2024-2025 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread.

[Brian39]

I think the more interesting thing with Hofer isn't an offer-sheet, it's trade possibilities. If we get an offer-sheet like Broberg, I think we pretty easily match because the compensation isn't worth it. At a 1st and 3rd round pick, I could see us taking the picks, and that would have to be the cap figure for Hofer to sign long-term IMO. But, I could see a situation where a team in need of a young goalie approaches us like we did for Halak. Askarov and Knight are somewhat comps, but not completely.

I haven't gone through the teams to figure out who would be in need of a goalie of the future that can step in immediately into at least a 1A/1B role to figure out a true comp, but I could see us being tempted by a Halak/Eller type offer. If you could use Hofer to get a young RD, I think that makes sense. Don't think you do something for a winger. Center is an option, but I don't know how much of one since we have Dvorsky, it would depend on the center.

Agreed

I'm just curious what our plan is for Binnington, Hofer, and Ellis. Previously, I was thinking Binnington would be the one to leave, but now that we have improved our current situation, I think I lean towards us keeping Binnington, and make a decision on Hofer and Ellis. And with Ellis' contract, we aren't forced into make a decision this summer, but I do think we probably make a decision sooner than later, so that we don't waste the value of whichever one we don't keep.

I think any potential to trade Binner has completely evaporated. That potential was based on the notion that 2025/26 was just a development year with any potential window opening happening in 2026/27 or later. Any such plan is gone. The team is playing at a 105+ point pace under Monty. The 5 on 5 underlying defensive metrics are top 5 in the league and the top 4 D are under contract for next season. The underlying offensive metrics are middle-of-the-road, but our 'actual' goals are outperforming the underlying numbers to put them in the top 5 as well. Most of our forward group is young and on the upswing and we have a couple high end young forward prospects that should be knocking on the door next season. We also have the cap space to make an addition if we want (either in the summer or to shore something up mid-season next year.

This team will be looking to win in 2025/26. We can debate whether they can build a Cup-contending roster or not, but this is a team that will be looking to be top 10 in the NHL next season. Binner is going to be part of that. I'd be stunned if he's moved in the next 14 months or so and I'd only see him moved in the summer of 2026 if Hofer genuinely steals the job from him in 2025/26.

I disagree that we make a decision sooner than later. Ellis did us a solid by accepting a 2 year deal. Him and Binner's deals now expire at the same time and Hofer can't get to UFA until the summer after Binner/Ellis need new contracts. Barring a great offer for Hofer, I think we return the Binner/Hofer tandem in 2025/26 to maximize our NHL team's ability in net and see if Hofer can take another step. Ellis can get an increased AHL workload and then we can make a decision next summer.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Agreed

I think any potential to trade Binner has completely evaporated. That potential was based on the notion that 2025/26 was just a development year with any potential window opening happening in 2026/27 or later. Any such plan is gone. The team is playing at a 105+ point pace under Monty. The 5 on 5 underlying defensive metrics are top 5 in the league and the top 4 D are under contract for next season. The underlying offensive metrics are middle-of-the-road, but our 'actual' goals are outperforming the underlying numbers to put them in the top 5 as well. Most of our forward group is young and on the upswing and we have a couple high end young forward prospects that should be knocking on the door next season. We also have the cap space to make an addition if we want (either in the summer or to shore something up mid-season next year.

This team will be looking to win in 2025/26. We can debate whether they can build a Cup-contending roster or not, but this is a team that will be looking to be top 10 in the NHL next season. Binner is going to be part of that. I'd be stunned if he's moved in the next 14 months or so and I'd only see him moved in the summer of 2026 if Hofer genuinely steals the job from him in 2025/26.

I disagree that we make a decision sooner than later. Ellis did us a solid by accepting a 2 year deal. Him and Binner's deals now expire at the same time and Hofer can't get to UFA until the summer after Binner/Ellis need new contracts. Barring a great offer for Hofer, I think we return the Binner/Hofer tandem in 2025/26 to maximize our NHL team's ability in net and see if Hofer can take another step. Ellis can get an increased AHL workload and then we can make a decision next summer.

