2023-2024 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[Reality Czech]

Is it really that hard to believe that Petro simply preferred to be in Vegas instead of St. Louis? Better weather, no state tax, new, competitive team in an exciting market, etc. Y'all are desperately trying to find the one reason Petro decided to leave but the most likely answer is usually the most obvious one. If he truly wanted to be in STL with all of his heart then he'd likely still be here.

I bet Korac threw out that anonymous quote simply because he knows the pitchforks are out for Armstrong and he knew it would feed right into the fans' anger. But let's keep debating this endlessly until the end of time, why not.

 

[BlueDream]

Is it really that hard to believe that Petro simply preferred to be in Vegas instead of St. Louis? Better weather, no state tax, new, competitive team in an exciting market, etc. Y'all are desperately trying to find the one reason Petro decided to leave but the most likely answer is usually the most obvious one. If he truly wanted to be in STL with all of his heart then he'd likely still be here.

I bet Korac threw out that anonymous quote simply because he knows the pitchforks are out for Armstrong and he knew it would feed right into the fans' anger. But let's keep debating this endlessly until the end of time, why not.

Yes actually it is kind of hard to believe that Petro wanted to be in Vegas over St. Louis, thanks for asking. He had spent his entire career here, was captain of the team, was the first captain in team history to hoist the Cup, and married a St. Louis woman, with whom had many young kids. Generally, a player with THAT background is not looking to uproot his home and bolt elsewhere. And a place like Vegas, despite having a good team, isn’t necessarily the type of city that would be a big draw to someone like Pietrangelo - who isn’t a young party type, and is from Canada so likely isn’t bothered by the cold.

Can you think of other times something similar like this has happened? If a Captain with major roots in a city is leaving a team, you would think it’s because they are either going home (not the case here), wanted a chance to win a Cup (again, not the case since he had just won here), or their team didn’t want them anymore. Hmmm, makes you think. Other than those three reasons, it just doesn’t make sense to simply want to leave. That doesn’t really happen.

Now, regarding Korac, I don’t think he’s the most reliable. I’d give it a 50% chance that his report is accurate, at best. If it is accurate, that’s a fireable offense from Armstrong. But honestly in Armstrong’s defense, I’d be shocked if he would have accepted anything under 8 mil.

 

[Reality Czech]

Yes actually it is kind of hard to believe that Petro wanted to be in Vegas over St. Louis, thanks for asking. He had spent his entire career here, was captain of the team, was the first captain in team history to hoist the Cup, and married a St. Louis woman, with whom had many young kids. Generally, a player with THAT background is not looking to uproot his home and bolt elsewhere. And a place like Vegas, despite having a good team, isn’t necessarily the type of city that would be a big draw to someone like Pietrangelo - who isn’t a young party type, and is from Canada so likely isn’t bothered by the cold.

Can you think of other times something similar like this has happened? If a Captain with major roots in a city is leaving a team, you would think it’s because they are either going home (not the case here), wanted a chance to win a Cup (again, not the case since he had just won here), or their team didn’t want them anymore. Hmmm, makes you think. Other than those three reasons, it just doesn’t make sense to simply want to leave. That doesn’t really happen.

Now, regarding Korac, I don’t think he’s the most reliable. I’d give it a 50% chance that his report is accurate, at best. If it is accurate, that’s a fireable offense from Armstrong. But honestly in Armstrong’s defense, I’d be shocked if he would have accepted anything under 8 mil.

That's a whole lot of speculation in your post. Players uproot and move their families all the time, that's nothing new or surprising. I bet they probably still own a home in St. Louis and spend a decent amount of time here. It's not like multimillion dollar athletes can't just hop on a private jet whenever they want. I'm sure there are plenty of people who live in Vegas for other reasons than the partying (no state tax for example). And there are plenty of Canadians who grew up in cold climates who would MUCH rather live somewhere warm. Petro's kids weren't even old enough to be in school, so it's not like uprooting them would make much difference. Plus, most pro athletes aren't satisfied with just one championship, they want as many as possible. I don't think much of your reasoning holds any weight.

So basically your argument is that Petro BADLY wanted to stay and it was ol' meanie Doug Armstrong who showed him the door, right? That the Blues and Armstrong didn't want Petro anymore, because......why exactly? I don't know about you, but if my heart is set on living in one place vs. another, I would accept slightly less to stay where I want to be. I'm not going to uproot my whole life and go against what I think is best for myself and my family over a few million dollars (when I've already earns tens of millions) and a NMC vs. a NTC.

