2024-2025 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread.

[Reality Czech]

If you get a center upgrade on Sunny you could bench Toro and upgrade the 4th line.



Not opposed to that.

I don't really see the point. Sunny has been good lately and so has the 4th line. If a youngish guy with term is available I'd change my mind, but considering how well the team has been playing I don't wanna disrupt the chemistry too much.

And I know some like to say he's a cancer based on whatever happened in Minny and Dallas, personally I don't care about that, and it seems that he's fit in well with our group, there hasn't been any issues, and it's been a good relationship. I definitely wouldn't be opposed to bringing him back again. I don't think any of the young defenders are ready for NHL time next year, so he wouldn't be blocking anyone. If we make any upgrades to the defense, I think it would have to come at the expense of Faulk or Leddy, where Suter can be that cheap 3rd pair vet.

Clearly Schenn was the only right choice for captain. Holloway also said something similar in the post game interview the other day.

 

[WeWentBlues]

One game before the deadline. I don't envy the position this team has put Armstrong into. Pretty abysmal season so far but better underlying metrics under Monty and starting to see results in the win column. Too little too late?

20 games in 42 days to close out the season is going to be brutal. I'd prefer to see the Blues make a push for the playoffs than start selling off assets.

 

[Reality Czech]

One game before the deadline. I don't envy the position this team has put Armstrong into. Pretty abysmal season so far but better underlying metrics under Monty and starting to see results in the win column. Too little too late?

20 games in 42 days to close out the season is going to be brutal. I'd prefer to see the Blues make a push for the playoffs than start selling off assets.

It's so frustrating to think that just 2-3 wins earlier in the season would have put us in a great position to make the playoffs, but I guess that's how it goes. I can think of a few games that we just gave away.

As you said, Army is in a tough spot because it's hard to trade away players when everything is coming together and the team is all on the same page. Seems to be a really close group that plays for each other. It took too long to get there but this actually looks like a pretty good team when everything is clicking.

 

[Beauterham]

It's so frustrating to think that just 2-3 wins earlier in the season would have put us in a great position to make the playoffs, but I guess that's how it goes. I can think of a few games that we just gave away.

As you said, Army is in a tough spot because it's hard to trade away players when everything is coming together and the team is all on the same page. Seems to be a really close group that plays for each other. It took too long to get there but this actually looks like a pretty good team when everything is clicking.

This might be a weird take, but I don't think the current situation is that bad to be honest. I mean, we don't HAVE to move any players right now: if we really want to move players, we could also do that in the offseason, before the draft. I don't even think the players would lose a lot of value compared to if we move them now. It might also stop GM's to throw out low-ball offers for players as they know Army isn't going to accept anyway because he needs them to make the playoffs. If a GM REALLY wants a specific player they will have to convince Army with an offer he can't refuse. Basicly, the massive haul refered to earlier.

However, the downside to our current situation is that if we barely miss out on the playoffs again, which -lets be honest- is quite possible, we will have a lower pick.

 

[Reality Czech]

This might be a weird take, but I don't think the current situation is that bad to be honest. I mean, we don't HAVE to move any players right now: if we really want to move players, we could also do that in the offseason, before the draft. I don't even think the players would lose a lot of value compared to if we move them now. It might also stop GM's to throw out low-ball offers for players as they know Army isn't going to accept anyway because he needs them to make the playoffs. If a GM REALLY wants a specific player they will have to convince Army with an offer he can't refuse. Basicly, the massive haul refered to earlier.

However, the downside to our current situation is that if we barely miss out on the playoffs again, which -lets be honest- is quite possible, we will have a lower pick.

Totally agree. It wouldn't surprise me if some rumors were floated as a wake up call to the team. If someone wants to overpay then Army has to consider it, but he also doesn't need to make any big moves right now.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

We don’t have any pending UFA in players who move the needle enough to command the kind of return we’d really miss. Standing pat, we won’t lose any first round compensation.

I think the already committed to trying to optimize this season when he made the move to Montgomery when he did.

I’m pretty optimistic about them overtaking the 8th spot. Does Vancouver look poised to buy together a winning streak? Not to me.

 

[Brian39]

I'm fully content giving another 1 year (preferably bonus laden) deal to Suter if he really is interested in staying here to finish out his career. I have zero heartburn about how that impacts younger D.

Tucker turned 25 this weekend and has played 20+ NHL games in each of the last 3 seasons for a blue line that was objectively not good on the left side. He has had ample opportunity to demonstrate that he belongs in a healthy 6 man D group and hasn't done so. His ceiling is limited and I think there is about a 0.1% chance that this organization is ever a contender if he is the 2LD. Maybe he develops into a contender-caliber 3rd pair D man, but he will be due a UFA-market-value contract by the time that ever becomes the case. He is also going to be a UFA this summer unless he plays 8 more NHL games this year, which is only going to happen if someone gets hurt because he is very clearly not one of the best 6 D men on the roster right now. I'm more than content to move on from him in order to build/keep a blue line that is tangibly better without him for 2025/26. Loof is waivers exempt next year and I haven't seen anything to suggest that he deserves to be penciled onto our bottom pair next season. Burns and Lindstein should clearly not be penciled into the NHL lineup next year.

