2023-2024 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[Snubbed4Vezina]

Don't worry. This team doesn't have the drive for any sustained level of success.

 

[taylord22]

Friedman on NHL network.

Recap: Wasn’t surprised about Berube. Smoke was out there a week or two ago. Berube a great motivator and coach, but wondered if messaging got stale. Thought of Kyrou when he heard.

Jay Woodcroft was the name he threw out as someone Army would likely speak to, due to Nill and Holland connection.

“Armstrong is fearless” there will be more changes, and he’s likely considering anyone not named Thomas or Parayko.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

Craig Button did an interview on local radio today and said many of the same things.

Paraphrasing:
- Not surprised, saw the writing on the wall a few weeks ago.
- Says nobody looks at the St. Louis roster and expects them to compete because they're fatally flawed defensively.
- The team has a tremendous pool of prospects. Thinks Snuggerud is going to be a great player, expects Bolduc and the three first rounders from last year all to be strong contributors at the NHL level but they're two seasons away from them making a difference.
- Anyone expecting a turnaround in the next 18-48 months is going to be disappointed.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

funny how the national guys all say they saw the smoke, dregs even reported on it last night, and none of our local guys seemed to have even a whiff that something might be up.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Army said during the press conference Vrana would be sent down

It’s just like Detroit. They’re trying to get him away from influencing the rest of the team.

 

[BlueDream]

Friedman on NHL network.

Recap: Wasn’t surprised about Berube. Smoke was out there a week or two ago. Berube a great motivator and coach, but wondered if messaging got stale. Thought of Kyrou when he heard.

Jay Woodcroft was the name he threw out as someone Army would likely speak to, due to Nill and Holland connection.

“Armstrong is fearless” there will be more changes, and he’s likely considering anyone not named Thomas or Parayko.

I know it seems like every single Edmonton castoff, whether it’s a player, coach, or executive, has failed here… so that gives me some pause… but I do think Woodcroft is probably the best available option. His resume is actually pretty solid and he would still be with the Oilers if their goalies could have made a save in their first 15 games. I am interested.

And when I say best available option, that is only including guys with previous NHL experience. There may be some good options in the AHL or college or wherever else, but I don’t have enough info to properly evaluate them. That includes Bannister too, I hope he does a good job and makes our decision easy, but I just don’t know what to expect.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

You see what Woodcroft did in Edmonton with 2 of the best 3-4 players in the league, crap on the bottom 6 and a leaky defense, and mediocre goaltending. He would have better goaltending, questionably better defense, a better bottom 6 at forward, but unquestionably worse offense at the very top.

Does he move the needle for this group? Maybe a little. Maybe. 15 points or so, to get this team to "definite playoff team?" I really don't think so. I think there's a high probability we just end up comfortably in the mediocre middle and the rebuild reload refocus takes even longer to get traction one way or another.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

I don't know enough about Woodcraft. But I think he could be beneficial to our more offensive minded players

 

[LogosBlue]

Gerard Gallant should be the first interview DA has.

 

[ArenaRat]

There was a preseason interview with Woodcroft on the 32 Thoughts podcast that surprised me. Normally I expect a coach interview to be full of coachspeak and word salad, but not him. Super thoughtful guy who boiled everything down to an actionable purpose. The ugly start (piss poor goaltending) doomed him -- they were hard against the cap and had no room for personnel moves, so firing the coach was the only way to shake things up. But I don't think his firing is a blemish on his record or representative of his ability. Interesting candidate.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Woodcroft played for the River Otters, I find that mildly interesting.

Getting this coach right is key because they will set the tone and style for our play through the beginning stages of the rebuild with the young players coming up. Getting Kyrou to play to his salary level is one of the more important things for the new coach.

 

[Thallis]

Woodcroft played for the River Otters, I find that mildly interesting.

Getting this coach right is key because they will set the tone and style for our play through the beginning stages of the rebuild with the young players coming up. Getting Kyrou to play to his salary level is one of the more important things for the new coach.

He also used to work his Brother's Northern Edge hockey camps in St. Louis. He signed one of his Flint Generals hockey cards for me when I went to that as a kid, but I have no idea where it went.

 

[Renard]

I suppose that Armstrong had a "to do" list with a number of items left to do before year's end.

