2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.

[TheOrganist]

Yeah, say what you want about Armstrong but it’s obvious he cares and wants this team to start getting better badly. I truly think he dreads the idea of his legacy ending on 4 straight playoff misses. Given how much as he talks about wanting to leave the franchise in a better place, I think that would really bother him. He’s a proud guy and is going to do everything in his power to accelerate this thing IMO.

The more I think about it, the more I think the Blues are going to shake this thing up in a big way - more than a lot of people realize. It might not come at the deadline, but if it doesn’t, I think he’s going to make a couple sizable trades this Summer.

Your second paragraph is kind of my point. He really shouldn’t be doing any of that. Right now we just need to stay the course and wait for our top prospects to marinate and start making an impact at the NHL level. Armstrong took advantage of a situation that is almost 100% impossible to replicate by stealing two young, impactful players from cap strapped team. Bravo. But we are not even close to the point in our retool of completely reshaping the team. It’s pointless. I think Armstrong is a good steward of the franchise and genuinely wants to put Steen in the best position possible to succeed but I get concerned about him doing something impulsive because of his impatience of how fast the team is progressing and with him on the verge of his way out the door. I get it. He’s pissed with the post-Cup years. But this is where we’re at and it is what it is.

 

[StlBigFly]

I think a lot of armstrong’s attitude is a public persona, or like fluffy writing to make the middle of the season news click worthy.

It’s probably the best outcome financially if we’re a team that can sneak into the playoffs. It’s worth the gamble to try since we have to spend a big pile of money either way. It’s not gonna happen probably, but he couldn’t really sell further if we had a better record. Schenn isnt on the trade block because Doug is “cranky”, it’s because our record, peers, and schedule indicate it’s the best action.

I don’t think the blues group or Doug are like … about to make some emotionally charged decisions or make roster changes for the sake of making them. We simply unlocked the ability to be a seller and then will go through with being a seller. It was not plan A. That’s how things go. Take the circumstances and make the best of them.

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

Your second paragraph is kind of my point. He really shouldn’t be doing any of that. Right now we just need to stay the course and wait for our top prospects to marinate and start making an impact at the NHL level. Armstrong took advantage of a situation that is almost 100% impossible to replicate by stealing two young, impactful players from cap strapped team. Bravo. But we are not even close to the point in our retool of completely reshaping the team. It’s pointless. I think Armstrong is a good steward of the franchise and genuinely wants to put Steen in the best position possible to succeed but I get concerned about him doing something impulsive because of his impatience of how fast the team is progressing and with him on the verge of his way out the door. I get it. He’s pissed with the post-Cup years. But this is where we’re at and it is what it is.

It’s not like this is a recipe where you simply add the ingredients and wait for it to cook. To many things change like injury, or a busting prospect. Even if it were a recipe, there’s still at least one crucial foundational ingredient missing for this next core. Players at positions we desperately need will become available, and other opportunities may never present themselves again. Armstrong can’t be passive and simply let things cook. His job is to enhance this team, and the strategy is to build for the future while maintaining competitiveness. Coming into this season, we had the expectation of competing for a playoff spot, but we miserably failed. All the things he did from Broberg, Holloway, Monty, and Fowler kept the above strategy in place. If a shake-up trade occurs, as long as it aligns with this strategy, it should be acceptable. Armstrong deserves confidence, and until he starts making significant moves that prioritize the present over the future, such as signing multiple aging free agents or trading young assets for aging ones in a manner reminiscent of a contender when their core is aging out and they seek one final chance at the Cup, I don’t believe we should be overly concerned. Armstrong’s legacy will be judged not only by his ability to secure our first Cup but also by how he has laid the groundwork for our next core and the subsequent success or any despair they bring. He understands this, and any action he takes will strike a balance between these two factors. Even if it means he might become the first Blues GM to miss the playoffs for four consecutive years.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Your second paragraph is kind of my point. He really shouldn’t be doing any of that. Right now we just need to stay the course and wait for our top prospects to marinate and start making an impact at the NHL level. Armstrong took advantage of a situation that is almost 100% impossible to replicate by stealing two young, impactful players from cap strapped team. Bravo. But we are not even close to the point in our retool of completely reshaping the team. It’s pointless. I think Armstrong is a good steward of the franchise and genuinely wants to put Steen in the best position possible to succeed but I get concerned about him doing something impulsive because of his impatience of how fast the team is progressing and with him on the verge of his way out the door. I get it. He’s pissed with the post-Cup years. But this is where we’re at and it is what it is.

