Celtic Note
Living the dream
- Dec 22, 2006
- 17,441
- 6,453
2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.
- Thread starter simon IC
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
LGB
Registered User
- Feb 4, 2019
- 2,533
- 2,767
I acknowledged that, but yes, possible he is not even tradeable in a year or two if he falls off the cliff. I would prioritize giving Dvorsky time and having a lineup where guys like Bolduc, Holloway, and Neighbours are put in good situations to produce and grow.
Drubilly
Muh dark moooooode
We’re soooo gonna trade for Luke aren’t we?!?
I mean he would fit into our all star defensive core (from 2017)
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,846
- 15,081
Getting bought out would be a pretty good outcome for Tarasenko. That couldn't take place until the summer, so he would get all of his remaining money this year. He could sign a 1 year deal at $1.75M in the summer wherever he wanted and make more total money than what he'd be owed on his current deal. There would be a hell of a lot more teams interested in Tarasenko at $1.75M than at $4.75M. Not every team in the league, but I'm fairly confident he'd have destinations that he wants to go to.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,846
- 15,081
Not a bad way to convince Schenn to waive his NTC for your team. I don't mean that as a knock on Luke. He is the type of depth D that can really help on a playoff run and he's got the intangibles to go along with that. I don't believe that any teams would view Luke solely as a way to try and land Brayden. But if you are looking for Brayden and looking to add a depth D man, Luke would be a nice option.
BadgersandBlues
Registered User
- Jun 6, 2011
- 2,027
- 1,725
I've been thinking more and more about Carolina as a potential trade partner for Binny. I think this deal would have to take place after the season for a number of reasons (NTCs, Salary Cap, and roster construction for Carolina's playoff push) and would be predicated on the concept that Carolina tanks out of the playoffs again, mainly due to goaltending, and Burns retires.
To Carolina - Binny, Faulk, and possibly a small sweetener - I'd go as far as to include a Simon Robertsson or Buchinger level of prospect, maaaaybe even Zach Dean, but I'd really prefer to keep him, and/or a later (5th+) round pick.
To STL - Scott Morrow and Jesperi Kotkaniemi.
On July 1st Faulk's full NTC modifies to a 15 team, and Binny's modifies to a 14 team. Faulk I assume will include the 7 Canadian teams plus bottom feeders such as Chicago, San Jose, Philly, Anaheim, and Buffalo. That accounts for 12 teams - I'd also assume he'd rather not go to Utah, Pittsburgh, or Columbus, but those are more guesses. Binny might keep some Canadian teams off his list, but who knows. Anyway, I don't think Carolina would be high on either of their lists to block, as they've been a very successful franchise for the last 6 years, they have a head coach everyone raves about, and there's really no hockey media/crazy fandom to bother them in Carolina.
Why it makes sense for Carolina:
1 - It maximizes their win-now window - Really this all depends on the value they see in Binnington and his ability to win when it matters most. Markstrom brought back a 1st and a bottom pair D-man, and his playof resume isn't nearly as good as Binny's. Assuming the Canes bow out again due to goaltending, they will be hard pressed to find a goalie on any market with a better big game resume then Binny. Faulk is a step down from Burns, but he's still a serviceable Top-4 D and from a production standpoint very similiar to Burns. I frankly think Carolina's system makes players look better from an advanced metrics standpoint then maybe they really are and Burns is a benficiary of that.
2- They get (Somehow) younger. Assuming Binny replaces Anderson and Faulk replaces Burns, they actually get younger at both positions.
3 - They get -some- cap flexibility. Currently Anderson and Burns make a combined 8.68M. Add in Kotkaniemi and that goes up to 13.5M. Binny and Faulk combine for 12.5. Carolina finding a 3C for 1M is pretty far fetched, but they also are likely replacing the cap hit of Orlov (7.75) for Nikishin's ELC. Nikishin's ELC will expire (Since it will only be a 2 year) in the same year that both Binny and Faulk come off the books. I think Hall's money goes to Rantanen, so that's a wash, but with the cap going up they should be able to fill a 3C role without much headache. I wouldn't love retaining on say Faulk, but I wouldn't let say 1.5M retained stand in the way of this deal either.
4 - They still have Badinka as a solid RHD prospect they can mature into their NHL roster.
Why Carolina doesn't do it:
1. They have been patient with Morrow and are about to reap the reward, they may value him far more as an ELC D-man then they do Binny/Faulk.
2. Center depth becomes an issue. Aho is amazing, and Staal is putting up a massive season, but he'll be 37 on opening day of 2025. Carolina doesn't really have any center prospects worth writing home about. Kotkaniemi is overpaid, but it's not a gross overpayment. Finding a 3C in UFA can be very tricky, and can you continue to trust Staal as your 2C next year?
