2023-2024 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[Majorityof1]

The defense needs to be better, but I think you are overstating the talent part of it. Nobody has 6 shutdown guys. Is Makar a shutdown guy? Byrom? Toews? Parayko is a shutdown guy. Faulk defends well off the rush, has active stick, he is above average defensively (and well above in other areas). Leddy is fine defensively with hwat he brings in transition. Krug needs to be sheltered. Projections (of prospects and of aging decline) aside, at present we need another top 4 D, ideally top pairing guy. If we had that (and better coaching and effort) our d would be viewed as a strength.

Faulk does defend well off the rush and holds the blue line well. But other than that he is bad. He is bad when the team gains the zone. I'd say he is below average defensively, or at the very best average, for a top 4 D. Krug is in the bottom half of the bottom half of the botton half of the....you get the idea. Leddy surprised me last season. Let's see if he can keep it up.

Getting another defensive minded top pair guy would be a pretty major change to our D. That is all I am saying. Our D need work too, in that we need to add at least one solid defensive preferably LH D.

And I do think Makar, Toews and Byram are better than Krug, Leddy (historically) and Faulk defensively. In part because they can keep the play going the other way better, but none are as bad as Krug, so they don't need to shelter any of them. They are all as good as Faulk or better defensively.

 

[MissouriMook]

I may be in the minority, but I don’t think we necessarily need to add a #1 to get back to a top tier defense. I think we need someone who is above average defensively to take some of the load off of Parayko, but also above average as a puck mover because you really have to be able to do that well to thrive in a Top 4 role in today’s NHL. I don’t think that player needs to be elite at either to make a huge difference.

 

[shpongle falls]

I may be in the minority, but I don’t think we necessarily need to add a #1 to get back to a top tier defense. I think we need someone who is above average defensively to take some of the load off of Parayko, but also above average as a puck mover because you really have to be able to do that well to thrive in a Top 4 role in today’s NHL. I don’t think that player needs to be elite at either to make a huge difference.

Would have been nice if that Krug trade went down and we had Sanheim.

 

[Reality Czech]

Would have been nice if that Krug trade went down and we had Sanheim.

Honestly I don't think Sanheim is nearly the difference maker some fans were hoping for. I've seen Flyers fans complaining about him online and his name even popped up in some "worst contracts" threads. I'm sure he's not that bad but I don't get the fascination with him. I certainly don't think he's good enough to transform a D corps on his own.

No one would deny that we could really use a legit top pairing guy but those guys are hard to get. Fans need to be more patient. In the short term I can't see any huge transformation of our D group but if course Army needs to be ready in case a potential deal materializes. Our best bet is that Faulk and Parayko play up to their potential because what we saw last year wasn't their best. And hope one of our prospects exceeds expectations. Hopefully there is a solid D prospect available with our highest draft pick next year.

 

[Celtic Note]

I think it is way premature to assume all of Dvorsky, Dean, and Bolduc are full time NHLers by 2024/25. If you assume that we are gifting spots to non-ready players based on an acceptance of being bad, then yes you could classify it as a rebuild. But that is far from a given.

If the goal is a retool and still forcing players to earn spots in 2024/25, then I think it is unlikely that we have 3+ rookies on the team. The only way we would have that many is if they have actually earned their spots and then you are talking about being a young team that is trying to exit a retool/rebuild.

Unless you have a truly generational talent, I think the path to success out of a retool/rebuild is to surround your rookies with a roster that is trying to win games as they enter the league. I don't think that asking our pool of good (but no truly elite) prospects to come in and start taking over in 2024 or 2025 is a recipe for long term success. I think that leads to the rookies getting their doors blown off for 2-3 years, developing a losing culture, and jumping on the hamster wheel of losing that we've seen in Anaheim, Buffalo, Detroit, and Ottawa.