1. fish or cut bait (I like this aphorism ) on Vrana.

2. Find Bortuzzo another job in the NHL;

3. If the team closes out the year on a low note, fire the coach.

4. Bring up hot prospects, if any.

 

[taylord22]

I certainly wouldn't baulk at Woodcroft, but it's going to be interesting to see how this is approached. Brind'Amour and Cooper (noted as not being married to TB) might be options at some point in the next 12-months. Maybe both are long shots, but it's worth factoring in for guys like that.

This roster isn't balanced and won't be for quite some time. The defense is a turd locked behind a timed vault of Armstrong's construction — can you even lure the right "guy" knowing he's going to be smelling a turd for extended time during his tenure? It feels like there's a lot of potential jobs 'available' with how bad the WC is, and how competitive the EC is.

The organization is alluring. The offense is poised to be -potentially- alluring in 2 years. Is that enough for a tier-1 coach? Or are we stuck with a tier-2 coach until the defense gets addressed?

Jobs are jobs. Money is money. But there's going to be a lot of options for the handful of elite/proven guys.

How many 'great' pieces do we legitimately have, actively? I think it's probably 2...Thomas and Buchnevich...and one of them is short-term. It's just not a lot. If you're ripping it down to the studs you're probably keeping Parayko (or maybe Faulk), you're married to Schenn, and likely keeping Neighbors. How many other guys are on the team that don't make sense to trade for one reason or another? Kyrou could be the chip you need to land a d-upgrade — especially if a combination of prospects walk-in next year and illustrate promise. Even a guy like Torpo is likely going to be valued higher at a TDL -by a contender- than what you'll have to deploy and pay him as. I don't know how to view Binnington. Brian has written a lot on the pros/cons and I've waivered back and forth on whether it's a good idea, even if we do actively intend/expect to pick in the top 10.

And -maybe- that blank slate -in itself- is alluring to some elite coaches; they can help build it to match their vision. But it's also where we go back to the turd in the vault...how much can we actively rip it down? And how damaging is ripping it down to the orgs financials over term?

 

[ezcreepin]

I certainly wouldn't baulk at Woodcroft, but it's going to be interesting to see how this is approached. Brind'Amour and Cooper (noted as not being married to TB) might be options at some point in the next 12-months. Maybe both are long shots, but it's worth factoring in for guys like that.

This roster isn't balanced and won't be for quite some time. The defense is a turd locked behind a timed vault of Armstrong's construction — can you even lure the right "guy" knowing he's going to be smelling a turd for extended time during his tenure? It feels like there's a lot of potential jobs 'available' with how bad the WC is, and how competitive the EC is.

The organization is alluring. The offense is poised to be -potentially- alluring in 2 years. Is that enough for a tier-1 coach? Or are we stuck with a tier-2 coach until the defense gets addressed?

Jobs are jobs. Money is money. But there's going to be a lot of options for the handful of elite/proven guys.

How many 'great' pieces do we legitimately have, actively? I think it's probably 2...Thomas and Buchnevich...and one of them is short-term. It's just not a lot. If you're ripping it down to the studs you're probably keeping Parayko (or maybe Faulk), you're married to Schenn, and likely keeping Neighbors. How many other guys are on the team that don't make sense to trade for one reason or another? Kyrou could be the chip you need to land a d-upgrade — especially if a combination of prospects walk-in next year and illustrate promise. Even a guy like Torpo is likely going to be valued higher at a TDL -by a contender- than what you'll have to deploy and pay him as. I don't know how to view Binnington. Brian has written a lot on the pros/cons and I've waivered back and forth on whether it's a good idea, even if we do actively intend/expect to pick in the top 10.

And -maybe- that blank slate -in itself- is alluring to some elite coaches; they can help build it to match their vision. But it's also where we go back to the turd in the vault...how much can we actively rip it down? And how damaging is ripping it down to the orgs financials over term?