By reading the tea leaves, it seems obvious to me that while Petro loves STL and is grateful for his time here, he was more than happy to move on to a new market and start a new chapter in his life. Some of you may see Petro as a victim in all of this, but he's a grown man who made his choice. I will never buy the argument that the ONLY reasons he left were a slightly lower AAV (but with an extra 8th year), less bonus money and a full NMC. Personally I think he just wanted a change and Vegas provided the best offer and opportunity to do that. For the record, I think both sides had already made up their mind long before Petro hit free agency. Army wouldn't have traded for Faulk if he was confident Petro was coming back, and it's been reported that there were no negotiations beyond midseason 2019-20.

I don't blame Petro for leaving, in fact I probably would have done the same. Could Army have done more to convince him to stay? Almost certainly. But that doesn't change the fact that if BOTH sides truly wanted to get a deal done, it would have got done. Compromise means giving and taking, not "give me everything I ask for or I'm leaving." Now let's continue to argue about this for the next decade. I look forward to some enlightening discussions with points that no one has ever brought up before.

 

[BlueDream]

That's a whole lot of speculation in your post. Players uproot and move their families all the time, that's nothing new or surprising. I bet they probably still own a home in St. Louis and spend a decent amount of time here. It's not like multimillion dollar athletes can't just hop on a private jet whenever they want. I'm sure there are plenty of people who live in Vegas for other reasons than the partying (no state tax for example). And there are plenty of Canadians who grew up in cold climates who would MUCH rather live somewhere warm. Petro's kids weren't even old enough to be in school, so it's not like uprooting them would make much difference. Plus, most pro athletes aren't satisfied with just one championship, they want as many as possible. I don't think much of your reasoning holds any weight.

So basically your argument is that Petro BADLY wanted to stay and it was ol' meanie Doug Armstrong who showed him the door, right? That the Blues and Armstrong didn't want Petro anymore, because......why exactly? I don't know about you, but if my heart is set on living in one place vs. another, I would accept slightly less to stay where I want to be. I'm not going to uproot my whole life and go against what I think is best for myself and my family over a few million dollars (when I've already earns tens of millions) and a NMC vs. a NTC.

By reading the tea leaves, it seems obvious to me that while Petro loves STL and is grateful for his time here, he was more than happy to move on to a new market and start a new chapter in his life. Some of you may see Petro as a victim in all of this, but he's a grown man who made his choice. I will never buy the argument that the ONLY reasons he left were a slightly lower AAV (but with an extra 8th year), less bonus money and a full NMC. Personally I think he just wanted a change and Vegas provided the best offer and opportunity to do that. For the record, I think both sides had already made up their mind long before Petro hit free agency. Army wouldn't have traded for Faulk if he was confident Petro was coming back, and it's been reported that there were no negotiations beyond midseason 2019-20.

I don't blame Petro for leaving, in fact I probably would have done the same. Could Army have done more to convince him to stay? Almost certainly. But that doesn't change the fact that if BOTH sides truly wanted to get a deal done, it would have got done. Compromise means giving and taking, not "give me everything I ask for or I'm leaving." Now let's continue to argue about this for the next decade. I look forward to some enlightening discussions with points that no one has ever brought up before.

I absolutely love how you tell me “there’s a lot of speculation in my post” as you then go on to speculate why you think Pietrangelo wanted to leave STL. Lmao.

Pietrangelo literally came out and said he wanted to stay here. He said they tried and tried to get something done but then had to look elsewhere when things weren’t going anywhere with the Blues. He actually stated a lot of my points (his legacy with the Blues, his wife and kids, etc). So actually no, it’s not speculation.

But hey, I’m sure he’s just lying and your speculation that he’s a greedy asshole who didn’t like St. Louis anymore is TOTALLY correct and definitely not speculation at all. No sir. Armstrong would never be stubborn in negotiations even though - oh wait - he did the same thing with David Perron, who also wanted to stay here? Hm interesting. Almost looks like a bit of a pattern but no, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence. Perron probably wanted to leave too, despite all his quotes stating otherwise, because Armstrong would never be a meanie.

