avs, Vegas and Wild. I havent seen anything on that.

He played hot hot early on season vs Anaheim, Kings and Sharks. And now he is ghost, Is that successful?

Now his last 16 GP 0+2 and -13, you call that good defenseman?

I know I have as much chance of getting anywhere arguing with you as I do arguing with a sock puppet, but I feel like this farce that somehow Faulk is horrible needs to be addressed. Here are his current stats for this season courtesy of NaturalStatTrick.com

CF% 50.27
FF% 50.36
SF% 52.29
GF% 53.23
xGF% 47.82
SCF% 50.40
HDCF% 45.5
HDGF% 62.86
PDO 1.003
OZStarts% 45.81

He has logged more minutes this season than any player on the team, has played more than half the season in the #1 role despite not being brought here to do so and has managed to be average or above average in every category except xGF% and HDCF% and even the HDCF% has managed to be offset by a monstrously positive HDGF% of 62.86, which means that despite giving up a few more high danger scoring chances while he is on the ice versus how many high danger chances the Blues get, we are actually converting almost twice as often on those HD chances.

I'm not exactly sure what you were expecting from someone who is slotted and paid to be a 2RD but we are getting above average play from him, above average results, and at a rate of pay that is commensurate with his role. But hey, maybe if you flip the numbers on his jersey you'll feel better about it.

 

[illinidave]

That one's easy. Army doesn't want $8M-$11M/year talent. Doesn't want to pay for it in dollars or in contract terms (NMC). His dream roster would have three 'second'-lines, a grinding 'fourth' line, four #2-3 defensemen, and two goalies making $8M or less combined.

I get that GM methodology, and it aligns to the grinding way they've played in recent years. I just think Pie's elite skills in defensive positioning, skating, and stickwork which are so crucial to locking down our D wouldn't just go away suddenly like some high priced stars' have issues with on their scoring or skating.

 

[Stealth JD]

I get that GM methodology, and it aligns to the grinding way they've played in recent years. I just think Pie's elite skills in defensive positioning, skating, and stickwork which are so crucial to locking down our D wouldn't just go away suddenly like some high priced stars' have issues with on their scoring or skating.

Makes you wonder if they had somehow stumbled into McDavid if Army would be like, "we can't win with a $11M/yr player. we need buy-in. we want guys to be rich, not wealthy". As if they'd be better with two $6M/yr players instead of an $11M/yr player and a $1M/yr player.

Blues could very well have gone $9M + $3M for Petro & Eddy instead of $6.5M + $6.5M for Krug & Faulk; but instead they cut off their nose to spite their face to prove that their policy was the best policy. At this point, it's pretty clear that 'maybe that wasn't the way to go', and the fanbase may not be unreasonable for holding Army's chestnuts over the open fire.

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

I know I have as much chance of getting anywhere arguing with you as I do arguing with a sock puppet, but I feel like this farce that somehow Faulk is horrible needs to be addressed. Here are his current stats for this season courtesy of NaturalStatTrick.com

CF% 50.27
FF% 50.36
SF% 52.29
GF% 53.23
xGF% 47.82
SCF% 50.40
HDCF% 45.5
HDGF% 62.86
PDO 1.003
OZStarts% 45.81

He has logged more minutes this season than any player on the team, has played more than half the season in the #1 role despite not being brought here to do so and has managed to be average or above average in every category except xGF% and HDCF% and even the HDCF% has managed to be offset by a monstrously positive HDGF% of 62.86, which means that despite giving up a few more high danger scoring chances while he is on the ice versus how many high danger chances the Blues get, we are actually converting almost twice as often on those HD chances.

I'm not exactly sure what you were expecting from someone who is slotted and paid to be a 2RD but we are getting above average play from him, above average results, and at a rate of pay that is commensurate with his role. But hey, maybe if you flip the numbers on his jersey you'll feel better about it.

Another note to add is that all those numbers go up when he's not paired with Krug.

 

[BlueMed]

I may have said this already, but if we are thinking of trading Schwartz, then Tarasenko should be on the table too. I know the contract situations are different, but losing Schwartz is worse than losing Tarasenko in terms of impact to the team. If we are looking to move Schwartz then it’s a signal that we are either going heavy retool or abandoning being competitive. In that case let’s move on from Tarasenko too. It seems no coincidence to me that the Blues won the Cup when Tarasenko was no longer “the guy”. He is such a floater and boarder line statue these days that his goal scoring has become overshadowed by all the things that he doesn’t do, which are many. I personally view him as an anchor to the lines he is on. He is similar to Hoffman in that regard.

I can't say I agree with any of this. Tarasenko can do things that Schwartz can't do, and Schwartz can do things that Tarasenko can't do. On our cup run, Tarasenko was still the guy, and he still draws so much attention from the opposition's best players. As far as floating around, what does Patrick Kane do 90% of the time when he doesn't have the puck? The difference between Vladi and Hoffman is that Vladi wins board battles, he hits, and he still backchecks. That's all Berube is asking for, which is why Vladi has never sat in the press box under his coaching term. The only reason Schwartz is being dangled is because of his UFA status. Saying that Tarasenko is an anchor to his line is entirely based on his recent play, which is unfair considering how much time he has missed from his shoulder surgery.