2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.

[bleedblue1223]

And since he was technically brought up, the Islanders are playing 7 D, and Perunovich is still being scratched, he's just not NHL quality.

 

[sfvega]

I don't know how we can just write off Broberg's development here. Now, I'm not saying our coaching staff worked magic on him, but you are way overrating what he did in the playoffs. His actual results were very good, but his xGF% was 34.87%. He had a tremendous amount of puck luck in the playoffs, and this season his expected results are solidly over 50%. To say that it was basically a given that Broberg would excel like he has in a 20+ minute role is kind of silly.

Now, I don't think our coaches turned him around, I think he just needed the right situation, but to say our development played no part is also kind of silly.

Broberg has outplayed expectations. I didn't say that our coaching played no part, ever. What I think is clear is that he turned a corner before he ever got here. It wasn't a given he would excel, but how many were expecting him to fail?

But Broberg was playing good hockey, against top teams, on his offhand side. That's impressive even if you think advanced stats showed inflated puck luck. But the rub is where Broberg WAS vs. where Nemec IS. And also, the cost of acquisition of what Broberg was (a literal no-brainer) vs. what was suggested of a proven Kyrou for a Nemec that is currently playing his way out of NJ. This is what I don't understand. This is the rest of the story, but it just kind of gets written off.

 

[StlBigFly]

What was the condition on his deal?

He’s at 9 games now

Seems it’s 20 games. I miss cap friendly…

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Agreed. I have reservations about his defensive game. The bolded part throws huge red flags for me. Not everyone will agree, but I don't like a player or a system that allows for that. But that's just me.

Giving defensemen at least some form of freedom to be a rover is good, otherwise it limits what they can contribute as well as makes your offense much more predictable and easy to defend. I mean, look at how Parayko has been this year with his goal scoring, but it's definitely something that needs to be used in with a balanced and opportunistic approach.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

What was the condition on his deal?

He’s at 9 games now

Seems it’s 20 games. I miss cap friendly…

Yeah he's played 2 games in the last 4 weeks. We aren't getting that pick back.

 

[Xerloris]

Giving defensemen at least some form of freedom to be a rover is good, otherwise it limits what they can contribute as well as makes your offense much more predictable and easy to defend. I mean, look at how Parayko has been this year with his goal scoring, but it's definitely something that needs to be used in with a balanced and opportunistic approach.

I think it's pretty obvious that Parayko did not have the freedom previously to be a rover because we see what he can do now that he is allowed that freedom

 

[Linkens Mastery]

I think it's pretty obvious that Parayko did not have the freedom previously to be a rover because we see what he can do now that he is allowed that freedom

I blame Hitch, Yeo, Berube, and Bannister. They held him back!

 

[BadgersandBlues]

I think you guys are crazy if you don't believe we've done well at developing defensemen. We won the Cup in 2019 with 4 of our top 5 D men in TOI 100% homegrown in AP/Parayko/Edmundson/Dunn. The only player in the top 5 who we didn't draft and develop was Jay-Bo. Our homegrown guys were the top 4 from a xGF% too.

We have developed 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round picks into top 4 NHL D-men. That's crazy good. We have gotten reasonable contributions from 5-7th round picks recently in Kessel and Tucker.

Perhaps this is an expectations issue. We haven't taken a D in the first round (Before Lindstein/Jiricek) since 2012, which was Jordan Schmaltz. 2012! We did take four in a row with Johnson/Cole/AP/Runblad, and for the most part we did develop those guys well. Johnson has played 1k+ games and counting. Cole had strong results for us before we moved him and he's now closing in on 900 games. AP is imo a HoF. Runblad and Schmaltz flamed out - it happens.

The thing I see for the most part is that guys who went on to other teams for whatever reason - and there's usually been a good reason we gave up on them - have had better results in bigger roles. That's nice and all, but they weren't going to have those roles on this team - we generally had better players that were blocking them, as we were in our competitive Cup window for most of the 2010's. Jax and Jay-Bo were blocking Cole. In the case of Edmundson, we didn't see eye to eye on contract value and went through a brutal Arb, and Dunn we chose to give up over Tarasenko, who ended up having a career year after we kept him and then got flipped for what is now the pick that got us Lindstein.

One final note - Mikkola still blows. He's just been paired with one of the best PMD in the league the last few years in Montour who did all the heavy lifting on puck transition. Now that he's playing with Kulikov they have had way worse results as a pairing. Don't pine for Niko Mikkola fellas.