 

[Majorityof1]

That's a whole lot of speculation in your post...

So basically your argument is that Petro BADLY wanted to stay and it was ol' meanie Doug Armstrong who showed him the door, right? That the Blues and Armstrong didn't want Petro anymore, because......why exactly?

Why Armstrong didn't want Petro? Because he didn't think Pietrangelo would age well. We have let a lot of older players looking for big money into their mid 30s go. It was right sometimes, wrong others. Also he doesn't like NMCs and refused to give one which was a deal breaker. He also doesn't like giving out huge contracts. He wants players who are rich, but not RICH. He may have felt Pietrangelo wanted to be RICH.

The evidence is there that it was Armstrong who wasn't sold on Pietrangelo, anecdotal yes. Requiring some speculation, yes. But Army is the one who delayed negoatiations with Petro's camp when he was eligible to be re-signed. Army is the one who went out and signed a younger, cheaper replacement in Faulk before he ever formally negotiated with Pietrangelo. Why do that if you really want to get something done with Pietrangelo?

I'll also agree with @BlueDream, it is pretty rich for you to critique him for a whole lot of speculation, when you make a whole lot of speculation as well. We have to speculate when we don't have the whole story. But the evidence at hand leads me to believe that Army did not want to sign Pietrangelo for a high dollar amount until he was 38 (would have been an 8 year deal here) and thought signing Faulk until he was 35 for less money was the better deal. This is backed up by things Armstrong has repeatedly said about their analysis of aging players and how he doesn't want anyone making huge money on a team and messing up the cap structure.

 

[wiscrev]

I absolutely love how you tell me “there’s a lot of speculation in my post” as you then go on to speculate why you think Pietrangelo wanted to leave STL. Lmao.

Pietrangelo literally came out and said he wanted to stay here. He said they tried and tried to get something done but then had to look elsewhere when things weren’t going anywhere with the Blues. He actually stated a lot of my points (his legacy with the Blues, his wife and kids, etc). So actually no, it’s not speculation.

But hey, I’m sure he’s just lying and your speculation that he’s a greedy asshole who didn’t like St. Louis anymore is TOTALLY correct and definitely not speculation at all. No sir. Armstrong would never be stubborn in negotiations even though - oh wait - he did the same thing with David Perron, who also wanted to stay here? Hm interesting. Almost looks like a bit of a pattern but no, I’m sure it’s just a coincidence. Perron probably wanted to leave too, despite all his quotes stating otherwise, because Armstrong would never be a meanie.

It's called, "saving face." What else do you think he would say? This whole subject is moot. He's gone, and quite frankly, I'm glad and also sick of all this bickering back and forth on the subject. It's done, and nothing can undo it, but there will those who want to debate this thing until the end of time. What a time waster. It's too bad some can't be better at delegating their time.

 

[Thallis]

It's also not hard to see how easy it is for someone to make claims without anything to substantiate it. Eklund built a hockey rumors empire by doing just that.

It's very rare that journalists who make a career of having a good relationship with the players and teams around the sport they work in will just make things up. Eklund has the financial incentive to do that since that's what his entire business is built on. An actual journalist like Korac closes doors within the league if he does that, giving him a financial disincentive to do so. You can argue there's a competing incentive for engagement, but this was a fairly innocuous throw in line on a bigger story outlining Armstrong's moves since the cup win and I don't see this discussion continue on most other Blues boards I visit.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I'm just curious as to why in the 3+ years it's been, we've never heard of the $7.5mil number before

I'm not looking to get into the debate over this topic, it just genuinely feels odd to me that this number randomly pops up, and yes, I know it could very well be true.

It may have been lobbed, and in the last ~3 years it slid off the radar. It may be made up. It may be new information that's been learned over time. I don't know. I kind of don't really care, but I'm sure I could care less.

Is it really that hard to believe that Petro simply preferred to be in Vegas instead of St. Louis? Better weather, no state tax, new, competitive team in an exciting market, etc. Y'all are desperately trying to find the one reason Petro decided to leave but the most likely answer is usually the most obvious one. If he truly wanted to be in STL with all of his heart then he'd likely still be here.