Why STL does it:
1. It brings in guys that fit our retool timeline much better, especially in major areas of need, RHD and C.
2. It maximizes the value of Binny, an asset that really isn't going to do much for us when our next window opens, as he's likely to age out quickly. It also gives us an opportunity to see what we have in our young goalies - Hofer has done OK as a backup so far, and I'm not really sure what's left for him to prove as a backup - Colten Ellis has also put up two really solid AHL seasons as the 1A in Springfield, I think it's time to give him a shot as a backup or perhaps a tandem type in the NHL. Zherenko gets the full starters load in the AHL next season to see if he can handle the workload.
3. This trade would have the same effect on the right side of our D as Broberg did for the left side of our D from an age/projection standpoint. All of a sudden we go from having Parayko and a lot of question marks to something that looks a whole lot more substantial.
4. Kotkaniemi is overpaid, but it's not terrible and even if he becomes our version of Lars Eller, a 3C who puts up 15ish goals and 35ish points a season, that's perfectly manageable with the cap going up - and we don't have anyone in the system outside of Dean that would profile as a 3C unless Dvo doesn't hit, and who wants to think about that. Maybe we even catch lightning in a bottle again, no one thought Holloway would turn out as well as he did.
5. It's the first step in passing the torch of our leadership group towards the younger core. It also makes trading Schenn down the line more feasable and helps relieve the pressure to rush Dvo to the NHL. Thomas/Schenn/Kotkaniemi is a better trio then Thomas/Schenn/Sunny, that's for damn sure.
Why STL doesn't do it:
1. Trading a goalie like Binner is tough. He's the franchise leader in wins. He's the guy who won us our only Stanley Cup. He's been nails in big games his entire career, which is something you can't quantify or scout. He's been a rock for us through this entire retool and never complained, even though our team has left him out to dry more often then not. He's one of my personal favorite Blues ever, and it would be heartbreaking to watch him leave. He should have a statue outside of Enterprise making that save on Nordstrom for all eternity.
2. Carolina says they want a sweetener or retention that we can't stomach.
To Carolina - Binny, Faulk, and possibly a small sweetener - I'd go as far as to include a Simon Robertsson or Buchinger level of prospect, maaaaybe even Zach Dean, but I'd really prefer to keep him, and/or a later (5th+) round pick.
To STL - Scott Morrow and Jesperi Kotkaniemi.
On July 1st Faulk's full NTC modifies to a 15 team, and Binny's modifies to a 14 team. Faulk I assume will include the 7 Canadian teams plus bottom feeders such as Chicago, San Jose, Philly, Anaheim, and Buffalo. That accounts for 12 teams - I'd also assume he'd rather not go to Utah, Pittsburgh, or Columbus, but those are more guesses. Binny might keep some Canadian teams off his list, but who knows. Anyway, I don't think Carolina would be high on either of their lists to block, as they've been a very successful franchise for the last 6 years, they have a head coach everyone raves about, and there's really no hockey media/crazy fandom to bother them in Carolina.
Why it makes sense for Carolina:
1 - It maximizes their win-now window - Really this all depends on the value they see in Binnington and his ability to win when it matters most. Markstrom brought back a 1st and a bottom pair D-man, and his playof resume isn't nearly as good as Binny's. Assuming the Canes bow out again due to goaltending, they will be hard pressed to find a goalie on any market with a better big game resume then Binny. Faulk is a step down from Burns, but he's still a serviceable Top-4 D and from a production standpoint very similiar to Burns. I frankly think Carolina's system makes players look better from an advanced metrics standpoint then maybe they really are and Burns is a benficiary of that.
2- They get (Somehow) younger. Assuming Binny replaces Anderson and Faulk replaces Burns, they actually get younger at both positions.
3 - They get -some- cap flexibility. Currently Anderson and Burns make a combined 8.68M. Add in Kotkaniemi and that goes up to 13.5M. Binny and Faulk combine for 12.5. Carolina finding a 3C for 1M is pretty far fetched, but they also are likely replacing the cap hit of Orlov (7.75) for Nikishin's ELC. Nikishin's ELC will expire (Since it will only be a 2 year) in the same year that both Binny and Faulk come off the books. I think Hall's money goes to Rantanen, so that's a wash, but with the cap going up they should be able to fill a 3C role without much headache. I wouldn't love retaining on say Faulk, but I wouldn't let say 1.5M retained stand in the way of this deal either.
4 - They still have Badinka as a solid RHD prospect they can mature into their NHL roster.
