2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.

[PocketNines]

I am not surprised to see the suggestion that disapproval of Krug is bad faith ("whipping boy") instead of earned, nor I am surprised to see who puts that forth. Imagine what kind of conversations could be had if criticism of a player were taken as if the person criticizing the player is doing so in good faith. The "whipping boy" people would have to critically think. Yikes

 

[Celtic Note]

The only centers that I'd be interested in acquiring are ones that are basically in between the development of Thomas and Dvorsky. If that player becomes available, I'd be somewhat interested, but I still wouldn't want to use the valuable trade pieces required to get them. A player like Mittelstadt or Frost to use as examples. Maybe a vet option is Scott Laughton, he's more of a 3rd line option though.

We are without our 2nd, 3rd, and 4th round picks this season, and our 2nd next season. It's not like we have picks to trade. I'm not sure which of our prospects we'd be willing to trade, and that's not an option I'd want to do. You'd probably have difficulty playing musical chairs with vets, a 3-way deal where we get a center, we send Saad somewhere, and that team sends picks/prospects to the team we get the center from might make sense on paper, but that's going to be pretty difficult to make happen.

To me, I see this season giving us the opportunity to know once and for all if Buchnevich has a future at C. I'm as pessimistic as everyone else, but at least we'll know for sure now. Faksa will allow Dvorsky to develop. If Buchnevich doesn't work, hopefully Holloway or Texier plays well enough to earn an opportunity. Next season, Dvorsky should be our 2nd or 3rd line center, so no point in getting someone that will block him.

Seeing that list of unavailable draft picks gives me pause. Sure we did a great job filling out our depth, but if we end up needing a #2/3C and a #1D, we don’t have a ton of supplementary draft capital.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Seeing that list of unavailable draft picks gives me pause. Sure we did a great job filling out our depth, but if we end up needing a #2/3C and a #1D, we don’t have a ton of supplementary draft capital.

We still have 1sts, so we have the assets for a #1D if one becomes available IMO. I still think each of the trades were easily worth it from a value perspective, it is important that Broberg and Holloway become long-term players for us though.

 

[Celtic Note]

We still have 1sts, so we have the assets for a #1D if one becomes available IMO. I still think each of the trades were easily worth it from a value perspective, it is important that Broberg and Holloway become long-term players for us though.

They both really need to hit.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Is he a legit centerman? I can't recall the role he played in Buffalo early in his career, but he was a winger who sometimes slides into center duty as needed for all of Florida, Colorado, and Pittsburgh. I think he can play center at the NHL level (and he did in fact play games at center during the Panthers' Cup run). But I'm not sure that I'd consider him a legit NHL center. IMO, he is the kind of guy who is ideally the "4th" center in your top 9 who you pencil in as a winger when you are fully healthy and slide into the middle 6 center duty when a center gets hurt.

I think he'd absolutely be written in as a center on our current lineup, but I don't think that it makes sense to pay assets to acquire him for that role given his age/term and the current phase of our franchise.

The Panthers aren't in a cap crunch and I think his contribution as a middle 6 Swiss army knife at $3M AAV is pretty valuable to their effort to repeat. I think we'd have to make an offer 'too good to pass up' to convince them to trade him and I'm not really looking to do that for a short term fix to this current roster. I do like the player though.

Yeah, maybe legit is overstated. He's played center in his career, for sure, but not at the rate that could be considered legit. I like him, too, but maybe just got a little excited. I'll put down my actuarial Ouija board now. Thank you.

EDIT: What the heck was I thinking by wanting to bring in a 31 y/o player? Glad I'm not the GM. Excitement makes me do goofy things.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Seeing that list of unavailable draft picks gives me pause. Sure we did a great job filling out our depth, but if we end up needing a #2/3C and a #1D, we don’t have a ton of supplementary draft capital.

They’ll deal from the prospect pool as well. I think this shows that the Blues shaved a year or two off the rebuild timeline by acquiring players already breaking into the NHL instead of trying to draft them.