This is the kind of statement anyone on either side, who's really dug in, says as if it's irrefutably true and there's no reason anyone should be able to argue against it. Going to the other side: is it really that hard to believe that Petro wanted to be in St. Louis, and no matter how much he gave Armstrong still wouldn't sign on a deal because he wanted to squeeze Petro a little more knowing Petro really didn't want to leave? Remember, his wife is from St. Louis, her family is in St. Louis, their kids were born in St. Louis. Most people, especially professional athletes with families, don't decide on a whim, "f*** it all, let's just get up and move."

If "we're going to Vegas, baby!" was really his plan, why didn't he have a contract signed within the first hour of UFA opening? Why did it take until the 3rd day before he finally signed? Well, he just couldn't make it look obvious. Because ... he was secretly worried about what people in St. Louis thought about him, even though he'd long before decided to fly the coop no matter how much Armstrong begged him to stay? Maybe he'd gone back to Mrs. P at some point, even after going to Vegas, and they talked about him just taking something to stay and they were trying to figure out what that was going to be - and that idea, even if it's far-fetched, is as "proven" as some of the other "obvious" conclusions that have been lobbed by people.

To say "well, if he really wanted to be here, he'd still be here" ignores a whole lot of stuff. A whole lot of stuff - things you and I and everyone else here will never have to worry about. No one's out there bidding for our services, willing to pay millions of dollars per year for 5, 6, 7 (or maybe even 8 in select cases) years, all that money guaranteed, for us to go work for them. No one is willing to sign us to that contract and then offer to pay us 2/3rds of it at some point to go away. We're not working in a system where our current employer can come in today, say "I'm sending you to Cleveland, Syracuse, Boise, Albuquerque, wherever - thanks for all you did here, that new place will call you in a bit and arrange for you to get there" and you're suddenly on a flight by say 4pm to that new destination, leaving everything behind, leaving your family behind, because you have to be there tomorrow to get to work. And a whole lot of stuff beyond that which factors into the decisions players have to make on where to play and what contract to sign and what details need to be in that contract.

Every time this topic comes up, nothing changes. "Petro would have taken $7.5M per to stay" gets lobbed, and the pro-Pietrangelo crowd screams SEE, HE WOULD HAVE TAKEN LESS, ARMSTRONG TRIED TO SCREW HIM! while the anti-Pietrangelo crowd screams FAKE NEWS, THAT'S UTTER BULLSHIT, PETRO'S TRYING TO SAVE FACE! No opinions are changed, it's all just further "proof" for each side's dug-in assertions. Nothing changes.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Amazon in talks over streaming partnership with bankrupt Diamond Sports Group: Report

Amazon is reportedly in talks to invest in bankrupt regional sports network operator Diamond Sports Group.

finance.yahoo.com

All Blues and Cards games to Amazon Prime Video? Honestly, with how they do NFL. It really wouldn't been the worst outcome ever.

 

[Majorityof1]

Amazon in talks over streaming partnership with bankrupt Diamond Sports Group: Report

Amazon is reportedly in talks to invest in bankrupt regional sports network operator Diamond Sports Group.

finance.yahoo.com

All Blues and Cards games to Amazon Prime Video? Honestly, with how they do NFL. It really wouldn't been the worst outcome ever.

I wonder if they'd have to keep it regional, or if we'd have access to all 42 teams Bally streams with a amazon prime sub. I get the Disney bundle with ESPN+ cheap through my cell provider, so it won't effect me much. But it would be good for other sports fans to have all that access to non-local teams with a subscription a lot of people have fir perks outside streaming.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

I wonder if they'd have to keep it regional, or if we'd have access to all 42 teams Bally streams with a amazon prime sub. I get the Disney bundle with ESPN+ cheap through my cell provider, so it won't effect me much. But it would be good for other sports fans to have all that access to non-local teams with a subscription a lot of people have fir perks outside streaming.

Agreed. If they can get this to remove Blackouts it would be great. Blackouts (IIRC) are dictated by local area so having Amazon over all of it might be beneficial to getting rid of blackouts.

 

[Blueline2757]

Back to the Petro discussion for a minute since there’s been discussion lately and I just want to say this. Petro was getting the screw job from Army from getting Petro’s replacement etc, the one rumour was Army wanted petro to accept the AAV before even talking about terms and conditions.

I don’t blame petro if he wanted to move on, I certainly don’t want to stay at my job if my boss was screwing me over.