Moving out aging players who are on the downward slide for career productivity is reasonable. In some ways, the return is less important. It’s more about weaponizing cap space.

But that also suggests they will be active in the UFA market. Maybe it makes it possible to do a futures for prime age (salary) player(s) move elsewhere to get a key piece.

I agree it’s not the time to make an impatient move. That has never been a time with the Blues where I thought Armstrong acted impulsively. But winding down his tenure, maybe there will be a temptation. Could be the drawback of having an heir named for a future date with Steen.

 

[TheOrganist]

Moving out aging players who are on the downward slide for career productivity is reasonable. In some ways, the return is less important. It’s more about weaponizing cap space.

But that also suggests they will be active in the UFA market. Maybe it makes it possible to do a futures for prime age (salary) player(s) move elsewhere to get a key piece.

I agree it’s not the time to make an impatient move. That has never been a time with the Blues where I thought Armstrong acted impulsively. But winding down his tenure, maybe there will be a temptation. Could be the drawback of having an heir named for a future date with Steen.

Your last sentence is what I think I'm trying to articulate. I also don't view Armstrong as impulsive. I would describe his managing style as aggressive but pragmatic. I just think we're in a bit of uncharted water with the succession plan fully underway and I think it could potentially change his calculus...again, a temptation as you accurately put it to rush the team back to contending sooner than is realistic.

 

[Spektre]

I think a lot of armstrong’s attitude is a public persona, or like fluffy writing to make the middle of the season news click worthy.

It’s probably the best outcome financially if we’re a team that can sneak into the playoffs. It’s worth the gamble to try since we have to spend a big pile of money either way. It’s not gonna happen probably, but he couldn’t really sell further if we had a better record. Schenn isnt on the trade block because Doug is “cranky”, it’s because our record, peers, and schedule indicate it’s the best action.

I don’t think the blues group or Doug are like … about to make some emotionally charged decisions or make roster changes for the sake of making them. We simply unlocked the ability to be a seller and then will go through with being a seller. It was not plan A. That’s how things go. Take the circumstances and make the best of them.

I agree the situation is dictating the selling mode. Saying that, there is merit in thinking Army being on his way out could affect some of his decisions. He's winding down his legacy as the Blues GM. From a personal perspective, I can't imagine he will want to be the first GM in Blues history to miss the playoffs 4 years in a row.

 

[StlBigFly]

I’m ready for trades!

Here’s my guesses for fun.

Faksa: not traded
Suter: not traded
Schenn: New York (dumb guess but it’s 100% based on either the islanders or rangers having stuff I want, less of a guess, more of a wish)

Binnington: Carolina (I think they’re about to make a decision. Binnington maybe the easiest path for them. Stl and Carolina talked about necas apparently so we’ve looked thru their stuff already)

Toropchenko: Toronto (cheap Berube guy slots into bottom of depleted depth chart.)

Western arms race:

Winnipeg: Marchand (Ehlers for Marchand let’s both teams contend while also both dealing with pending ufas - both teams would sign their new dude)

Avalanche: Crosby (it’s the best thing for the penguins probably. Their fans aren’t dumb)

Stars: Seth Jones (seems too perfect a fit)

Flames: Middlestadt (same with Seth Jones)

Vegas: Rackell? (I don’t think they’re can afford much)

Wild: Nelson (maybe a good place for Schenn too)

 

[Brian39]

Listening to 32 thoughts it sounds like there has been a disconnect between what the media thinks about the Blues fortunes this year and what the reality is. “Doug Armstrong is very disappointed in his team. Very disappointed. I’m hearing things in St.Louis…there could be a shake up.” Dreger has done it. Friedman has done it.

Again, no legitimate person thought this team was even remotely capable of doing anything extraordinary this year. The media seems to be blind to this fact for some reason. We all agree Holloway/Broberg/Monty = good but none of these moves transformed the team from mid to central division contender. We’re still in the heart of our retool. Ok, Doug is listening on X vet who will not have any significant role the next time the team contends now that the Blues are truly out of playoff contention. Shocker. The way it’s being framed is just odd to me.

There is a massive gap between 'extraordinary' and what we have gotten out of our first 56 games.

There is a pretty damn big gap between Army's publicly stated expectations from the start of the year and what we have gotten through our first 56 games.

