2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.

[Vladys Gumption]

Richards and/or Carter, pretty it was a similar scenario for at least one of them. Very rare though.

They were a couple years into their deals though weren’t they? I could have sworn Richards was two years in. And obviously it’s come out since that it was driven by off ice issues.

Obviously never say never, but I’d be surprised to see similar with Buchnevich.

 

[bleedblue1223]

They were a couple years into their deals though weren’t they? I could have sworn Richards was two years in. And obviously it’s come out since that it was driven by off ice issues.

Obviously never say never, but I’d be surprised to see similar with Buchnevich.

Richards was, but Carter was who i was thinking of. Signed in late 2010, extension started for 11/12 season and was traded summer of 2011.

 

[StlBigFly]

You can't even name the pieces. You've already named the team. What are those elite pieces we are getting from Vancouver (who is also giving away Boeser)?

Can you name a trade where one elite forward in his prime with term was traded for multiple prospects that hit?

If we are trying to make room for elite prospect, why are we moving the 26-year-old and not the older guys you name?

You say we have 3 dozen forward prospects which is a huge exaggeration, but even so, how does traded quality for quantity help us?

You are playing the wishful thinking game. Oh, just plug Dvorsky in for Kyrou and he'll be just as good, even though he has a lower point per game and worse defense in the minors than Kyrou does in the pros. Then all our prospects will hit in 2 years and not take longer or bust. You are doing the equivalent of the underwear Elves from South Park who still underwear in an elaborate plan to make money but don't now how they will make money.

Step 1: Trade Kyrou
Step 2: Ummmmm......
Step 3: Stanley cup!!!!!!

It's an incomplete plan and would be a bad one even if it was complete. Not even the Kyrou haters who scream to trade him at every opportunity are jumping in to support you.

I’d ask Vancouver for Willander, their first in 2025 and second in 2026, the third teams first, the third teams cap dump, the third teams B+ prospect. They get the skaters we get both payouts.

I’d enjoy that the team had a better shot at a very high pedigree talent in this years draft.

I can name a lot of trades. It’s my speciality.

Joe Sakic traded a prime Matt Duchene in a 3 team deal whereby the Avalanche got both payouts which set them up for their cup win and the success they’re currently having. That trade coincided with the avalanche drafting high pedigree talent. Some subset of their fans were likely upset at the time; the team isn’t so great and they just traded their most potent center. It worked out okay. They drafted high pedigree talent because they traded away their high talent nhl forward and others in their prime for multiple young pieces. They wouldn’t have been bad enough to draft all stars if they retained all their great players. Instead they turned one guy into multiple high quality young pieces which they then built with to win a cup. Duchene, a sub 27 year old center who had just netted 30 goals - he was never a bonafide all star, just like Kyrou. He was and is good at some things and flawed at others. He has enjoyed a long career and I’m sure the avalanche are happy for him.

I’d be building for a team that competes in 5 years. Snuggerud is exciting. He’s 20. Dvorsky is exciting. He isn’t even 20 yet. It’s gonna be a minute.

It would suck that my team was momentarily bad but it sure would be nice that when the all star game comes along there’s a guy on our team that’s kind of a no brainer and we haven’t had that in a decade. Just one top 5 pick gets us a better chance at it than we’ll have again for a decade. It’s very unlikely we get this unless we’re bad. We won’t be bad enough as history has shown. We need to push the compete window one more time and take one deep dip into the prospect pool. It’s futile to trade somebody with low value and get somebody with low value in return. You’re just adjusting the mess; not fixing it. We’re close enough to the bottom of the standings that most of the bandaid is already ripped off. Just rip it and be done. Take the parh that the circumstances have given you: the choice to push the compete window aligns with you getting a very good pick right this season.

 

[Majorityof1]

I’d ask Vancouver for Willander, their first in 2025 and second in 2026, the third teams first, the third teams cap dump, the third teams B+ prospect. They get the skaters we get both payouts.

I’d enjoy that the team had a better shot at a very high pedigree talent in this years draft.

I can name a lot of trades. It’s my speciality.

Joe Sakic traded a prime Matt Duchene in a 3 team deal whereby the Avalanche got both payouts which set them up for their cup win and the success they’re currently having. That trade coincided with the avalanche drafting high pedigree talent. Some subset of their fans were likely upset at the time; the team isn’t so great and they just traded their most potent center. It worked out okay. They drafted high pedigree talent because they traded away their high talent nhl forward and others in their prime for multiple young pieces. They wouldn’t have been bad enough to draft all stars if they retained all their great players. Instead they turned one guy into multiple high quality young pieces which they then built with to win a cup.