 

[joe galiba]

Back to the Petro discussion for a minute since there’s been discussion lately and I just want to say this. Petro was getting the screw job from Army from getting Petro’s replacement etc, the one rumour was Army wanted petro to accept the AAV before even talking about terms and conditions.

I don’t blame petro if he wanted to move on, I certainly don’t want to stay at my job if my boss was screwing me over.

we are talking about either around 8 or or around 9 million dollars a year, no one is or was getting screwed

 

[Majorityof1]

we are talking about either around 8 or or around 9 million dollars a year, no one is or was getting screwed

So because someone makes more than whatever arbitrary number is a lot to you, it's OK for someone far richer to screw them over? The minimum wage worker probably thinks you are well off. Does that mean its OK for your boss not to pay you what you are owed/worth?

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

So because someone makes more than whatever arbitrary number is a lot to you, it's OK for someone far richer to screw them over? The minimum wage worker probably thinks you are well off. Does that mean its OK for your boss not to pay you what you are owed/worth?

Nobody screwed over Petro. He was ufa and was able to find deal he wanted in Vegas. Whether it was mistake by blues that led him there, it was made by blues trying to balance competing interests in a salary cap league. We can say blues chose poorly, that they mis-weighed various factors and made club worse off, and I think hindsight bears that out. But nobody did Petro dirty. It’s a cap world and while army I think wanted to keep him, army thought given Petro ask that would be better to replace him than give him what he wanted contractually. That today perhaps looks to have been wrong call, but it doesn’t have to mean more than that. Even best gm isn’t perfect.

 

[BlueDream]

It's called, "saving face." What else do you think he would say? This whole subject is moot. He's gone, and quite frankly, I'm glad and also sick of all this bickering back and forth on the subject. It's done, and nothing can undo it, but there will those who want to debate this thing until the end of time. What a time waster. It's too bad some can't be better at delegating their time.

Ah yes, Pietrangelo was the one saving face. But Armstrong definitely wasn’t doing that at all, right?

It’s really funny how you guys will just pick and choose who you want to support and what you want to believe, and you will never change your minds no matter how easily the arguments are picked apart.

 

[Majorityof1]

Nobody screwed over Petro. He was ufa and was able to find deal he wanted in Vegas. Whether it was mistake by blues that led him there, it was made by blues trying to balance competing interests in a salary cap league. We can say blues chose poorly, that they mis-weighed various factors and made club worse off, and I think hindsight bears that out. But nobody did Petro dirty. It’s a cap world and while army I think wanted to keep him, army thought given Petro ask that would be better to replace him than give him what he wanted contractually. That today perhaps looks to have been wrong call, but it doesn’t have to mean more than that. Even best gm isn’t perfect.

I mostly agree with this. I was using the term used by prior posters. My argument was merely that the amount of money at stake does not change the calculus.

 

[joe galiba]

So because someone makes more than whatever arbitrary number is a lot to you, it's OK for someone far richer to screw them over? The minimum wage worker probably thinks you are well off. Does that mean its OK for your boss not to pay you what you are owed/worth?

If I want to sell my house for $520,000 and someone offers me $480,000, I am not getting screwed

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Back to the Petro discussion for a minute since there’s been discussion lately and I just want to say this. Petro was getting the screw job from Army from getting Petro’s replacement etc, the one rumour was Army wanted petro to accept the AAV before even talking about terms and conditions.

I do recall that getting reported, and not just from everyone's favorite homerific sources.

we are talking about either around 8 or or around 9 million dollars a year, no one is or was getting screwed

Dollars are relative, depending on where you are on the income scale. When we're talking millions of dollars for an annual salary, no one here can relate to it and it's very naive to suggest well, I wouldn't hold out for $5 million, I'd play for just $4 million $3 million $2 million $1 million instead, I'd play for the love of the game type stuff.

As much as you may love your job, if you know the next place over is offering 10% more with additional perks and the chance to be part of success that the rest of the world will always remember, ... you may not be getting screwed by your current employer, but loyalty to them is going to go so far.

If I want to sell my house for $520,000 and someone offers me $480,000, I am not getting screwed

Again, dollars are relative and specific to the example it depends on the situation. If the house is really worth $550,000 but you'll take $520,000 because you want to sell and take care of something else without having to wait a while for top dollar, and someone offers you $480,000 instead knowing you want to move and they're trying to swoop in and take advantage of your desire to sell quick, you're probably getting screwed.