I'll clarify. I absolutely agree that Ellis did us a solid, and we are in no rush to make a decision on what we do. I don't expect something this summer. My view with saying we make a decision sooner than later is simply, Army and Steen are now in a place where if trade talks do come up, they have leverage and they can get good value. Making a decision might simply mean they have a better idea of what plan A looks like as far as what 2 goalies they want to keep, and what value it would take to move the other. I don't think we wait until the current contracts and timelines run their course before making a move when that goalie loses some of their trade value.

Unless we get a great deal that helps the roster for next season, I'd much rather go into the year with all 3. I like Ellis being our #3 better than Zherenko or a random vet we sign for Springfield. Assuming Ellis is ready to be a NHL backup, an injury to Binnington or Hofer wouldn't kill us in the standings, and that's better than moving him to get slightly better value in a trade.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

 

[STL fan in MN]

What is a number that you think the Blues couldn't/wouldn't match?

I'd be perfectly content to take an unprotected 1st and a 3rd for Hofer ($4.581M+ AAV). I don't see contenders offering him that and I don't see teams offering him that to make him a backup. The teams offering him that kind of money would be looking to make him their 1A or outright #1. I'm a big Hofer fan and I think he will be that. But I'm not sure he will be good in that role in year 1 and I'd be more than happy to hold an unprotected 1st of the team putting him in that position.

So we're probably talking about a Broberg-like contract where the compensation is only a 2nd. $4.5M is obviously more than I'd like to pay him, but we have the cap space to make that work in the short term. I think any team signing him to an offer sheet in this range would have to know that they are very unlikely to get the player and are doing it almost exclusively to screw our cap structure and piss off a front office.

I just don't see a path for another team to actually pry him away from us with an offer sheet, which is why we so rarely see offer sheets.

I’d think the Blues would consider not matching once the compensation reached a 1st rd pick+. And like you, agree anything less than that would be an easy match. It would be just to screw with our cap structure. My guess is the Blues re-sign him for around $3.5M for a couple years.

The trade route bleedblue brings up is intriguing but I see that as more likely a year away if ever. Hofer could be seen as someone that could step into a #1 role a year from now (like Halak was back in the day when we traded away Eller to get him) and Ellis would likely be considered more ready for an NHL backup role a year from now too. Not saying any of that will happen but it’s the sorts of things GMs think about as their players develop and how things are looking in terms of contracts and the cap.

 

[Mike Liut]

I think it’s time for the Kyrou bashers to admit they’re wrong and start recognizing what a great player he is.

 

[ScratchCatFever]

I think it’s time for the Kyrou bashers to admit they’re wrong and start recognizing what a great player he is.

At the very least, he deserves credit for turning the whole Berube/Cuckeford saga into a positive for his growth as a player and a person. It would've been fair at the time to question if the whole ordeal would break him. But his skin proved to be thicker than most people thought and it humbled him. I think it's safe to say he's taken that next step in his development to becoming a more complete hockey player. I'm glad he's part of this group.

 

[taylord22]

Pretty good breakdown of what's changed in terms of 'systems' for the Blues on the most recent run. Spoiler for the end, they ask Goyens "what percentage of the Blues turnaround would you attribute to coaching" His answer: 70%

 

[Beninnola]

I’ve noticed a few different groups celebrating Monty and his impact.

And I’ve noticed zero of those places mention bannister, for weeks, was without Robert Thomas, didn’t have Cam Fowler, didn’t have Leddy, and didn’t have Broberg. It’s a ridiculously ignorant take to highlight the difference in aggregate numbers between the two coaches.

The team started well, then was a bit mid, and then was injured, then a coach bump that coincided with injured players returning, then mid for a long time, then hotter than the sun.

It’s real easy to show improvement in certain ways, like expected goals for and against, when one of the things you’re comparing to the other is not similar whatsoever. Like a team with a healthy Robert Thomas versus a team with Buchnevich at 1C.