I’d be building for a team that competes in 5 years.

It would suck that my team was momentarily bad but it sure would be nice that when the all star game comes along there’s a guy on our team that’s kind of a no brainer and we haven’t had that in a decade. Just one top 5 pick gets us a better chance at it than we’ll have again for a decade. It’s very unlikely we get this unless we’re bad. We won’t be bad enough as history has shown. We need to push the compete window one more time and take one deep dip into the prospect pool. It’s futile to trade somebody with low value and get somebody with low value in return. You’re just adjusting the mess; not fixing it. We’re close enough to the bottom of the standings that most of the bandaid is already ripped off. Just rip it and be done. Take the parh that the circumstances have given you: the choice to push the compete window aligns with you getting a very good pick right this season.

I don't think we get all of that. Vancouver would be paying Boeser, a 1st and Willander for Kyrou. That is a lot. I don't see a good chance for elite players in that either. We aren't getting a high first from the 3rd team who is getting a rental, and teams with high firsts wouldn't want a rental. If Boeser comes signed, Vancouver isn't giving up another first and Willander.

So that's two mid to late 1sts a B+ prospect, and a 2nd round pick. those are all a crap shoots and rarely lead to an elite player. Willander could be elite but isn't a guarantee.

Then let's look at the Duchene trade. Avs got the following: Girard, Bowers, Ott 1st (Byram), Kamenev, a 2nd (traded for 2 later picks, getting Annunen and Zhuravlyov), 3rd (Steinburg)

Breaking it down -

Bowers (25 yo in AHL and not producing) + Matthew Steinberg (24 year old AHLer) + Zhuravlyov (left for KHL) + Kamenex (washed out and left for KHL) = 0

Annunen = Backup goalie who could have a bit more upside

Byram - traded for Middlestadt = Middle 6 C

Girard - Good top 4 D, but not on top pair and not elite

So where is the elite talent Colorado got? They got 2 solid pieces with Girard and Byram. But neither is elite. Neither is as good as Kyrou. And that was one trade where Sakic did damn well. If we can get a crazy haul for Kyrou, ok, maybe we pull the trigger, but i wouldn't expect it. That is not the norm. You said coming up with examples is your specialty and that is all you came up with - 1 trade for no elite players.

 

[StlBigFly]

I don't think we get all of that. Vancouver would be paying Boeser, a 1st and Willander for Kyrou. That is a lot. I don't see a good chance for elite players in that either. We aren't getting a high first from the 3rd team who is getting a rental, and teams with high firsts wouldn't want a rental. If Boeser comes signed, Vancouver isn't giving up another first and Willander.

So that's two mid to late 1sts a B+ prospect, and a 2nd round pick. those are all a crap shoots and rarely lead to an elite player. Willander could be elite but isn't a guarantee.

Then let's look at the Duchene trade. Avs got the following: Girard, Bowers, Ott 1st (Byram), Kamenev, a 2nd (traded for 2 later picks, getting Annunen and Zhuravlyov), 3rd (Steinburg)

Breaking it down -

Bowers (25 yo in AHL and not producing) + Matthew Steinberg (24 year old AHLer) + Zhuravlyov (left for KHL) + Kamenex (washed out and left for KHL) = 0

Annunen = Backup goalie who could have a bit more upside

Byram - traded for Middlestadt = Middle 6 C

Girard - Good top 4 D, but not on top pair and not elite

So where is the elite talent Colorado got? They got 2 solid pieces with Girard and Byram. But neither is elite. Neither is as good as Kyrou. And that was one trade where Sakic did damn well. If we can get a crazy haul for Kyrou, ok, maybe we pull the trigger, but i wouldn't expect it. That is not the norm. You said coming up with examples is your specialty and that is all you came up with - 1 trade for no elite

I think for the purposes of valuing a young winger some guys like Kessel and Evander Kane come to mind. Taylor Hall has been on like 7 teams and also has a Hart trophy - some deals in there to see value. There’s a lot of guys; a lot of scenarios one could point to and say; “that aspect of that situation is similar to ours”. The dramatically changing cap situation makes it hard to compare these things. The changes in taxation do too. A lot of guys move at these ages - guys who are really good at certain things but not headed to the hall of fame - and each time it’s some unique story to some team centric circumstances.