Why Carolina doesn't do it:
1. They have been patient with Morrow and are about to reap the reward, they may value him far more as an ELC D-man then they do Binny/Faulk.
2. Center depth becomes an issue. Aho is amazing, and Staal is putting up a massive season, but he'll be 37 on opening day of 2025. Carolina doesn't really have any center prospects worth writing home about. Kotkaniemi is overpaid, but it's not a gross overpayment. Finding a 3C in UFA can be very tricky, and can you continue to trust Staal as your 2C next year?
Why STL does it:
1. It brings in guys that fit our retool timeline much better, especially in major areas of need, RHD and C.
2. It maximizes the value of Binny, an asset that really isn't going to do much for us when our next window opens, as he's likely to age out quickly. It also gives us an opportunity to see what we have in our young goalies - Hofer has done OK as a backup so far, and I'm not really sure what's left for him to prove as a backup - Colten Ellis has also put up two really solid AHL seasons as the 1A in Springfield, I think it's time to give him a shot as a backup or perhaps a tandem type in the NHL. Zherenko gets the full starters load in the AHL next season to see if he can handle the workload.
3. This trade would have the same effect on the right side of our D as Broberg did for the left side of our D from an age/projection standpoint. All of a sudden we go from having Parayko and a lot of question marks to something that looks a whole lot more substantial.
4. Kotkaniemi is overpaid, but it's not terrible and even if he becomes our version of Lars Eller, a 3C who puts up 15ish goals and 35ish points a season, that's perfectly manageable with the cap going up - and we don't have anyone in the system outside of Dean that would profile as a 3C unless Dvo doesn't hit, and who wants to think about that. Maybe we even catch lightning in a bottle again, no one thought Holloway would turn out as well as he did.
5. It's the first step in passing the torch of our leadership group towards the younger core. It also makes trading Schenn down the line more feasable and helps relieve the pressure to rush Dvo to the NHL. Thomas/Schenn/Kotkaniemi is a better trio then Thomas/Schenn/Sunny, that's for damn sure.
Why STL doesn't do it:
1. Trading a goalie like Binner is tough. He's the franchise leader in wins. He's the guy who won us our only Stanley Cup. He's been nails in big games his entire career, which is something you can't quantify or scout. He's been a rock for us through this entire retool and never complained, even though our team has left him out to dry more often then not. He's one of my personal favorite Blues ever, and it would be heartbreaking to watch him leave. He should have a statue outside of Enterprise making that save on Nordstrom for all eternity.
2. Carolina says they want a sweetener or retention that we can't stomach.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 53,355
- 17,204
Competely agree, I've always viewed Carolina as the perfect fit on paper. And I think they have the perfect pieces to convince Army to do it. I do think Army will prefer more NHL ready pieces. Morrow is someone that we could immediately throw on the 3rd pair down the stretch. Stylistically, he can fill the role that Faulk has played. He's a future piece, but he in theory allows us to remain competitive today. With Kotkaniemi, he's certainly been a disappointing player for Carolina, and they'd probably benefit by moving his contract to get a more impactful player in his spot. At the same time, we'd have pretty solid need for him, even if just as a #3 C as an upgrade over Sunny.
I think that type of a deal makes more sense than a 1st+prospect.
I think that type of a deal makes more sense than a 1st+prospect.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,846
- 15,081
I think you can put together a Binner/Faulk deal mid-season. I wouldn't call it likely, but I think it makes more sense for Carolina to get their goalie now than waiting another year.
Sean Walker has been a disappointment in Carolina. He's playing 16 minutes a night for them (6th on the team and over 2 minutes less than 5th place) and hasn't stuck on the top 2 units on the PP or PK. 11 points and a -3 and he is arguably the most-sheltered D man on the team. His $3.6M isn't a terrible number, but he's 30 and signed for 4 more seasons after this one. My guess is that they regret that contract and would be happy to move it for an upgrade. Swapping Walker for Faulk upgrades the right side of their D by a comfortable margin right now.
While I don't think that our organization is eager to retain money with 2 years of additional term, Faulk only makes $4.5M in real dollars in each of the remaining 2 years of his deal. Retaining 18.77% of Faulks contract would get his cap number down to the $5.28M they currently take for Burns and would only cost the Blues $845k for each of the next 2 seasons. That feels pretty doable if the return is right and then Carolina could view Faulk as a 1-to-1 replacement of Burns in 2025/26 and 2026/27. It would also give them plenty of leeway to make the cap work now.