I’m giving 80% of the improvement to the players and the overall plan. I feel anybody who is giving 70% to the coach is a full blown idiot who is taking the easy path to analysis because “numbers are better”. Guess what analyst: Robert Thomas helps the team score more when he’s in the lineup. The icetime guys like Bolduc got under both coaches developed him to where he is today. Same with the rest. Monty is fine, I’m glad he’s here. He hasn’t taken a single shift. I’m not convinced we wouldn’t be in the exact same spot with bannister. Why wouldn’t we be?

 

[bleedblue1223]

Jack Adams and GM of the year will be interesting to follow. Haven't really put too much into tracking who the leaders would be, but have to imagine Monty and Army are contenders along with Washington's duo.

 

[AyeBah]

I’ve noticed a few different groups celebrating Monty and his impact.

And I’ve noticed zero of those places mention bannister, for weeks, was without Robert Thomas, didn’t have Cam Fowler, didn’t have Leddy, and didn’t have Broberg. It’s a ridiculously ignorant take to highlight the difference in aggregate numbers between the two coaches.

The team started well, then was a bit mid, and then was injured, then a coach bump that coincided with injured players returning, then mid for a long time, then hotter than the sun.

It’s real easy to show improvement in certain ways, like expected goals for and against, when one of the things you’re comparing to the other is not similar whatsoever. Like a team with a healthy Robert Thomas versus a team with Buchnevich at 1C.

I’m giving 80% of the improvement to the players and the overall plan. I feel anybody who is giving 70% to the coach is a full blown idiot who is taking the easy path to analysis because “numbers are better”. Guess what analyst: Robert Thomas helps the team score more when he’s in the lineup. The icetime guys like Bolduc got under both coaches developed him to where he is today. Same with the rest. Monty is fine, I’m glad he’s here. He hasn’t taken a single shift. I’m not convinced we wouldn’t be in the exact same spot with bannister. Why wouldn’t we be?

Good points all around, Drew.

 

[MissouriMook]

I’d think the Blues would consider not matching once the compensation reached a 1st rd pick+. And like you, agree anything less than that would be an easy match. It would be just to screw with our cap structure. My guess is the Blues re-sign him for around $3.5M for a couple years.

The trade route bleedblue brings up is intriguing but I see that as more likely a year away if ever. Hofer could be seen as someone that could step into a #1 role a year from now (like Halak was back in the day when we traded away Eller to get him) and Ellis would likely be considered more ready for an NHL backup role a year from now too. Not saying any of that will happen but it’s the sorts of things GMs think about as their players develop and how things are looking in terms of contracts and the cap.

I'm hoping it is closer to $2.5M per year, but with the cap going up its hard to say.

 

[MissouriMook]

Jack Adams and GM of the year will be interesting to follow. Haven't really put too much into tracking who the leaders would be, but have to imagine Monty and Army are contenders along with Washington's duo.

I wonder if any coach has ever even been a finalist for the Jack Adams Award in a season in which they were fired mid-season.

 

[Beninnola]

Good points all around, Drew.

Folks who want to compare coaches should use both coaches full results. That includes bannister going 30-19-5 last year.

If you do - You find that bannister outperformed Monty until only recently in the aggregate. You could make videos until just recently that made Monty look bad, out coached by a rookie interim. People didn’t do that because it would have been dumb, equally dumb imo as the opposite that is happening now.

If that means I’m drew bannister then fine. Idgaf

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Folks who want to compare coaches should use both coaches full results. That includes bannister going 30-19-5 last year.

If you do - You find that bannister outperformed Monty until only recently in the aggregate. You could make videos until just recently that made Monty look bad, out coached by a rookie interim. People didn’t do that because it would have been dumb, equally dumb imo as the opposite that is happening now.

You’re not actually arguing that bannister is as good a coach as Monty, are you?

 

[Beninnola]

You’re not actually arguing that bannister is as hood a coach as Monty, are you?

I don’t know that I could.

I can look at the situations and results and identify our performance comes from:

Oskar Sundqvist is dramatically outperforming his contract and is elite in his non-sexy role.

Our first line, when healthy, can handle elite opposition without getting caved in.