 

[Majorityof1]

If I want to sell my house for $520,000 and someone offers me $480,000, I am not getting screwed

If it's worth $520k, and you sell it for less, then yes, you got screwed. It might not be illegal/against any rules. It may even be your fault. But you definitively got screwed. You got less for something than what it was worth.

Whether Army tried to screw Pietro or not is up for debate, but his salary is irrelevant to that. Lots of people call him greedy for not taking less out if loyalty because he's already rich but don't call out the owners who are even richer fir implementing the cap to suppress salaries in the first place. Whether he makes $1M or $8M, we are free to argue Armstrong's decisions and tactics the exact same without the"its OK to offer him less because he already makes so much" rhetoric.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

If it's worth $520k, and you sell it for less, then yes, you got screwed. It might not be illegal/against any rules. It may even be your fault. But you definitively got screwed. You got less for something than what it was worth.

Whether Army tried to screw Pietro or not is up for debate, but his salary is irrelevant to that. Lots of people call him greedy for not taking less out if loyalty because he's already rich but don't call out the owners who are even richer fir implementing the cap to suppress salaries in the first place. Whether he makes $1M or $8M, we are free to argue Armstrong's decisions and tactics the exact same without the"its OK to offer him less because he already makes so much" rhetoric.

It’s fine to call owners greedy for demanding cap. I don’t disagree. But this isn’t situation where club tried to pay him less out of greed. They wanted to pay him less out of desire to use that money elsewhere on roster. That may be mistake, maybe keeping stars like Petro matters more and rest can be worked around, but it wasn’t a desire to save money to put in owners pocket. That is where analogy to our jobs or housing falls apart.

Most folks who discuss salary with boss don’t have a cap, so it really is generally them wanting to keep money for self and not give to you. If your boss had cap, it’s different. They would be giving your money elsewhere to get a better employee elsewhere at risk of alienating you. Again, they may be stupid or shortsighted or not understanding all that you bring, but it’s not greed or screwing you if they spend part of $ you wanted to add a complementary scorer or whatever.

 

[joe galiba]

If it's worth $520k, and you sell it for less, then yes, you got screwed. It might not be illegal/against any rules. It may even be your fault. But you definitively got screwed. You got less for something than what it was worth.

Whether Army tried to screw Pietro or not is up for debate, but his salary is irrelevant to that. Lots of people call him greedy for not taking less out if loyalty because he's already rich but don't call out the owners who are even richer fir implementing the cap to suppress salaries in the first place. Whether he makes $1M or $8M, we are free to argue Armstrong's decisions and tactics the exact same without the"its OK to offer him less because he already makes so much" rhetoric.

If it is actually worth 520k, then I can turn around and sell it to a different buyer, but just because it is only worth 480k to buyer x doesn't mean he is trying to screw me

I don't think Petro was greedy or not greedy, he had an opportunity to make more and he took it, good for him, it doesn't mean the Blues were trying to screw him because they valued his services a bit lower, it is not getting screwed

 

[joe galiba]

I do recall that getting reported, and not just from everyone's favorite homerific sources.


Dollars are relative, depending on where you are on the income scale. When we're talking millions of dollars for an annual salary, no one here can relate to it and it's very naive to suggest well, I wouldn't hold out for $5 million, I'd play for just $4 million $3 million $2 million $1 million instead, I'd play for the love of the game type stuff.

As much as you may love your job, if you know the next place over is offering 10% more with additional perks and the chance to be part of success that the rest of the world will always remember, ... you may not be getting screwed by your current employer, but loyalty to them is going to go so far.


Again, dollars are relative and specific to the example it depends on the situation. If the house is really worth $550,000 but you'll take $520,000 because you want to sell and take care of something else without having to wait a while for top dollar, and someone offers you $480,000 instead knowing you want to move and they're trying to swoop in and take advantage of your desire to sell quick, you're probably getting screwed.

at the end of the day if the only offer you get is 480k, well then that is what it is worth under those conditions, I do not see it as getting screwed

if I have to pay 10% more for a product that is in stock vs the same product from a different manufacturer that is 8 weeks out I am not getting screwed, I have to make a decision based upon what I feel is best for our company at that moment

also loyalty is individual, and different people value it differently

 

[Reality Czech]

It may have been lobbed, and in the last ~3 years it slid off the radar. It may be made up. It may be new information that's been learned over time. I don't know. I kind of don't really care, but I'm sure I could care less.