I think, under the current Canucks ownership, that they are a full blown wildcard. I think it’s a good time in history to have something they want. Just a feeling I have.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I think for the purposes of valuing a young winger some guys like Kessel and Evander Kane come to mind. Taylor Hall has been on like 7 teams and also has a Hart trophy - some deals in there to see value. There’s a lot of guys; a lot of scenarios one could point to and say; “that aspect of that situation is similar to ours”. The dramatically changing cap situation makes it hard to compare these things. The changes in taxation do too. A lot of guys move at these ages - guys who are really good at certain things but not headed to the hall of fame - and each time it’s some unique story to some team centric circumstances.

I think, under the current Canucks ownership, that they are a full blown wildcard. I think it’s a good time in history to have something they want. Just a feeling I have.

Situations are fluid.

 

[Reality Czech]

100% The team that gets the best player at the time of the deal, usually wins the trade. If we trade Kyrou for futures, I'd put money on none of those futures reaching the level of Jordan Kyrou.

Kyrou right now is exactly the player I expected him to become if he reached his ceiling. Perhaps even a little bit better. He's well worth his contract, and he's one of the few bright spots on the team this year.

View attachment 971558

As someone else said, I'll move Buchnevich for futures. I'm not moving a 26 year old on a very reasonable contract that's about to become a major value for this franchise.

It's time for Kyrou haters to start to accept that they misjudged the kid's drive to improve. There's plenty to pick apart on this team, but Kyrou is no longer on the list.

Kyrou has improved but any chart that gives him an 80 rating on defense is questionable lol. These bar charts are not the end all be all in terms of player evaluation.

No doubt he's a much more complete player, I'll give him credit for that. But I'd guess his defense rating has more to do with how good he is offensively and shot/goal differentials rather than his defensive skills.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Yeah, a good chunk of some defensive metrics just comes down to usage and the saying, "a good defense is a good offense" applies here. If someone starts in the offensive zone and essentially only plays in the offensive zone, then they will look very good on the defensive metrics, even they are terrible in the defensive zone, they are just sheltered from the defensive zone.

Now, I do think Kyrou has improved and I don't really have complaints there this season. We don't need him to be even good defensively, he doesn't need to be on the shutdown line. We need him to be like Tarasenko, someone that will be on the offensively tilted lines, that produces, and that isn't a liability defensively. Tarasenko would have some pretty good moments defensively, and that's kind of what we need from Kyrou, to occasionally use his stick and speed to create turnovers and odd man rushes the other way. I think he's done that this season.

In previous seasons, you could maybe argue Army had some buyer's remorse and maybe he was a bit overpaid, but this season he's performed how I would expect for someone of his contract.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

Kyrou has improved but any chart that gives him an 80 rating on defense is questionable lol. These bar charts are not the end all be all in terms of player evaluation.

No doubt he's a much more complete player, I'll give him credit for that. But I'd guess his defense rating has more to do with how good he is offensively and shot/goal differentials rather than his defensive skills.

Possession is the single most important factor in preventing the other offense from creating offensive chances. The chart is saying that when Kyrou is on the ice he’s in the 80th percentile of all NHLers in preventing the other team from generating offense. You say it’s because of his offensive skill. If he’s doing it because the other team isn’t touching the puck, that’s the very best way an NHL team can prevent the other team from scoring.

He’s always had offensive skill. Up until this year he had not shown he could contribute to lines that do a good job of preventing the other team from generating offensive opportunities despite his offensive skill. This season he’s done a fantastic job of doing just that. It’s a major improvement.

The chart showing he’s far more defensively responsible than most of his own teammates yet, we’ll never hear the same criticisms from players on lines that have been a much greater liability. But nevertheless, some of you absolutely cannot see a post about Kyrou without having to discount his improvements in some way.

Nobody’s saying he’s an elite defensive player like you’re inferring. But what we can say based on his chart, and based on his performance this season, is that he’s good enough at not allowing the other team to create offense to score better than 80 percent of his peers.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Possession is the single most important factor in preventing the other offense from creating offensive chances. The chart is saying that when Kyrou is on the ice he’s in the 80th percentile of all NHLers in preventing the other team from generating offense. You say it’s because of his offensive skill. If he’s doing it because the other team isn’t touching the puck, that’s the very best way an NHL team can prevent the other team from scoring.

He’s always had offensive skill. Up until this year he had not shown he could contribute to lines that do a good job of preventing the other team from generating offensive opportunities despite his offensive skill. This season he’s done a fantastic job of doing just that. It’s a major improvement.