We're 13 points back of the 4th place team in the Central Division and are 14 points ahead of the last-place Blackhawks. That puts us basically exactly in between a truly putrid Hawks team and any of the 4 good teams in the Central. I think it was a reasonable expectation that the team would be closer to those good teams than an awful Hawks team, especially with the context that we'd add a Jack Adams winning coach and bring in Cam Fowler to help improve the D group mid-season. This team keeps finding ways to lose. This team keeps coming out flat and multiple vets are having below-expectation seasons.

I don't find it remotely odd that Army is very disappointed in the team even though he never thought that it was a legit contender. He (IMO reasonably) expected this team to be playing meaningful hockey into and potentially through March. Maybe we would have sold and maybe not, but I think the expectation was that any rookies airdropped into lineup down the stretch would be joining a team that was still fighting for something. Instead, the season was functionally over by the end of January. That's falling pretty well short of non-ridiculous expectations.

 

[TheOrganist]

There is a massive gap between 'extraordinary' and what we have gotten out of our first 56 games.

There is a pretty damn big gap between Army's publicly stated expectations from the start of the year and what we have gotten through our first 56 games.

We're 13 points back of the 4th place team in the Central Division and are 14 points ahead of the last-place Blackhawks. That puts us basically exactly in between a truly putrid Hawks team and any of the 4 good teams in the Central. I think it was a reasonable expectation that the team would be closer to those good teams than an awful Hawks team, especially with the context that we'd add a Jack Adams winning coach and bring in Cam Fowler to help improve the D group mid-season. This team keeps finding ways to lose. This team keeps coming out flat and multiple vets are having below-expectation seasons.

I don't find it remotely odd that Army is very disappointed in the team even though he never thought that it was a legit contender. He (IMO reasonably) expected this team to be playing meaningful hockey into and potentially through March. Maybe we would have sold and maybe not, but I think the expectation was that any rookies airdropped into lineup down the stretch would be joining a team that was still fighting for something. Instead, the season was functionally over by the end of January. That's falling pretty well short of non-ridiculous expectations.

That's fair...but there really doesn't need to be any "fallout" from the team playing below these meager expectations. Nothing needs to be "shaken up"...you shake up a team or re-evaluate your core after a year like the 2015 playoffs when the same cast is struggling to get over the proverbial hump...it was always going to be a transition year is my point. And I think there are enough positives in the underlying metrics that I'm comfortable Monty will be able to take this team places when he has more talent at his disposal considering the style he likes to play.

 

[sfvega]

I agree the situation is dictating the selling mode. Saying that, there is merit in thinking Army being on his way out could affect some of his decisions. He's winding down his legacy as the Blues GM. From a personal perspective, I can't imagine he will want to be the first GM in Blues history to miss the playoffs 4 years in a row.

Army's legacy as Blues GM is not at all effected by the last portion of a season while we're rebuilding with a fully stocked prospect pool. I don't think we look at it that way, and I definitely don't think a bigger picture thinker like Army thinks that way.

 

[Majorityof1]

There is a massive gap between 'extraordinary' and what we have gotten out of our first 56 games.

There is a pretty damn big gap between Army's publicly stated expectations from the start of the year and what we have gotten through our first 56 games.

We're 13 points back of the 4th place team in the Central Division and are 14 points ahead of the last-place Blackhawks. That puts us basically exactly in between a truly putrid Hawks team and any of the 4 good teams in the Central. I think it was a reasonable expectation that the team would be closer to those good teams than an awful Hawks team, especially with the context that we'd add a Jack Adams winning coach and bring in Cam Fowler to help improve the D group mid-season. This team keeps finding ways to lose. This team keeps coming out flat and multiple vets are having below-expectation seasons.

I don't find it remotely odd that Army is very disappointed in the team even though he never thought that it was a legit contender. He (IMO reasonably) expected this team to be playing meaningful hockey into and potentially through March. Maybe we would have sold and maybe not, but I think the expectation was that any rookies airdropped into lineup down the stretch would be joining a team that was still fighting for something. Instead, the season was functionally over by the end of January. That's falling pretty well short of non-ridiculous expectations.

I agree in part. But I also think the expectations Army had were very optimistic given out C depth. Schenn playing better this year helps but we need to give him our best playing Ws which is hurting Thomas. And not having a 3C is hurting our depth scoring. If Buch hadn't regressed and Neighbours took a step forward, maybe we are OK. But also we couldn't have predicted Holloway would be this good either

And yes, on the flip side, nobody could have expected the goalies to regress this much, but many expected some level of regression there

I think Army's expectation entering the season of being in the playoff hunt were optimistic. Less so after getting Fowler. But there are still flaws with this team that Army caused and did not address.