This is the kind of statement anyone on either side, who's really dug in, says as if it's irrefutably true and there's no reason anyone should be able to argue against it. Going to the other side: is it really that hard to believe that Petro wanted to be in St. Louis, and no matter how much he gave Armstrong still wouldn't sign on a deal because he wanted to squeeze Petro a little more knowing Petro really didn't want to leave? Remember, his wife is from St. Louis, her family is in St. Louis, their kids were born in St. Louis. Most people, especially professional athletes with families, don't decide on a whim, "f*** it all, let's just get up and move."

If "we're going to Vegas, baby!" was really his plan, why didn't he have a contract signed within the first hour of UFA opening? Why did it take until the 3rd day before he finally signed? Well, he just couldn't make it look obvious. Because ... he was secretly worried about what people in St. Louis thought about him, even though he'd long before decided to fly the coop no matter how much Armstrong begged him to stay? Maybe he'd gone back to Mrs. P at some point, even after going to Vegas, and they talked about him just taking something to stay and they were trying to figure out what that was going to be - and that idea, even if it's far-fetched, is as "proven" as some of the other "obvious" conclusions that have been lobbed by people.

To say "well, if he really wanted to be here, he'd still be here" ignores a whole lot of stuff. A whole lot of stuff - things you and I and everyone else here will never have to worry about. No one's out there bidding for our services, willing to pay millions of dollars per year for 5, 6, 7 (or maybe even 8 in select cases) years, all that money guaranteed, for us to go work for them. No one is willing to sign us to that contract and then offer to pay us 2/3rds of it at some point to go away. We're not working in a system where our current employer can come in today, say "I'm sending you to Cleveland, Syracuse, Boise, Albuquerque, wherever - thanks for all you did here, that new place will call you in a bit and arrange for you to get there" and you're suddenly on a flight by say 4pm to that new destination, leaving everything behind, leaving your family behind, because you have to be there tomorrow to get to work. And a whole lot of stuff beyond that which factors into the decisions players have to make on where to play and what contract to sign and what details need to be in that contract.

Every time this topic comes up, nothing changes. "Petro would have taken $7.5M per to stay" gets lobbed, and the pro-Pietrangelo crowd screams SEE, HE WOULD HAVE TAKEN LESS, ARMSTRONG TRIED TO SCREW HIM! while the anti-Pietrangelo crowd screams FAKE NEWS, THAT'S UTTER BULLSHIT, PETRO'S TRYING TO SAVE FACE! No opinions are changed, it's all just further "proof" for each side's dug-in assertions. Nothing changes.

You know how I know Petro didn't really wanna stay in St. Louis? Because he left. Rather than trying to decipher tidbits of information that may or may not be true, I base my judgment on what actually happened. Who ever said he decided on a whim? I'm sure he took his time to decide, but I stand by my comment that if he truly, 100% was committed to staying here that a deal would have got done. I said in my post that both sides likely knew 6-18 months ahead of time that Petro wasn't likely coming back.

I also never said that Petro knew 100% he was going to Vegas, but I think most players would be pretty excited to hit UFA for the first time in their career. I don't see any reason why he would rush to sign the moment free agency opened. But from what I remember, he sure didn't waste any time hopping on a PJ to Vegas to meet with ownership.

And while Vegas has a wagon of a team right now, Petro's numbers are way down. The times I've watched Vegas this year, he hasn't impressed me much. Maybe Vegas did overpay to convince him to come there. 1 goal and 14 points in 27 games isn't the kind of production you expect out of an $8.8 million dollar player. Interesting that Faulk also has 14 points and Krug has 15.

 

[Brian39]

You know how I know Petro didn't really wanna stay in St. Louis? Because he left. Rather than trying to decipher tidbits of information that may or may not be true, I base my judgment on what actually happened. Who ever said he decided on a whim? I'm sure he took his time to decide, but I stand by my comment that if he truly, 100% was committed to staying here that a deal would have got done. I said in my post that both sides likely knew 6-18 months ahead of time that Petro wasn't likely coming back.

Do you also believe that David Perron didn't really want to stay?