The odds of getting a truly generational talent by spending 5 years in the absolute basement are still not good and I don't believe such a guy exists in the 2024 or 2025 draft classes. I'm not really interested in playing 3 more years of meaningless games to get good lottery odds for Gavin McKenna. I'd rather try to put the best possible roster around our developing rookies with the goal of having the kids act as a good supporting cast to a decent roster starting in 2024/25 and eventually take over as the core.

My fear in trading Buch is that we set ourselves up for another 2-3 years of bad hockey starting in 2024/25. I don't have much interest in a rebuild where we don't start looking like present-day Detroit/Ottawa until 2027 or 2028.

Good points.

But even if we trade Buch. Can you replace him with a comparable, yet younger veteran player? I realize that trade doesn’t happen often, but it does happen.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Honestly I don't think Sanheim is nearly the difference maker some fans were hoping for. I've seen Flyers fans complaining about him online and his name even popped up in some "worst contracts" threads. I'm sure he's not that bad but I don't get the fascination with him. I certainly don't think he's good enough to transform a D corps on his own.

No one would deny that we could really use a legit top pairing guy but those guys are hard to get. Fans need to be more patient. In the short term I can't see any huge transformation of our D group but if course Army needs to be ready in case a potential deal materializes. Our best bet is that Faulk and Parayko play up to their potential because what we saw last year wasn't their best. And hope one of our prospects exceeds expectations. Hopefully there is a solid D prospect available with our highest draft pick next year.

Do people think Sanheim is the answer? I thought it was to exchange bad contracts and move the hole on defense elsewhere (for both teams).

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Do people think Sanheim is the answer? I thought it was to exchange bad contracts and move the hole on defense elsewhere (for both teams).

I don’t think he is the answer to what ails us. I do think he can be part of the answer. His contract is a negative (particularly the term) which is why he only makes sense if we move Krug, but I think sanheim would fit in well as long, mobile, puck moving top 4 defenseman who could play 22 minutes a night in all situations.

 

[BlueDream]

Do people think Sanheim is the answer? I thought it was to exchange bad contracts and move the hole on defense elsewhere (for both teams).

Yes, the Blues did.

Sanheim is signed for 8 more years. The Blues aren’t taking that on to just “exchange contracts” without thinking he’s a solution. That’s a big commitment.

 

[Majorityof1]

Do people think Sanheim is the answer? I thought it was to exchange bad contracts and move the hole on defense elsewhere (for both teams).

Yes, the Blues did.

Sanheim is signed for 8 more years. The Blues aren’t taking that on to just “exchange contracts” without thinking he’s a solution. That’s a big commitment.

I don't know if anyone thought he was the answer. It wasn't like we'd stick Sanheim in the lineup, and begin the multi-year dynasty. He was better and cheaper than Krug. Swapping Sanheim for Krug makes us better. So if you can do that for a low cost, then there is definitely appeal to that. I don't think many would argue they would rather have Parayko, Faulk, Leddy and Krug at $23.5M AAV than Parayo, Faulk, Leddy and Sanheim for a quarter mil less.

The issue with Sanheim is the term. His term is not bad in a vaccuum. He just makes it more complicated to make further changes to the D couple years. If Chabot (or name your preferred LD) kicks free and we have Sanheim, would we be able to make a move for him? So the question wasn't "is Sanheim the Answer?" It was" Is he enough of an improvement to lose the flexibility to make another move?"

I assume the Blues though thy could make a move with the rising cap. They could also move Leddy fairly easily if needed. Or even Faulk/Parayko is movable if absolutely necessary.

 

[Xerloris]

Sanheim can play #1 LD and that moves Leddy down to #2 LD and in essence strengthens the Dcore considerably. No one is saying Sanheim was a franchise player.

 

[Spektre]

Sanheim is decent and that’s it. He should not be logging #1 D minutes. I’m thrilled Krug blocked the trade.

Take a step back and analyze the trade. Sanheim is 27 and entering the prime of his career. He’s signed for 8 more years at 6.25 million per season. If he was anything close to a #1 D, do you think his return would be a late first and Krug?