 

[Snubbed4Vezina]

That's fair...but there really doesn't need to be any "fallout" from the team playing below these meager expectations. Nothing needs to be "shaken up"...you shake up a team or re-evaluate your core after a year like the 2015 playoffs when the same cast is struggling to get over the proverbial hump...it was always going to be a transition year is my point. And I think there are enough positives in the underlying metrics that I'm comfortable Monty will be able to take this team places when he has more talent at his disposal considering the style he likes to play.

I agree that there's no reason to "shake up" the team just to shake up the team by trading someone like Schenn, but if a smart deal presents itself for any of these veteran pieces that likely aren't going to be impactful 2-3 seasons down the line, it's not really a "shake up" it's simply smart management of assets.

I think the talk of a shake up is Army's last ditch effort to squeeze some high-effort hockey out of this group this season but ultimately at the end of the day, it's likely too late to save some of their veteran buddies from getting a ticket out of town.

 

[Spektre]

Army's legacy as Blues GM is not at all effected by the last portion of a season while we're rebuilding with a fully stocked prospect pool. I don't think we look at it that way, and I definitely don't think a bigger picture thinker like Army thinks that way.

It’s not just about how this year plays out.

In 20 years from now, every Blues fan is still going to think of Army as the GM who helped get the first championship. That doesn’t change the fact they will miss the playoffs 3 years in a row, and next year could set the franchise record with a 4th straight miss.

Army has publicly stated multiple times that he wants to leave the franchise in a better place than when he started. He’s also stated it’s not right now.

People can argue, and say the organization is already better, due to worth, and having a banner. That’s not how Army sees it. It’s not the full picture anyway.

We’ll see what happens this year and next. I can’t see him handing over the reigns to Steen after missing the playoffs 4 years in a row, and being happy with the state of affairs, regardless of how good the prospect pool is.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

I think it's fair for Army to be frustrated with this group.

He brought in a Jack Adams winning coach, and we started playing much better at 5v5 under Monty almost immediately, but especially after Thomas/Broberg came back. The biggest issue around the middle of December was trying to play Suter 24 minutes a night, with no real timetable on Leddy's return, so we made a calculated buy on Fowler, who fit in seamlessly right away. I remember writing something at the time of the trade about how Army had given this team a real chance with those two early moves, and that it was up to the team to show who they were.

We were right there after the two wins against Calgary - that's the moment a good team finds a way and cements themselves. We crumbled, badly.

I think it's also fair to consider shaking up the leadership group on this team. A major trend from last year that has carried over to this year is our record when trailing first. We get scored on first too often (Last year we were scored on first in 43 games, which ranked us 13th, 1 more game and we would have been tied for 10th most in the league. This year we've been scored on first 30 times in 55 games, which ties us with the Rangers at 8th most in the league) but the real issue is that our record when getting scored on first is absolutely putrid.

Last year, we had 10 wins when trailing first (Out of 43 games). The only teams with less were Chicago, Minnesota, Philly, Columbus, and San Jose. Not the company you want to keep. This year we have 8 wins in 30 games, so we've done a -bit- better, but almost every team that is behind us in "comeback" wins has played significantly less games getting scored on first then we have.

In aggregate, we've played the 8th most games over the last two years when trailing first, one more and we'd be 6th most. Yet we have only won more games then 6 teams, Nashville, Philly, Anaheim, Columbus, and San Jose.

I personally believe a lot of that should fall at the feet of our leadership group. They're generally the most experienced and highest paid players on our roster. They need to have the confidence and poise/presence to keep this team moving in the right direction, especially in the face of adversity. They have not proven capable to this point of righting the ship when it needs righting.

We got scored on before the first commercial break in every one of the four games we lost after the Vegas shootout victory. We went on to lose all four. I think the leadership group needs to wear that.

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

That's fair...but there really doesn't need to be any "fallout" from the team playing below these meager expectations. Nothing needs to be "shaken up"...you shake up a team or re-evaluate your core after a year like the 2015 playoffs when the same cast is struggling to get over the proverbial hump...it was always going to be a transition year is my point. And I think there are enough positives in the underlying metrics that I'm comfortable Monty will be able to take this team places when he has more talent at his disposal considering the style he likes to play.