I think something interesting to note about the coaching situation is that 1st, a really good coach can get this team competing and I stand firm on that stance. There are enough pieces here to be competitive, though to what extent is to be determined. 2nd, a new coach coming in is probably going to have a lot to say about the assistant coaches. Maybe they all stay after this year, but I would imagine if a Cooper or Brind'Amour came in, they are going to want assistants that fit their message and style. 3rd, if you do get a S-tier coach, I think the type of interest you get from players in trades and free agency is going to be way higher than if you get like a B-tier coach. I personally think players are more likely to want to play for Cooper or Brind'Amour than maybe a Woodcroft or *insert name*.

 

[taylord22]

I think something interesting to note about the coaching situation is that 1st, a really good coach can get this team competing and I stand firm on that stance. There are enough pieces here to be competitive, though to what extent is to be determined. 2nd, a new coach coming in is probably going to have a lot to say about the assistant coaches. Maybe they all stay after this year, but I would imagine if a Cooper or Brind'Amour came in, they are going to want assistants that fit their message and style. 3rd, if you do get a S-tier coach, I think the type of interest you get from players in trades and free agency is going to be way higher than if you get like a B-tier coach. I personally think players are more likely to want to play for Cooper or Brind'Amour than maybe a Woodcroft or *insert name*.

Agreed. And restructuring the admin of the team -and catching an actual footing on trajectory- gives Armstrong the 'out'. He's going to want a new challenge sooner than later. An S-tier coach is insulation for that day. I don't disagree with national perception that he's 'very accountable', but being 'generally' accountable is very different than being accountable for specifics (e.g. The D construction). We haven't heard that.

This new line of his "I want to leave the organization in a better place than I've found it" has reared its head consistently in press conferences and radio/tv hits over the last 6-months. I take him at face value that he's not going to leave when things are bad, but I suspect he will leave when the timing of his contract and positive footing line-up more evenly.

 

[Brian39]

Drop Kyrou, add Buchnevich. I would move Buchnevich at next year's trade deadline when I'm pretty sure his NTC is no longer effective - and if there's a hot offer for him between now and then, I'd move him to maximize his value.

Contracts are the only thing that led me to putting them in different tiers.

Buch would immediately move up to 'essentially untouchable' for me if there is an agreed-upon extension. The only reason I currently have him in the 'I'd sell for a great futures package' tier instead of higher is because he isn't locked up long term. Feeling out Buch's thoughts on an extension would probably be my #1 priority right now if I was in charge. You can't file a contract with the league until 7/1/24, but you can have candid conversations with his agent and you can even agree on a contract that then sits in a drawer.

Kyrou is in my "I'll only trade him for a known quantity" tier simply because he has tons of term left, his trade protection doesn't kick in until 2025 and I want to see how he looks under whoever our next full-time coach is before I sell low. I think Kyrou has been a better overall player this year than he was last year even though it hasn't translated to goals. I don't buy for a second that he suddenly became a 5% shooter, so I want to take a long while to see what his overall game looks like if/when he can put together the positive strides he's made off the puck with a 10% or higher shooting percentage. If I had to put money on it, I would bet on him having at least 1 90+ point season during his current contract and I wouldn't be surprised by multiple. I have little doubt that an increasing cap means he will eventually be worth the AAV and we shouldn't have cap concerns over the next 2 years given the state of the franchise. We could eventually reach a point where I take the best futures package available to him, but that wouldn't be for at least another 15 months.

We've seen what this team would be without Binnington. He goes, it's full-on tank mode - but I might also just throw him in the below category if we're going full-on rebuild.

Agreed and I'm not ready to do that yet. I want Bannister (and likely the next full-time hire) to get a good chunk of time with stable goaltending. I don't want to see Hofer suddenly thrown into a 1A or starter's pace right now either. I think the benefits of going full-blown rebuild by trading Binner are outweighed by the cost to long-term organizational knowledge/evaluation/development at this time, which is why I'd only move Binner right now if the return was a specific potentially franchise-altering piece. I will likely begin moving Binner down my untouchability list at the conclusion of this season.

Also add: Toropchenko, Tucker, MV63 (though I'd still part with him because I think what we've seen isn't what we'll see long-term), Hofer (unless we think Zherenko is suddenly the answer - which, let's see Hofer play some more games behind a semi-motivated team instead of a lackluster one before falling in love again with the AHL guy like we've done in years past).

I excluded the RFAs largely just because those types of moves are rarely deadline deals. None of our RFAs are established/known quantities on cheap deals that playoff teams might target as a cheap multi-year upgrade.