Holloway balances our offense and helped Kyrou elevate the degree that we are potent enough to roll lines against good teams. They’re effective enough that we can just have a cadence, not stressed needing to constantly avoid risk moments.

Bolduc has grown to handle 15+ good shifts a game.

Our defense now has a bazillion games played, when healthy we are absolutely stacked.

Bannister was fine maybe? I’m not in the room. Monty is fine too? Sure.

Neither guy is a competitive advantage. They’re positive contributors. Neither have the ability to “be 70% of the reason”, especially when the justification includes comparing the results of an injured team to a healthy one.

Before 4 nations - we were playing horribly for a long while, below .500 for a stretch. Was that Monty’s 70% too? Is that bad stretch the players and goalies fault but then the good part is the coach? You can snip timeframes that make drew look good and you can snip timeframes that make Monty look good. Goalpost moving can help any argument, especially if you move one goalpost that coincides with trades and players returning from injury.

 

[Brian39]

Neither guy is a competitive advantage. They’re positive contributors. Neither have the ability to “be 70% of the reason”, especially when the justification includes comparing the results of an injured team to a healthy one.

Parayko has played 0 minutes on this recent 10 game win streak. He's now missed more games than Thomas did and the overwhelming consensus around here was that those two were by far our most 2 important players this year.

I get the point your making, but let's not pretend that the current team is healthy while losing Thomas was a death knell for Bannister.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I don’t know that I could.

I can look at the situations and results and identify our performance comes from:

Oskar Sundqvist is dramatically outperforming his contract and is elite in his non-sexy role.

Our first line, when healthy, can handle elite opposition without getting caved in.

Holloway balances our offense and helped Kyrou elevate the degree that we are potent enough to roll lines against good teams. They’re effective enough that we can just have a cadence, not stressed needing to constantly avoid risk moments.

Bolduc has grown to handle 15+ good shifts a game.

Our defense now has a bazillion games played, when healthy we are absolutely stacked.

Bannister was fine maybe? I’m not in the room. Monty is fine too? Sure.

Neither guy is a competitive advantage. They’re positive contributors. Neither have the ability to “be 70% of the reason”, especially when the justification includes comparing the results of an injured team to a healthy one.

Before 4 nations - we were playing horribly for a long while, below .500 for a stretch. Was that Monty’s 70% too? Is that bad stretch the players and goalies fault but then the good part is the coach? If you grabbed Monty’s first 50 games here and bannisters first 50 - guess who wins? It’s drew by a lot. Goalpost moving can help any argument, especially if you move one goalpost that coincides with trades and players returning from injury.

Monty has track record of helping players achieve their best performance. We finally got a chance to get more than 1 practice in at. 4 Nations break and this looks like a different team. Is this all a coincidence? Would we be doing this under Bannister?

 

[Beninnola]

Parayko has played 0 minutes on this recent 10 game win streak. He's now missed more games than Thomas did and the overwhelming consensus around here was that those two were by far our most 2 important players this year.

I get the point your making, but let's not pretend that the current team is healthy while losing Thomas was a death knell for Bannister.

I agree, but it wasn’t just Thomas.

Our defense was:

(Example just picked Sabres game from November)

Parayko
Faulk
Kessel

Suter
Perunovich
PO Joseph

When healthy now it’s

Fowler Broberg leddy
Parayko Faulk Suter

It’s like thousands of games difference and 2/3 of the left side of the November group aren’t nhlers (way below replacement level).

I’m not really meaning to imply anything negative about Monty. I just don’t like the analysis of the coaches using aggregate stats because the scenarios are so different imo

 

[Xerloris]

I’ve noticed a few different groups celebrating Monty and his impact.

And I’ve noticed zero of those places mention bannister, for weeks, was without Robert Thomas, didn’t have Cam Fowler, didn’t have Leddy, and didn’t have Broberg. It’s a ridiculously ignorant take to highlight the difference in aggregate numbers between the two coaches.

The team started well, then was a bit mid, and then was injured, then a coach bump that coincided with injured players returning, then mid for a long time, then hotter than the sun.