I think by 2 years from now we’ll be looking at an established Dvorsky, Snuggerud, etc, and will be starting to look at specific holes in the roster rather than a general rebuild. The 1D may be that hole, but I don’t think we’re going to draft that guy. We’ll be shopping for a big hockey trade then.

 

[Brian39]

To me, I see this season giving us the opportunity to know once and for all if Buchnevich has a future at C. I'm as pessimistic as everyone else, but at least we'll know for sure now. Faksa will allow Dvorsky to develop. If Buchnevich doesn't work, hopefully Holloway or Texier plays well enough to earn an opportunity. Next season, Dvorsky should be our 2nd or 3rd line center, so no point in getting someone that will block him.

Agree with pretty much everything in your post, but wanted to discuss the bolded.

I'm not even sold that the Blues view the Buch-at-center thing as an experiment for whether hus future is at center. The public comments suggest that, but it sounds a lot better to frame it that way than it does to say "we really suck at center after Robert Thomas. We know that Buch isn't as good there as he is on the wing, but we just need him to do the best he can there for a while until we can improve the position."

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the team and player have discussed this as an imperfect and temporary solution with the intention to slide him back to wing the instant someone else makes even a plausible case to be a long term 2C. That would be in line with all the reports that extension talks were focused on us selling him a long-term plan.

One reason to extend a guy like Buch (even though his prime doesn't perfectly align with the core) is to use him to help bring young guys along. Often that comes in the form of making them line mates. But it can also come in the form of making the vet eat the non-ideal minutes that you don't want youth playing yet. I think Buch at C is probably an example of the latter much more than a true experiment to see if he's in the plans to play center long term.

I view this year as a bridge year to contention and I think that Buch at center is just part of that bridge.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Agree with pretty much everything in your post, but wanted to discuss the bolded.

I'm not even sold that the Blues view the Buch-at-center thing as an experiment for whether hus future is at center. The public comments suggest that, but it sounds a lot better to frame it that way than it does to say "we really suck at center after Robert Thomas. We know that Buch isn't as good there as he is on the wing, but we just need him to do the best he can there for a while until we can improve the position."

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the team and player have discussed this as an imperfect and temporary solution with the intention to slide him back to wing the instant someone else makes even a plausible case to be a long term 2C. That would be in line with all the reports that extension talks were focused on us selling him a long-term plan.

One reason to extend a guy like Buch (even though his prime doesn't perfectly align with the core) is to use him to help bring young guys along. Often that comes in the form of making them line mates. But it can also come in the form of making the vet eat the non-ideal minutes that you don't want youth playing yet. I think Buch at C is probably an example of the latter much more than a true experiment to see if he's in the plans to play center long term.

I view this year as a bridge year to contention and I think that Buch at center is just part of that bridge.

Agreed, I think that's exactly how they see it. In an ideal world, this is how I view the situation. This season, you try and pair Schenn, Buchnevich, and Bolduc. Schenn with Buchnevich as a way to share center duties, and those 2 vets to help bring Bolduc along. On paper, it makes a lot of sense, we'll see how it plays out. And for next season, I could see an ideal plan of Dvorsky at C with Buchnevich on his wing, where they can share center duties and Buch helps bring him along.

I think it gives us the flexibility to move him to wing if someone like Dvorsky performs at a level at some point where he demands the 2nd line center spot. If we signed Chandler Stephenson to the contract that he got, we'd just be creating unnecessary and expensive roadblocks.

And I do really like the idea that we have 3 youngish players in Neighbours, Bolduc, and Holloway being able to be the 3rd part to their line and they are each with players with pretty solid track records. Lines will change, but I do like the initial plans. I think it's very intentional to both develop those younger players, but also be in a position to compete.

 

[Reality Czech]

Yeah, maybe legit is overstated. He's played center in his career, for sure, but not at the rate that could be considered legit. I like him, too, but maybe just got a little excited. I'll put down my actuarial Ouija board now. Thank you.

EDIT: What the heck was I thinking by wanting to bring in a 31 y/o player? Glad I'm not the GM. Excitement makes me do goofy things.

I'm just kidding, I don't think it's a bad idea in theory. But I don't expect any significant trades in the foreseeable future.