Count your blessings the Blues don’t have another 8 year boat anchor of a contract.

The Blues D are soft. Faulk is the only top 4 D they have who will stand people up at the lines. I wouldn’t label him soft, but he’s not overly physical either.

It’s fine to have skilled D. None of the Blues D are skilled enough to merit being a liability on defense.

Loof and Tucker are the type of D the Blues need. The D needs to be hard to play against. Leddy is okay but he’s another just meh D. He’s not a standout defensively, and he’s nothing special offensively.

I can’t wait until Krug, Scandell, and Leddy are gone. Build a better D corps that has a mix of very physical D, and others who have the skill.

For the love of bass fishing don’t bring in a Sanheim type for 8 more years of blah

 

[Majorityof1]

Sanheim is decent and that’s it. He should not be logging #1 D minutes. I’m thrilled Krug blocked the trade.

Take a step back and analyze the trade. Sanheim is 27 and entering the prime of his career. He’s signed for 8 more years at 6.25 million per season. If he was anything close to a #1 D, do you think his return would be a late first and Krug?

Count your blessings the Blues don’t have another 8 year boat anchor of a contract.

The Blues D are soft. Faulk is the only top 4 D they have who will stand people up at the lines. I wouldn’t label him soft, but he’s not overly physical either.

It’s fine to have skilled D. None of the Blues D are skilled enough to merit being a liability on defense.

Loof and Tucker are the type of D the Blues need. The D needs to be hard to play against. Leddy is okay but he’s another just meh D. He’s not a standout defensively, and he’s nothing special offensively.

I can’t wait until Krug, Scandell, and Leddy are gone. Build a better D corps that has a mix of very physical D, and others who have the skill.

For the love of bass fishing don’t bring in a Sanheim type for 8 more years of blah

We won the cup with Peitrangelo, Bouwmeester, Parayko as a clear top 3. Sure we had Edmundson, but he his minutes were closer to Dunn and Gunnersson than they were to the top 3. That is one guy who is physical getting barely more than bottom pair minutes.

And you think Loof and Tucker are the answer? You aare complaining that Sanheim isn't a proven 1D, and you are saying the answer is guys who aren't a proven 6th D. If you don't want Sanheim, fine. I wasn't thrileld with his name either. But at least give another option besides the pie in the sky wish that our slow footed 7th round pick whose only skill is physicality is the solution.

 

[Spektre]

We won the cup with Peitrangelo, Bouwmeester, Parayko as a clear top 3. Sure we had Edmundson, but he his minutes were closer to Dunn and Gunnersson than they were to the top 3. That is one guy who is physical getting barely more than bottom pair minutes.

And you think Loof and Tucker are the answer? You aare complaining that Sanheim isn't a proven 1D, and you are saying the answer is guys who aren't a proven 6th D. If you don't want Sanheim, fine. I wasn't thrileld with his name either. But at least give another option besides the pie in the sky wish that our slow footed 7th round pick whose only skill is physicality is the solution.

Are you comparing Pietrangelo, Parayko, and Bouwmeester to the top 3 D now???

Pietrangelo actually played physical during the Cup run, and has since played physical in the playoffs. J-Bow was the perfect D specialist partner for Parayko.

Not sure why you’re dogging Tucker and Loof. We don’t know what their ceiling will be but I’m saying the Blues need those types of D. Opponents should not like playing against the Blues D. Right now it’s extremely non-physical. Maybe that’s okay if you have 6 Housley’s that each score 80 points, but none of them are extremely good offensively.

 

[Majorityof1]

Are you comparing Pietrangelo, Parayko, and Bouwmeester to the top 3 D now???

Pietrangelo actually played physical during the Cup run, and has since played physical in the playoffs. J-Bow was the perfect D specialist partner for Parayko.

Not sure why you’re dogging Tucker and Loof. We don’t know what their ceiling will be but I’m saying the Blues need those types of D. Opponents should not like playing against the Blues D. Right now it’s extremely non-physical. Maybe that’s okay if you have 6 Housley’s that each score 80 points, but none of them are extremely good offensively.