It’s real easy to show improvement in certain ways, like expected goals for and against, when one of the things you’re comparing to the other is not similar whatsoever. Like a team with a healthy Robert Thomas versus a team with Buchnevich at 1C.

I’m giving 80% of the improvement to the players and the overall plan. I feel anybody who is giving 70% to the coach is a full blown idiot who is taking the easy path to analysis because “numbers are better”. Guess what analyst: Robert Thomas helps the team score more when he’s in the lineup. The icetime guys like Bolduc got under both coaches developed him to where he is today. Same with the rest. Monty is fine, I’m glad he’s here. He hasn’t taken a single shift. I’m not convinced we wouldn’t be in the exact same spot with bannister. Why wouldn’t we be?

Bannister was a shit coach, results have nothing to do with him being shitty. his entire system was shitty.

 

[Xerloris]

I agree, but it wasn’t just Thomas.

Our defense was:

(Example just picked Sabres game from November)

Parayko
Faulk
Kessel

Suter
Perunovich
PO Joseph

When healthy now it’s

Fowler leddy suter
Parayko Faulk Tucker

It’s like thousands of games difference and 2/3 of the November group aren’t nhlers (way below replacement level)

Why are you comparing an injured Blue line to a healthy Blue line when one of the "healthy" players on the Blue line you list is injured and has been for a while now?

 

[Beninnola]

Why are you comparing an injured Blue line to a healthy Blue line when one of the "healthy" players on the Blue line you list is injured and has been for a while now?

We aren’t replacing Parayko with somebody who isn’t an nhler.

Before we had multiple non-nhlers in the group simultaneously.

I’m absolutely in love with Fowler.

Should Monty get the credit for bringing him in? I’m okay with it I guess. I’m not looking for reasons to put the guy down. I just don’t think fowler joining the team has anything to do with the coach, and he’s good because he’s good, not because of some magical coaching moment. He’s been good. Our results likely improve more because we added Fowler, not more because of coaching, as an example. So then pointing at one coach or the other when this is the difference just doesn’t sit well with me.

I don’t agree with others saying drew was bad because the results don’t say that. I also dont agree with others saying the results are majority driven by the coach, because I dont feel the results show that either. We’re better because we’re a depth team that now has depth. We have a good coach and it’s cool. The players and the long term development plan are driving the results imo. The players will probably never say it, so nobody can convince me that we wouldn’t be in a similar position right now with a different coach. If they want to make that statement then I’ll change my opinion

 

[Linkens Mastery]

The fact that the Blues are 3 points back from 10th in the league after they were the 7th worst team in the league on Feb 1st is crazy.

 

[Beninnola]

My analysis of the analysis: (of the YouTube video of our teams strategies being discussed).

The blues are not notably more concerned with puck possession up high and it’s one of the options of the general play so … showing the handful of times that was the option that was taken while not showing the other options being taken is just ... The numbers do not reflect the change as described. We’re behind the net more now. And I think….thats just the general state of our team when we’re playing well….like the general metric you could use any night to see how things were going: the amount of time and plays we make from behind their goal line is an excellent metric to add to a small list.

This is a franchise that had all of you watch shwizzle Schwartz button hook on the half wall then half the time go to the blue line, or down the wall for years, watched Kyrou dance on the blue line for years, under bannister and Monty equally turning over the puck at bad times (I’m not mad). None of this stuff the one video is talking about is anything new. It’s literally just … I’m not going there nevermind.

Robert Thomas loves loves loves behind the net plays. He’s always been like this. Monty didn’t make Thomas discover some love for the thing he’s always done.

The blues activate their D. - yep we do this way more under Monty. We also have cam Fowler, Leddy, and Broberg (extra credit Tucker) who all love to activate. That didn’t exist under the old coach, and po Joseph did activate all the time under the old coach, Broberg started the season under a full time activate mode with drew bannister as his coach until Mitch Marner said no.

The analysis is just for clicks. Nicest thing I can say.