We have top 5-10 defensive metrics since Montgomery took over and that is now a 40 game sample. All of these numbers are per 60 at 5 on 5: 3rd in expected goals against, 6th in scoring chances against, 1st in scoring chances against, 7th in corsi against, 8th in fenwick against, and 17th in shots against. Suter has legitimately contributed to that group's success and I'm in zero rush to intentionally make the group worse to develop low-ceiling, non-foundational guys.

I was weary of Suter's reported locker room concerns, but it very much appears that he fits in with our group. And as I said at the time of the signing, if he becomes a problem it is an easy contract to move out. I assume that the same would be true of any extension.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I'm fully content giving another 1 year (preferably bonus laden) deal to Suter if he really is interested in staying here to finish out his career. I have zero heartburn about how that impacts younger D.

Tucker turned 25 this weekend and has played 20+ NHL games in each of the last 3 seasons for a blue line that was objectively not good on the left side. He has had ample opportunity to demonstrate that he belongs in a healthy 6 man D group and hasn't done so. His ceiling is limited and I think there is about a 0.1% chance that this organization is ever a contender if he is the 2LD. Maybe he develops into a contender-caliber 3rd pair D man, but he will be due a UFA-market-value contract by the time that ever becomes the case. He is also going to be a UFA this summer unless he plays 8 more NHL games this year, which is only going to happen if someone gets hurt because he is very clearly not one of the best 6 D men on the roster right now. I'm more than content to move on from him in order to build/keep a blue line that is tangibly better without him for 2025/26. Loof is waivers exempt next year and I haven't seen anything to suggest that he deserves to be penciled onto our bottom pair next season. Burns and Lindstein should clearly not be penciled into the NHL lineup next year.

We have top 5-10 defensive metrics since Montgomery took over and that is now a 40 game sample. All of these numbers are per 60 at 5 on 5: 3rd in expected goals against, 6th in scoring chances against, 1st in scoring chances against, 7th in corsi against, 8th in fenwick against, and 17th in shots against. Suter has legitimately contributed to that group's success and I'm in zero rush to intentionally make the group worse to develop low-ceiling, non-foundational guys.

I was weary of Suter's reported locker room concerns, but it very much appears that he fits in with our group. And as I said at the time of the signing, if he becomes a problem it is an easy contract to move out. I assume that the same would be true of any extension.

We extended Tucker for 2 years last week, but otherwise agree.

 

[Oberyn]

I'm fully content giving another 1 year (preferably bonus laden) deal to Suter if he really is interested in staying here to finish out his career. I have zero heartburn about how that impacts younger D.

Tucker turned 25 this weekend and has played 20+ NHL games in each of the last 3 seasons for a blue line that was objectively not good on the left side. He has had ample opportunity to demonstrate that he belongs in a healthy 6 man D group and hasn't done so. His ceiling is limited and I think there is about a 0.1% chance that this organization is ever a contender if he is the 2LD. Maybe he develops into a contender-caliber 3rd pair D man, but he will be due a UFA-market-value contract by the time that ever becomes the case. He is also going to be a UFA this summer unless he plays 8 more NHL games this year, which is only going to happen if someone gets hurt because he is very clearly not one of the best 6 D men on the roster right now. I'm more than content to move on from him in order to build/keep a blue line that is tangibly better without him for 2025/26. Loof is waivers exempt next year and I haven't seen anything to suggest that he deserves to be penciled onto our bottom pair next season. Burns and Lindstein should clearly not be penciled into the NHL lineup next year.

We have top 5-10 defensive metrics since Montgomery took over and that is now a 40 game sample. All of these numbers are per 60 at 5 on 5: 3rd in expected goals against, 6th in scoring chances against, 1st in scoring chances against, 7th in corsi against, 8th in fenwick against, and 17th in shots against. Suter has legitimately contributed to that group's success and I'm in zero rush to intentionally make the group worse to develop low-ceiling, non-foundational guys.

I was weary of Suter's reported locker room concerns, but it very much appears that he fits in with our group. And as I said at the time of the signing, if he becomes a problem it is an easy contract to move out. I assume that the same would be true of any extension.

Tucker signed a two-year extension two days ago. I would say he has been serviceable as a bottom pairing defenseman and gives the Blues some edge on the back end. If the Blues do re-sign Suter then I don't have an issue with alternating between the two depending on the opponent and who's playing well.

 

[bleedblue1223]

We signed MacEachern to a 2-year 1-way contract too, so just because we signed Tucker, I don't think it means his role of NHL/AHL tweener really changes. Same with Kessel. We've shown a willingness to pay our tweeners a NHL salary.