The chart showing he’s far more defensively responsible than most of his own teammates yet, we’ll never hear the same criticisms from players on lines that have been a much greater liability. But nevertheless, some of you absolutely cannot see a post about Kyrou without having to discount his improvements in some way.

Nobody’s saying he’s an elite defensive player like you’re inferring. But what we can say based on his chart, and based on his performance this season, is that he’s good enough at not allowing the other team to create offense to score better than 80 percent of his peers.

Kyrou has been quite good this year. He and Holloway have basically been our top 2 forwards all year. He has improved in all the areas we dinged him for, rightly, in past.

 

[StlBigFly]

I’m just saying auston Matthew’s and Connor McDavid and Nathan McKinnon and Connor bedard and the little cellebrini f who will terrorize us for a decade all come from the same place.

Being bad.

It is possible that it is in our organization’s best interest to momentarily lower our expected goals for. By doing so it may result in more wins, more dollars, happier fans. The easiest way to do this is to trade the guy who has the best expected goals for. It so happens circumstances may align that it is possible. It is icing on the cake that it appears we could take them to the cleaners during the process.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Possession is the single most important factor in preventing the other offense from creating offensive chances. The chart is saying that when Kyrou is on the ice he’s in the 80th percentile of all NHLers in preventing the other team from generating offense. You say it’s because of his offensive skill. If he’s doing it because the other team isn’t touching the puck, that’s the very best way an NHL team can prevent the other team from scoring.

He’s always had offensive skill. Up until this year he had not shown he could contribute to lines that do a good job of preventing the other team from generating offensive opportunities despite his offensive skill. This season he’s done a fantastic job of doing just that. It’s a major improvement.

The chart showing he’s far more defensively responsible than most of his own teammates yet, we’ll never hear the same criticisms from players on lines that have been a much greater liability. But nevertheless, some of you absolutely cannot see a post about Kyrou without having to discount his improvements in some way.

Nobody’s saying he’s an elite defensive player like you’re inferring. But what we can say based on his chart, and based on his performance this season, is that he’s good enough at not allowing the other team to create offense to score better than 80 percent of his peers.

My only comment is that a good possession player isn't inherently a good defensive player and a bad possession player isn't inherently a bad defenisve player. When defensive metrics are mostly possession metrics, I think it's a flawed takeaway to say he's more defensively responsible than others, because depending on the metric, defensive responsibility isn't even factoring in.

It reminds me of the old days here where I'd have Rangers fans argue with me that Shattenkirk was better defensively than Pietrangelo because of various possession metrics. This is when they were both in St. Louis.

 

[Bluesnatic27]

My only comment is that a good possession player isn't inherently a good defensive player and a bad possession player isn't inherently a bad defenisve player. When defensive metrics are mostly possession metrics, I think it's a flawed takeaway to say he's more defensively responsible than others, because depending on the metric, defensive responsibility isn't even factoring in.

It reminds me of the old days here where I'd have Rangers fans argue with me that Shattenkirk was better defensively than Pietrangelo because of various possession metrics. This is when they were both in St. Louis.

While that is true, I think that falls more under trying to define what is good defense. Possession metrics hate players that block shots because that implies the other team has the puck more often than his team. Many fans would say that is what good defense is as it prevents the shot from hitting the net. Good defense has to have some operable definition for these charts to better measure that they need to.

A good example of this is the Cale Makar debate when he first entered the league. He defined defense predicated on not giving the other team the puck as opposed to applying defensive fundamentals in his game. Many fans here would say he was bad defensively despite his numbers saying the other team would not get many shots off simply for that reason.

 

[bleedblue1223]

While that is true, I think that falls more under trying to define what is good defense. Possession metrics hate players that block shots because that implies the other team has the puck more often than his team. Many fans would say that is what good defense is as it prevents the shot from hitting the net. Good defense has to have some operable definition for these charts to better measure that they need to.

I view defense as what they do in the defensive and neutral zone. Preventing or breaking up entries, limiting high-danger shots, zone exits and controlled zone exits, blocked shots, etc.

I would never argue some of the extremely sheltered forwards are good defensively, like say Panarin, but it is true they limit what the other team does offensively because they are so sheltered, and they are very good offensively, but they also require other players on their team to carry a much heavier load defensively.