I guess it depends on how patient we're talking. Offseason? OK, maybe, depending on what other moves get made. Next trade deadline? That's probably ideal. This trade deadline? That's moving toward "fire sale" category. Someone's got to be here that has experience to mentor the kids as they step into the NHL, unless we're going to roll kids like it's 1978-79 and expect they'll figure it out while slogging in the basement of the league standings.

To clarify, these are my tiers right now. This is my valuation/willingness to move guys if I were in charge and trying to make deals between right now and the trade deadline. I don't expect tons of movement in these tiers over the next few months, but I would expect that my stance on several guys will change between the trade deadline and 7/1/24.

Add Krug here, because ... that contract, he's not getting moved easily, we might as well be as patient as we can. I don't see ownership agreeing to bury that contract (his salary for the 3 seasons is $8.5M, $6.5M and $6M respectively) and then pay a couple million more for his NHL replacement. Almost goes in the category up, though I'm not "perfectly fine" because it may be that difficult to move him.

I have Krug in my fire sale tier because I would be aggressively trying to move him before the deadline. Most the other fire sale assets are pretty small potatoes unless they improve their play under a new coach. He is the lone multi-year guy that I'd be aggressively trying to get off the roster by the deadline rather than simply fielding offers to gauge the market.

 

[ezcreepin]

Agreed. And restructuring the admin of the team -and catching an actual footing on trajectory- gives Armstrong the 'out'. He's going to want a new challenge sooner than later. An S-tier coach is insulation for that day. I don't disagree with national perception that he's 'very accountable', but being 'generally' accountable is very different than being accountable for specifics (e.g. The D construction). We haven't heard that.

This new line of his "I want to leave the organization in a better place than I've found it" has reared its head consistently in press conferences and radio/tv hits over the last 6-months. I take him at face value that he's not going to leave when things are bad, but I suspect he will leave when the timing of his contract and positive footing line-up more evenly.

The thing I worry about for an inevitable departure of Armstrong is that the amount of actually good GMs in this league are very few. I think Army is one of those despite his deficiencies at building a defense in this league. I give him credit for having a vision and trying to execute that, but I think the direction is probably wrong (STL, TB, Vegas all had tough defenses to play against. Puck movement might be way overrated right now).

I think Armstrong had a pretty good idea of how to build a tight, defensive unit, but his vision for puck movement is incorrect. I think you see that with the performance this team has had for a few years now when compared to other teams with "lesser" players. It's probably the case that he was incredibly lucky to hit so big on Parayko and having Petro develop into a true #1 all around defenseman. His trades for Bouw and Gunnarsson are underrated even if some of their years were questionable. Generally I feel comfortable with Army building another defense again, but with the heavy contracts we have now, it seems like it'll be built too late.

 

[taylord22]

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Not a fan of that comment.

Don't get me wrong, I've said similar about old co-workers and supervisors. But, this was not the time to make that type of comment.

 

[BlueDream]

I think it’s hilarious, to be honest.

I’m no Kyrou apologist but he’s been the whipping boy while everyone acts like Berube could do no wrong. Good on Jordan for firing back a little bit and I hope he proves people wrong.

 

[Blueline2757]

I used to like Kyrou but I'm starting to get tired of his entilted attitude. I can't wait until he isn't our overoverpaid underperforming prima donna anymore!!!!!!!!!

 

[joe galiba]

Not a fan of that comment.

Don't get me wrong, I've said similar about old co-workers and supervisors. But, this was not the time to make that type of comment.

or he could simply be moving forwards and not wanting to rehash the past

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I think it’s hilarious, to be honest.

I’m no Kyrou apologist but he’s been the whipping boy while everyone acts like Berube could do no wrong. Good on Jordan for firing back a little bit and I hope he proves people wrong.

with that comment he only increases spotlight on his performance, even more so than it already was going to be. i hope he explodes now that we made the change. show us what you got kyrou!

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Not a fan of that comment.

Don't get me wrong, I've said similar about old co-workers and supervisors. But, this was not the time to make that type of comment.

I think it says something, and at the same time it says nothing. I've heard other, less "in your face" and more "under the radar" statements over the last ~30 hours that meant more.