Binner and Faulk (18.77% retained) is $11.28M against the cap. Freddie, Walker, and Kotkaniemi are $11.82M against the cap. Freddie, Walker, and Hall are $13M against the cap. Either way, this deal could very well be cap neutral (or even a net cap gain) for Carolina this year without the Blues having to eat a brutal amount of real dollars. And $11.28M for Binner and Faulk the next 2 years should be more than manageable for Carolina.
If the deal with us included Kotkaniemi, then Carolina would need another deal in place for a rental center upgrade and they would need to include Hall in that deal to make it work. But any team selling a quality center should be easily able to eat Hall's money since it is an expiring deal. If that team for some reason couldn't, then we would still have the cap space to also act as an intermediary and retain on Hall even after taking back Freddie, Walker, and Kotkaniemi.
All in all, I'm much more interested in prying Morrow (and other futures) out of Carolina than Kotkaniemi. I'd be happy to take a flyer on Kotkaniemi as a secondary piece of any deal with them, but if they want to keep him for this year's Cup push and then reassess in the summer I would not let that derail a deal. I'd be happy to move on from discussing him and keep the conversation focused on Morrow and other futures for the chance to upgrade in net (and potentially elsewhere too). But Kotkaniemi is also their 7th highest scoring forward this year, so it isn't like he would be an irreplaceable loss for them if he were included in a deal.
If they view Faulk as a good replacement for Burns moving forward, I think a mid-season deal is very doable instead of them having to wait for another playoff let down. I just don't see how they enter these playoffs with the same goalies that let them down last year.
Last edited:
Not true, he's one of the most overrated prospects in all of hockey yes.
That seems like an opinion that requires some justification. While best might be arguable, he is consistently rated by "experts" to be near the top. Calling him overrated is outside of the normal discourse. Why?
BleedBlue14
UrGeNcY
I mean he's a 6'4 mobile defenseman who has been tearing up the KHL for the last 2-3 years. By most regards he's the top defensive prospect in the NHL to not have played in the NHL yet.
What is the basis for him being overrated? Also, are you stating that they would trade him because he's overrated? If so why would we want him?
Everything he's done so far in a league that's generally viewed as the 2nd or 3rd best in the world from age 20-23 is pointing towards a high end player.
Would honestly be pretty insane if we got to March 10th and Schenn and Binner are no longer on the team. Would not have guessed that would be a possibility 5 months ago.
I would be pretty shocked if either got moved even with all the smoke out there. Not saying I am against it I just don't think it will actually happen.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 53,355
- 17,204
I'm still not expecting anything monumental, but the cap going up like it is, is perfect timing for us. Schenn looking more like a #2 C, Binnington having that performance, and hell Parayko having the season he's having. Army is in a position where desperate times might make desperate offers, and we'll see what happens.
Now this clip doesn't mean that much, but Kypreos is basically saying he'd trade Knies+ for Parayko. Now, I don't know if I would do that, but it's at least the type of offer that you take time to consider. It kind of highlights that if Army wants to make a move and he's open to who he's willing to move, he can make a significant move to help Steen's future.
And that's what is interesting to me for this deadline and upcoming summer. Army's previous comments have been more about setting Steen up for success, not necessarily with just getting the Blues back to the playoffs ASAP. He probably thought he could do both, give Steen some very nice future pieces and a team that either just made the playoffs or very much on that way. The way this season has gone, may have changed that view, and now he wants to maxmize the future part of what he gives Steen. And when I mean future part, I don't mean more picks, but moving a vet or 2 in return for young NHL players that will have a longer impact on Steen's teams than a Binnington, Schenn, Fowler, or Parayko would.
Now this clip doesn't mean that much, but Kypreos is basically saying he'd trade Knies+ for Parayko. Now, I don't know if I would do that, but it's at least the type of offer that you take time to consider. It kind of highlights that if Army wants to make a move and he's open to who he's willing to move, he can make a significant move to help Steen's future.
And that's what is interesting to me for this deadline and upcoming summer. Army's previous comments have been more about setting Steen up for success, not necessarily with just getting the Blues back to the playoffs ASAP. He probably thought he could do both, give Steen some very nice future pieces and a team that either just made the playoffs or very much on that way. The way this season has gone, may have changed that view, and now he wants to maxmize the future part of what he gives Steen. And when I mean future part, I don't mean more picks, but moving a vet or 2 in return for young NHL players that will have a longer impact on Steen's teams than a Binnington, Schenn, Fowler, or Parayko would.
Last edited:
Snubbed4Vezina
Registered User
- Jul 9, 2022
- 2,985
- 5,298
Cue the late 1st + Nick Robertson trade proposals on the trade board.
Latest posts
-
-
Speculation: Roster Building thread - Part XVII - (TDL is March 7th)- Latest: Paulie Walnutz
-
-