Possession and defense are 2 seperate things. Being a good possession player does mean the other team isn't able to generate offense themselves, but it doesn't mean you are a good defensive player. I give some amount of leeway on metrics because it is tough to evaluate, and that's why I think the best thing to do is try our best to make apples to apples comparisons, and that minds comparing players with similar usage to try and eliminate as many variables as you can.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

My only comment is that a good possession player isn't inherently a good defensive player and a bad possession player isn't inherently a bad defenisve player. When defensive metrics are mostly possession metrics, I think it's a flawed takeaway to say he's more defensively responsible than others, because depending on the metric, defensive responsibility isn't even factoring in.

It reminds me of the old days here where I'd have Rangers fans argue with me that Shattenkirk was better defensively than Pietrangelo because of various possession metrics. This is when they were both in St. Louis.

The point isn't just that he's more defensively responsible because of possession, that was never the argument. I brought up possession because Czech was insinuating that Kyrou’s defensive numbers only look good because of his offense. I was simply saying, possession is one of the most important things a forward line can do to limit the other team’s scoring chances. If that's what a line can do for us, why is that a bad thing that is worth jab?

Yeah, possession is huge, but Kyrou has done more than just contribute offensively. He's always contributed offensively. That hasn't kept him from being ranked below the 20th percentile in the past. He’s backchecking, he’s managing the puck better, and he’s playing a much more complete two-way game. How many times this season have we seen a forward hustle back, break up a play, or steal the puck and thought, “Wait, was that Kyrou??” For me, it’s happened more than a few times.

I don't see how Shattenkirk vs. Petro is relevant here. No one’s saying Kyrou is suddenly a great defensive forward. But what I am saying, along with others, is that he’s made significant strides compared to past seasons and is fairing far better than most of his other teammates at keeping the opposition off the scoresheet. Yet somehow, he takes way more criticism than guys who constantly get caved in defensively.

Do you want Kyrou to be Dallas Drake or do you want him to be Jordan Kyrou? I want my best scorer taking o-zone faceoffs rather than being put in positions to prove his defensive value on the other end of the ice. If he's accomplishing what he's accomplishing offensively this season, while still preventing opposing offenses from creating offensive chances at the rate he's currently is, then he's doing everything I need him to be doing. That's what this is all about. As long as he continues to play like he's played this season, and the second half of last season too, then it's time to move on from this idea that he's a highly flawed player. He's a great player for us right now, and arguably the MVP of the team this season.

 

[bleedblue1223]

The point isn't just that he's more defensively responsible because of possession, that was never the argument. I brought up possession because Czech was insinuating that Kyrou’s defensive numbers only look good because of his offense. I was simply saying, possession is one of the most important things a forward line can do to limit the other team’s scoring chances. If that's what a line can do for us, why is that a bad thing that is worth jab?

Yeah, possession is huge, but Kyrou has done more than just contribute offensively. He's always contributed offensively. That hasn't kept him from being ranked below the 20th percentile in the past. He’s backchecking, he’s managing the puck better, and he’s playing a much more complete two-way game. How many times this season have we seen a forward hustle back, break up a play, or steal the puck and thought, “Wait, was that Kyrou??” For me, it’s happened more than a few times.

I don't see how Shattenkirk vs. Petro is relevant here. No one’s saying Kyrou is suddenly a great defensive forward. But what I am saying, along with others, is that he’s made significant strides compared to past seasons and is fairing far better than most of his other teammates at keeping the opposition off the scoresheet. Yet somehow, he takes way more criticism than guys who constantly get caved in defensively.

Do you want Kyrou to be Dallas Drake or do you want him to be Jordan Kyrou? I want my best scorer taking o-zone faceoffs rather than being put in positions to prove his defensive value on the other end of the ice. If he's accomplishing what he's accomplishing offensively this season, while still preventing opposing offenses from creating offensive chances at the rate he's currently is, then he's doing everything I need him to be doing. That's what this is all about. As long as he continues to play like he's played this season, and the second half of last season too, then it's time to move on from this idea that he's a highly flawed player. He's a great player for us right now, and arguably the MVP of the team this season.

Because Shattenkirk vs Petro was an example I've had on this site of people conflating possession metrics with defensive ability. Now, I agree Kyrou has been more responsible this year and better in defensive aspects of his game, but I wouldn't site possession metrics to prove that, that's the point.

At the end of the day, I only care that the players are performing well in the roles that the coaches give them, and if the roles don't suit them, I put that on the coaches. And 2 things can be true at the same time, Kyrou has improved in those areas, particularly because he was so poor the past couple seasons, and that he's at a significant advantage because of the role and usage that he has.

Has Kyrou really received much criticism this year. Maybe from some, but I'd bet the majority of this board would say he's been one of our top players this season.