No. I am saying long, rangy D who are good with their stick and good at transition can win a cup without having Grrrrr tough guys. Sanheim, Parayko and Faulk is a lot closer to that cup trio than Parayko, Faulk and Loof. Maybe Loof and Tucker get there, but they are a long way from it. And they don't fit the mold of any of the top 3 of our Cup team.

 

[Xerloris]

Are you comparing Pietrangelo, Parayko, and Bouwmeester to the top 3 D now???

Pietrangelo actually played physical during the Cup run, and has since played physical in the playoffs. J-Bow was the perfect D specialist partner for Parayko.

Not sure why you’re dogging Tucker and Loof. We don’t know what their ceiling will be but I’m saying the Blues need those types of D. Opponents should not like playing against the Blues D. Right now it’s extremely non-physical. Maybe that’s okay if you have 6 Housley’s that each score 80 points, but none of them are extremely good offensively.

Maybe physical by his standards but certainly not physical for NHL standards.

 

[Spektre]

No. I am saying long, rangy D who are good with their stick and good at transition can win a cup without having Grrrrr tough guys. Sanheim, Parayko and Faulk is a lot closer to that cup trio than Parayko, Faulk and Loof. Maybe Loof and Tucker get there, but they are a long way from it. And they don't fit the mold of any of the top 3 of our Cup team.

We are looking at the Blues from different perspectives. You’re looking at the franchise closer to how Army does (most likely). He’s hoping that last year was an anomaly for the D. I just highly doubt that’s the case but we’ll see.

 

[Majorityof1]

We are looking at the Blues from different perspectives. You’re looking at the franchise closer to how Army does (most likely). He’s hoping that last year was an anomaly for the D. I just highly doubt that’s the case but we’ll see.

No. I am looking at it as Loof and Tucker are replacement level guys, and all the physicality in the world won't change the fact they are 3rd pairing D at best. Maybe they get better, but doubtful. The age of physicality is over. If you can't skate, if you are not good with you stick, if you can't pass in transition, then you aren't a game changer. A physical guy can maybe hold the line for 15 minutes a night, but that is it.

 

[execwrite1]

The d-men who are going to fix the Blues are 15 years old right now.

It's going to be a long year.

 

[HighNote]

I think this year is going to be the same length as last year.

 

[joe galiba]

I think this year is going to be the same length as last year.

well, I am 58 so this year will be 1/58th of my life vs last year being 1/57th of my life, so from my perspective it will seem to be slightly shorter

 

[Hrkac Circus]

2024 is Leap Year so it will be one day longer.

 

[Brian39]

Do people think Sanheim is the answer? I thought it was to exchange bad contracts and move the hole on defense elsewhere (for both teams).

I think the reality is pretty squarely in the middle of these two options. I don't think that Sanheim is/was viewed as a #1 stud D man who could be a savior. But I also don't think that he was viewed as simply a bad contract.

He's looked like a #2/3 shutdown guy for long stretches before and last season was a clear departure from that. But it was also year 1 under a hard ass coach with a reputation for playing favorites who split him up from the guy he had been paired with for a long time (Risto).

I'd wager that our front office believes that he would be a quality #2/3 level D man in the right situation and that the right situation is playing a shutdown role next to Parayko. If you think that Sanheim-Parayko can give you 18+ even strength minutes of quality shutdown usage and 2 minutes of PK time every night, then there is a pretty compelling case that $6.25M x 8 isn't a bad contract.

That doesn't transform the blueline back to an elite group overnight, but it would be a large upgrade. The unit might still be overpaid, but it would be in better shape. So not 'the' answer, but more than simply accepting a bad contract to shift the hole elsewhere. I do think it would tangibly plug a hole (albeit for more money than you'd like a #2/3 solution to cost).

 

[Xerloris]

THANK GOD

 

[mk80]

THANK GOD

 

[STL fan in MN]

THANK GOD