 

[Brian39]

I think you guys are crazy if you don't believe we've done well at developing defensemen. We won the Cup in 2019 with 4 of our top 5 D men in TOI 100% homegrown in AP/Parayko/Edmundson/Dunn. The only player in the top 5 who we didn't draft and develop was Jay-Bo. Our homegrown guys were the top 4 from a xGF% too.

We have developed 2nd, 3rd, and 5th round picks into top 4 NHL D-men. That's crazy good. We have gotten reasonable contributions from 5-7th round picks recently in Kessel and Tucker.

Perhaps this is an expectations issue. We haven't taken a D in the first round (Before Lindstein/Jiricek) since 2012, which was Jordan Schmaltz. 2012! We did take four in a row with Johnson/Cole/AP/Runblad, and for the most part we did develop those guys well. Johnson has played 1k+ games and counting. Cole had strong results for us before we moved him and he's now closing in on 900 games. AP is imo a HoF. Runblad and Schmaltz flamed out - it happens.

The thing I see for the most part is that guys who went on to other teams for whatever reason - and there's usually been a good reason we gave up on them - have had better results in bigger roles. That's nice and all, but they weren't going to have those roles on this team - we generally had better players that were blocking them, as we were in our competitive Cup window for most of the 2010's. Jax and Jay-Bo were blocking Cole. In the case of Edmundson, we didn't see eye to eye on contract value and went through a brutal Arb, and Dunn we chose to give up over Tarasenko, who ended up having a career year after we kept him and then got flipped for what is now the pick that got us Lindstein.

One final note - Mikkola still blows. He's just been paired with one of the best PMD in the league the last few years in Montour who did all the heavy lifting on puck transition. Now that he's playing with Kulikov they have had way worse results as a pairing. Don't pine for Niko Mikkola fellas.

Just to add on to this regarding Eddy, I just don't see a guy that improved when he left. I thought our organization undervalued him a bit and I argued way back that we played too much hardball with him in negotiations. I think we could have taken a different path with him, but none of my issues were about his development as a player. He had a couple nice seasons with us as a middle-of-the-lineup D man and was a good compliment to Petro when they were paired together.

After leaving, Eddy has had a couple really nice seasons as the #4 D man when he plays with a partner who excels at moving/skating the puck up ice. He's also had multiple seasons where he hasn't been very good. He still doesn't produce much offense, he still has trouble staying in the lineup, he still gives the puck away too much, he's still physical, he still blocks shots, and his possession numbers haven't improved from his time here. I see the same guy he was when he was here.

I don't see a leap in development or a big improvement when he left. I just see other teams valuing the same guy we had more than we did. And while I disagree with our valuation of him, I don't see anything to suggest that we didn't effectively develop him. We developed him into a a guy who can be an effective (albeit flawed) #4 defensive D man in the right situation. That's a good outcome for a 2nd round pick and he did that for us on the way to a Cup in his mid-20s. And then he's continued to be that (flaws included) through his late 20s and early 30s. I very much view Eddy as a successfully developed D man.

Completely disagree on Mikkola though. He genuinely took a big step forward in Florida and has had a nice season this year. He's 4th in TOI and ATOI for a contender and has been effective. He has already reached career-bests in goals and assists. He is 6 shots away from a career best in shots, is 3rd on the team (and 2nd among D) in +/-, is 8th on the team (and 2nd among D) in expected +/-, and is putting up the best possession numbers of his career. He's still not a perfect D man and like Eddy will never be more than a #4 who supports a good partner. But he has been way more effective in that role for Florida than he was here and this is the 2nd year where that is true. We can debate how much is him and how much is Florida's system/team. But I very much disagree that he's been bad this year.

 

[ezcreepin]

Maybe, I don’t think I am over analyzing though, and definitely not confused. I put the question and answer right there is the post you responded to as close to word for word as I could since JR decided to introduce himself in the middle of the question. After the “Not Really”; Armstrong answered on stop gaps which your interpretation of the question on veteran or older players includes, but he also briefly mentioned not trading futures for players, and then hockey trades; to conclude he went back to stop gaps. I don’t think Armstrong took the question as just older or veteran players or he would have never mentioned the other two categories in his explanation afterwards.

Later on in the interview he was asked to explain to fans why he stood pat and he said that he didn’t answer the earlier question very well. So maybe you’re right but I disagree, If your answer to an any question is “Not Really” I am gonna take that at face value.