Here’s a better one:

We have 2 competitive advantages that we can leverage to win

One is breadth and depth of defensive experience. We can exploit other teams with holes or nullify some advantage elite teams have against us. Most teams do not have anywhere near this.

Second is basically Holloway in terms of our total group. We got enough wingers to be a full enough team. Most teams cannot say this and those teams are at the mercy of our grind.

 

[Xerloris]

We aren’t replacing Parayko with somebody who isn’t an nhler.

Before we had multiple non-nhlers in the group simultaneously.

I’m absolutely in love with Fowler.

Should Monty get the credit for bringing him in? I’m okay with it I guess. I’m not looking for reasons to put the guy down. I just don’t think fowler joining the team has anything to do with the coach, and he’s good because he’s good, not because of some magical coaching moment. He’s been good. Our results likely improve more because we added Fowler, not more because of coaching, as an example. So then pointing at one coach or the other when this is the difference just doesn’t sit well with me.

I don’t agree with others saying drew was bad because the results don’t say that. I also dont agree with others saying the results are majority driven by the coach, because I dont feel the results show that either. We’re better because we’re a depth team that now has depth. We have a good coach and it’s cool. The players and the long term development plan are driving the results imo. The players will probably never say it, so nobody can convince me that we wouldn’t be in a similar position right now with a different coach. If they want to make that statement then I’ll change my opinion

Fowler sucked before he got here. I guess he just magically remembered how to play after he had forgotten all this time in Anaheim? or maybe the coach matters.

 

[BlueDream]

I’ve noticed a few different groups celebrating Monty and his impact.

And I’ve noticed zero of those places mention bannister, for weeks, was without Robert Thomas, didn’t have Cam Fowler, didn’t have Leddy, and didn’t have Broberg. It’s a ridiculously ignorant take to highlight the difference in aggregate numbers between the two coaches.

The team started well, then was a bit mid, and then was injured, then a coach bump that coincided with injured players returning, then mid for a long time, then hotter than the sun.

It’s real easy to show improvement in certain ways, like expected goals for and against, when one of the things you’re comparing to the other is not similar whatsoever. Like a team with a healthy Robert Thomas versus a team with Buchnevich at 1C.

I’m giving 80% of the improvement to the players and the overall plan. I feel anybody who is giving 70% to the coach is a full blown idiot who is taking the easy path to analysis because “numbers are better”. Guess what analyst: Robert Thomas helps the team score more when he’s in the lineup. The icetime guys like Bolduc got under both coaches developed him to where he is today. Same with the rest. Monty is fine, I’m glad he’s here. He hasn’t taken a single shift. I’m not convinced we wouldn’t be in the exact same spot with bannister. Why wouldn’t we be?

It’s pretty ironic that you’re calling people giving credit to the coach a “full blown idiot” because you clearly just don’t understand how important coaching is. Full stop.

Like, we’ve seen this happen with the team time and time again when a great coach takes over. Your last question about “why wouldn’t we be in the same spot with Bannister?” is mind boggling. That’s like saying that we would have won the Cup if we kept Yeo instead of firing him in favor of Berube, because why wouldn’t we have? The team would have just somehow figured it out, right?

I’m sure the drastic change we saw when the team went from bad to the top of the league when we replaced Davis Payne with Hitchcock was a coincidence too, right? Because as you said with Montgomery, Hitch didn’t take a single shift.

You are just severely underrating coaching in every regard, and showing that you don’t understand how much they affect the game. The players don’t just “start playing better” randomly. It’s due to systems and what they’re being taught in the film room and at practice, etc. There’s a ton that goes into it. And by the way, I see you haven’t given credit to Monty for the team not missing a beat while without Parayko and Buch. But somehow Bannister gets to use the injury excuses. Cmon man, look at the underlying numbers. The Blues have been the best defensive team in the NHL over the past couple months. Bannister never achieved anything close to that, but you want to act like this is just chance or something. Montgomery’s track record speaks for itself, it’s crazy how he lucked into having the best regular season of all time in Boston a couple years ago too, huh? Surely Bannister could achieve all this stuff, because…reasons.