Disagree, if you set organizational goals and fail to achieve them making excuses or just waiting for them to fix themselves isn’t a path to success. We are trending down, if it was just one year you can maybe wait and see if it was just bad luck. However, this is the third year of missing the playoffs and with a better roster than last year and a better coach we are on pace for less wins than last year. We are closer to the 2010 or 2011 Blues than 2015. After transitioning out of the rebuild from 2009 to 2011, playoffs were the expectation and when the team didn’t meet those expectations after missing in both years Armstrong did a purge…or “Shake Up” or whatever you want to call it. Afterwards we made the playoffs six years straight and had one conference final appearance before barely missing the playoffs in 2018.

February 19, 2011, the Blues traded Johnson, Jay McClement, and a 2011 first-round pick to the Colorado Avalanche for Kevin Shattenkirk, Chris Stewart, and a second-round pick in 2011.

At the trade deadline in 2011, Doug Armstrong traded Eric Brewer, Brad Boyes and Brad Winchester in three separate deals before the deadline. The team got three draft picks in return and they turned into … Jordan Binnington, Joel Edmundson and MacKenzie MacEachern.

He also traded for Halak that offseason.

Altogether, it worked out great last time. I like Scheen, Binner, Faulk, and Sunny. However, if moving them or any non-core piece makes the Blues better and makes them play like it, I am all for it.

 

[Brian39]

I agree in part. But I also think the expectations Army had were very optimistic given out C depth. Schenn playing better this year helps but we need to give him our best playing Ws which is hurting Thomas. And not having a 3C is hurting our depth scoring. If Buch hadn't regressed and Neighbours took a step forward, maybe we are OK. But also we couldn't have predicted Holloway would be this good either

And yes, on the flip side, nobody could have expected the goalies to regress this much, but many expected some level of regression there

I think Army's expectation entering the season of being in the playoff hunt were optimistic. Less so after getting Fowler. But there are still flaws with this team that Army caused and did not address.

He is?

He had 20 goals and 46 points last season. He is currently on pace for 16 goals and 46 points this season. He's improved the +/- (-22 last year and on pace for -10 this year) but he is turning the puck over more and taking the puck away from guys less. His possession numbers are better, but he's also getting noticeably more sheltered than last year. He had a 26 game stretch this year where he was playing really well. Game 1 of that stretch was the first game under Monty, so I was optimistic that it was going to last all year. But he was awful before the coaching change and his last 8 games have been rough. He has 3 goals, 9 assists and is -14 in the 30 total games on either side of that awesome 26 game stretch.

Streakiness is nothing new for him and I think he's got a decent chance of hitting 50 points. But I can't say that he has been better overall. FWIW, he had a couple awesome 15+ game stretches last year too.

The lack of a 3C is absolutely a major hole, but it isn't like we had a great 3C last year. Hayes had 13 goals and 29 points as our 3C. I think it was reasonable to believe the additions of Broberg and Holloway would largely offset the losses of Krug and Hayes. I'm not at all saying that this current team doesn't have holes, but on paper it has fewer than last year's.

 

[Celtic Note]

He is?

He had 20 goals and 46 points last season. He is currently on pace for 16 goals and 46 points this season. He's improved the +/- (-22 last year and on pace for -10 this year) but he is turning the puck over more and taking the puck away from guys less. His possession numbers are better, but he's also getting noticeably more sheltered than last year. He had a 26 game stretch this year where he was playing really well. Game 1 of that stretch was the first game under Monty, so I was optimistic that it was going to last all year. But he was awful before the coaching change and his last 8 games have been rough. He has 3 goals, 9 assists and is -14 in the 30 total games on either side of that awesome 26 game stretch.

Streakiness is nothing new for him and I think he's got a decent chance of hitting 50 points. But I can't say that he has been better overall. FWIW, he had a couple awesome 15+ game stretches last year too.

The lack of a 3C is absolutely a major hole, but it isn't like we had a great 3C last year. Hayes had 13 goals and 29 points as our 3C. I think it was reasonable to believe the additions of Broberg and Holloway would largely offset the losses of Krug and Hayes. I'm not at all saying that this current team doesn't have holes, but on paper it has fewer than last year's.

I think you could also mention the goaltending slide here, which I believe you noted as a significant possibility this off season. Or maybe it was someone else.

Goaltending was a major part of our over performing last year. Any roster improvement over last years team was going to need to be significant to over come any slide given how well they played. The defense was especially challenged. Army made adjustments there. So their was cause for some optimism on D.