I am huge Army fan and love what he has done with the Blues however, I’m still disappointed in this deadline. If you really want playoffs then pay the prices asked for Dobson, Nemec, or Clarke. If you really don't think this team can make the playoffs then sell. He tried the latter it failed and didn’t pivot to the former. I really am not a fan of standing pat when it means we will have guys playing meaningless games in a months and still draft fifteen overall. Worse case scenario imho.

Hopefully this team proves Armstrong and myself wrong and makes the playoffs. One can hope.

Again, I think there might be some misinterpretation into what Doug is saying. I think it's pretty widely understood around here what a stop gap refers to when talking about a player, so I don't think it's super necessary to go into that bit. As far as what a hockey trade is, I think there is an argument that a hockey trade can mean trading a significant or core player between two teams ie the Erik Johnson-Stewart/Shattenkirk trade. But I think Armstrong also views a hockey trade as both sides benefitting in the immediate future as opposed to trading a player for prospects or picks. The reason I believe this is because he considered the Coyle-Mittelstadt trade to be a hockey trade despite Coyle being 33 (he's also signed for this year and next). With all that being said, I think it's clear that Doug was not interested right now in trading assets in picks and prospects for a player and/or stop gap for right now, an assertion I would hope you would agree with?

I guess what I take issue with is Doug not wanting to make a hockey trade. I feel that if you've been watching since Army took over, then you would believe that he would make a hockey trade if he felt it helped the team. I think if he wanted someone like Dobson, Nemec, or Clarke, he would have absolutely inquired about them and then at that point it's a matter of are they available or will you pay the price for them. No matter what the answer to that question is, it's very clear that either 1) None of them were available right now or 2) No one in the league was willing to pay the price for them. So to reiterate my point, I take issue with you saying that he wasn't willing to make a hockey trade during the deadline because there doesn't seem to be any evidence at all that this is the case, I don't think he was concerned whether we make the playoffs or not, but rather how we continued to play, and (this is just my nitpick here) I think the view that you should either buy hard or sell hard when you're middle of the pack is sort of a bad way to view any team in general.

We don't have to get too much into this because this is going to be difference of opinion, but I think that if this team is playing pretty well but not positioned to make a run or it's not clear if they will or won't make the playoffs, then to me it's foolish to sell off players like Schenn, Buch, and to a lesser extent Faulk and Leddy when they are the ones helping and guiding the younger players into what it means to be a pro and how to handle the pro game. For example, you take a look at Ottawa and Buffalo and see what they do each year and during the deadline and it's nearly the same thing every year - play competitive for a few months, have a rough stretch where you're out of the playoffs and spiraling, sell off valuable players for prospects and picks, draft a shit load of times each year (and draft quality at that), neglect to surround the young players coming in with good veteran leaders as opposed to letting the young players to struggle, and rinse and repeat. That, in my view, seems like what you're advocating for and I'm completely opposed to it.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Over the last 15 years or so, we've honestly been pretty successful at drafting big defensive defensemen. It's just that those aren't a very valuable commodity. Edmundson makes $3.8, Mikkola makes $2.5, Hakanpaa makes $1.5. They're guys that teams like to have, partially because they're cost-controlled, but they rarely want to pay anything substantial to acquire them. Throw Kessel and Tucker onto that pile: they're probably more valuable to us right now than they would be to anyone else.

It's the offensive defenseman that we've been fairly miserable at drafting. Dunn and Walman are both good picks, but we couldn't find a place for them because of reasons explained elsewhere. I do think they would both be thriving right now under Monty's system. Aside from them? Vannelli, Schmaltz, Perunovich, Noel, and even Rundblad all fizzled out here or elsewhere.

It seems like Ralph, Burns, Lindstein, and Loof are on the defensive defenseman path. Jiricek and Fischer both (I think) have the potential to be Parayko-esque unicorns that can be dominant at both ends of the ice, though I doubt either reach Colt-55's level.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

Over the last 15 years or so, we've honestly been pretty successful at drafting big defensive defensemen. It's just that those aren't a very valuable commodity. Edmundson makes $3.8, Mikkola makes $2.5, Hakanpaa makes $1.5. They're guys that teams like to have, partially because they're cost-controlled, but they rarely want to pay anything substantial to acquire them. Throw Kessel and Tucker onto that pile: they're probably more valuable to us right now than they would be to anyone else.

It's the offensive defenseman that we've been fairly miserable at drafting. Dunn and Walman are both good picks, but we couldn't find a place for them because of reasons explained elsewhere. I do think they would both be thriving right now under Monty's system. Aside from them? Vannelli, Schmaltz, Perunovich, