I think Colt can handle the hardest assignments. I don't think he can do it as well as Petro could. I still think it was a mistake not signing Petro. Yeah Faulk and the second pairing is definitely worrisome.
2020-2021 St. Louis Blues: Well, ****.
- Thread starter EastonBlues22
- Start date
- Status
I think Colt can handle the hardest assignments. I don't think he can do it as well as Petro could. I still think it was a mistake not signing Petro. Yeah Faulk and the second pairing is definitely worrisome.
Parayko already had hardest assignments. It's why Petro looked so good.
joe galiba
Registered User
- Apr 16, 2020
- 2,186
- 2,453
the real problem I see is who takes the opponents 2nd line or the defensive assignments when Parayko is not able to be on the ice (penalty, end of shift, etc...)
how we handle that will determine the difference between a good team or a contender
the defense in transition and on o-zone starts should be very good
I also could see Parayko not getting much time on the power play if Dunn stays or Perunovich forces his way onto the roster
keep him fresh for the defensive end load
Krug, Faulk, Dunn or Peru would be very good on the PP
how we handle that will determine the difference between a good team or a contender
the defense in transition and on o-zone starts should be very good
I also could see Parayko not getting much time on the power play if Dunn stays or Perunovich forces his way onto the roster
keep him fresh for the defensive end load
Krug, Faulk, Dunn or Peru would be very good on the PP
Prosaic
Registered User
- Sep 11, 2020
- 143
- 202
Good post. Blues made an absolutely terrible decision by signing Faulk. I didn't mind the trade but the signing was dreadful then and it's even more dreadful now. If it wasn't for Faulk we would still have Pietrangelo, Maybe. I haven't liked the moves Armstrong has made since winning the cup. The Blues still should be in win now mode and now unfortunately, They are not. Armstrong is starting to do to the Blues what he did to the Stars.
What a terrible GM. Built Cup team and then had best record in West last year. Fire him.
You need to take your rose colored glasses off, As I said some of the moves since winning the cup IMO are not good, Trading for Faulk I didn't mind the trade itself, but immediately signing him without him having played a game while alienating Petro in the process. Not good. I can name a lot of thigs that should be fireable. Not giving Petro a NMC Isn't a good look, It's the price you pay to keep a top 5 #1 defenseman. If it was me I would fire Army on the spot if he let my captain and #1 defenseman walk.
I haven't liked what Armstrong has done since June 2019, He made the Blues worse not better. I call a spade a spade, I'm sorry you fail to see that.
LetsGoBooze
Let the re-tool breathe
- Jan 16, 2012
- 2,408
- 1,587
LoL +1
So his demands didn't matter? This is how Chicago ended up with Toews and Kane on those 2 huge contracts, how have they done since? How do you build a team around that? Army put his foot in the ground and quckly pivoted once AP didn't accept our highest and best. Smart GMing, in my opinion. We easily coulda been Pietrangelo-less
AND Krug-less.
Last edited:
Pietrangelo didn't accept the Blues offer because Army didn't offer him an NMC, I've said it before on this board and I'll it again. It's the price you pay to keep an top 3 defenseman, Hedman and Josi who are my top 2 defensemen, They both have MMC's once again it's the price you pay to keep a player of Petro's calibre.
And you mention Toews and Kane, They won 3 cups together so it was worth it. The Blues could've won at least 2 more cups with Pietrangelo and because of Armstrong's short sighted move, They'll be lucky if they even win one more, Which sadly I don't see happening.
JoshFromMO
Registered User
To be fair to Kane, he won the Art Ross, Hart and Ted Lindsay the year after signing that contract
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
That's a short sighted dismissal at best, if not completely wrong. The Kane and Toews contracts kicked in for the season after the hawks won their 3rd cup. They were ~27 when those contracts came into effect. They're slowing now with 3 years left in the contracts.
They lost in the 1st round or didn't qualify in the 5 seasons since those contracts started. The hawks dynasty ended when those contracts started. They didn't win a damn thing with them.
2015-16 lost in 7 to us.
2016-17 lost in 4 to NSH.
2017-18 didn't qualify.
2018-19 didn't qualify.
2019-20 qualified for play-in, lost in 5 to VGK.
Hard to build a complete roster when 25+% of your cap is tied up in 2 guys. The 2015-16 season Toews and Kane accounted for 29.4% of the hawks cap space. They're counting for 25.8% of the cap this season and next.
I'm not saying that the Petro 8 AAV sinks us the same way the Kane & Toews contracts sunk the hawks... But you're definitely skewing some of the facts in their presentation.
To keep Petro would have required a NMC, you're absolutely right. That's the cost for the best in the game - but I don't see us as being the top contender for the cup even with Petro here in 2020-21.
We don't have the offence or the shutdown D from the 2018-19 run witht the questions around Tarasenko and the moving pieces on the D. JBo did a lot more for our pairings than many of us care to admit. Faulk sure as hell didn't replace him. Scandella falls short. Who gets shipped out to fit Petro in - introducing another hole into the former cup caliber roster?
This team is going as far as Binnington carries it. The 2018-19 Binnington performance was Conn Smythe worthy. Without a similar performance, we're 2nd round fodder at best. The 2019-20 performance Binnington gave was solid, but not cup caliber - ignoring the bubble, where something was clearly off with him.
We don't have the prospects to extend a window by trading for help and none of our kids are arriving to make a splashy rookie season performance. We've been good but not great for too long, there's a retool or a rebuild in our near future (3-5 years tops).
Yes I admit that I was wrong about Toews and Kane and I realized it after I posted.
I sort of disagree but I also understand where your coming from, Even if the Blues did have Petro their chances are much greater being a contender with him than where they are now.
I agree about Binny.
Are we going to endure the same people making basically the same posts about Pietro and Armstrong over and over, in pretty much every thread from what I can see, all year? There aren’t any new points being made, just repeating the same arguments. Can it not just stay in the Pietro thread?
He is not on this team any more.
He is not on this team any more.
Yes I'm well aware that Petro isn't on the team anymore and the reasons why upsets me the most.
FrontYardSpecial
Registered User
- Jan 22, 2014
- 390
- 642
Ted Hoffman
Done
- Dec 15, 2002
- 29,289
- 8,728
[kid voice] DON'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO, YOU'RE NOT MY REAL DAD! [/kid voice]
I’m not even saying to stop posting the repetitive arguments. Just cohort them in the designated thread! Please!!
I made an account specifically because of the tone of this discussion. I read at the PD website, post occasionally, but that place is overrun by couple loony toons.
I appreciate the civil discourse and thought out posts without resorting to name calling.
I’m new here, hope I fit in witt thy h you guys
Welcome. I found the Blues Talk forum earlier this year, There's a reason why people here call it the asylum. I read it just to see what hot take someone has. I just shake my head at some of the stuff that's said there.
right! I read how upset you were at the petro non signing but you have moved past it mostly. Again, I enjoy the rational discussion here
Yeah. I've mostly moved past it but there's still times where I get upset and shake my head. You can see my opinion that i posted a few days ago in the Petro thread below. Maybe you've seen it already.
execwrite1
Registered User
- Mar 30, 2018
- 1,523
- 1,472
None of us know what really happened, but the evidence seems to suggest that Armstrong did the Faulk signing to tell Petro he wasn't getting his signing bonus and NMC.
If that's true, very bad move by Armstrong. Cut off your nose to spite your face, as they say. There is no other way to view the Faulk contract - it's terrible.
Let's hope he proves that wrong and has a great year.
If that's true, very bad move by Armstrong. Cut off your nose to spite your face, as they say. There is no other way to view the Faulk contract - it's terrible.
Let's hope he proves that wrong and has a great year.
If only Armstrong could jump into a time machine and turn back the clock to avoid signing Faulk to such a ridiculous deal. An example of Army just being too smart for his own good and overthinking it by pushing Petro off the team.
Yes Faulk will improve now that there's stability, But the point is he'll have to play out of his f***ing mind to justify the contract (dollars + term) he received. Sadly I just don't see that happening.
- Status