But I think a lot of his depth signings as well as Buch flopped. Maybe on paper it looks better in a vacuum, but adding a bunch of new players often requires time to everyone to gel. Our two offersheets didn’t take any time and Suter was ok to start, but we knew from the get go that we couldn’t rely on Suter as the season progressed given heavy usage.

As for all the other depth we absolutely didn’t strike gold and there were reasons teams moved on from those guys at a low cost. We should have gotten more out of them than we got, but we had an unseasoned coach with a mediocre resume, so assuming everyone would perform well shouldn’t be an expectation.

Then we also needed to expect Buch and other vets declining each year (on average) moving forward. Buch shouldn’t have fell off like he did. But putting him at center was likely going to hamper his production.

Faulk hasn’t surprised.
Schenn hasn’t surprised.

Binnington ebbs and flows year to year and Hofer is young and not consistently getting playing time.

I thought Neighbours over produced last year, so it’s not surprising where he is at the moment.

Holloway has been a pleasant surprise as was Broberg who played amazing but returned back to earth (which is still a very good player and admittedly better than I thought…though not terribly far off).


Al this to say that I am not saying we couldn’t have competed for a wild card spot, but what is happening now could easily have been an assumption as well (This all is not really directed at you though. I just went tired, stream of consciousness.)

 

[Majorityof1]

He is?

He had 20 goals and 46 points last season. He is currently on pace for 16 goals and 46 points this season. He's improved the +/- (-22 last year and on pace for -10 this year) but he is turning the puck over more and taking the puck away from guys less. His possession numbers are better, but he's also getting noticeably more sheltered than last year. He had a 26 game stretch this year where he was playing really well. Game 1 of that stretch was the first game under Monty, so I was optimistic that it was going to last all year. But he was awful before the coaching change and his last 8 games have been rough. He has 3 goals, 9 assists and is -14 in the 30 total games on either side of that awesome 26 game stretch.

Streakiness is nothing new for him and I think he's got a decent chance of hitting 50 points. But I can't say that he has been better overall. FWIW, he had a couple awesome 15+ game stretches last year too.

The lack of a 3C is absolutely a major hole, but it isn't like we had a great 3C last year. Hayes had 13 goals and 29 points as our 3C. I think it was reasonable to believe the additions of Broberg and Holloway would largely offset the losses of Krug and Hayes. I'm not at all saying that this current team doesn't have holes, but on paper it has fewer than last year's.

I guess I should have stated that more clearly. Schenn being able to fill a top 6 C role recently when paired with our best wings has helped, but at the expense of Thomas's line. Holloway-Schenn-Kyrou scores at 3.16 goals per 60 pace. Schenn without those 2 has a 1.24 pace. That 1.24 is what's causing his goal drop and his points to stagnate. But when paired with good wingers, he seems to have put up decent numbers.

Ideally, I want to eventually replace both middle 6 C slots soon. But while we wait on Dvorsky, I am fine with just getting a 3C. And I still think it was inexcusable for Armstrong to enter the season without one and expect the playoffs from this team.

 

[sfvega]

It’s not just about how this year plays out.

In 20 years from now, every Blues fan is still going to think of Army as the GM who helped get the first championship. That doesn’t change the fact they will miss the playoffs 3 years in a row, and next year could set the franchise record with a 4th straight miss.

Army has publicly stated multiple times that he wants to leave the franchise in a better place than when he started. He’s also stated it’s not right now.

People can argue, and say the organization is already better, due to worth, and having a banner. That’s not how Army sees it. It’s not the full picture anyway.

We’ll see what happens this year and next. I can’t see him handing over the reigns to Steen after missing the playoffs 4 years in a row, and being happy with the state of affairs, regardless of how good the prospect pool is.

We were always going to have more of a chance to make the playoffs next year than this year. I don't think much is going to happen this deadline, much the same as last deadline. The noteworthy piece to move/not move is Schenn. So, either we intend to move him to get that contract out and try to use that flexibility or keep Schenn because you're trying to make that push next year. It's hard to move Schenn without having someone to take that spot. We'd love to pencil Dvo in his spot, but if the playoffs next year is the goal that seems like a very risky move. So I think the lion's share of the moves are coming in the off-season.

I don't think Army is under the impression that he can coast on the banner he won. I think he's under the impression that he built a team that could contend for basically a decade, and now he's trying to put Steen in a spot to be able to take over a team that can do that again. I don't think, in terms of bigger picture, that it hinges on making the playoffs next year or not.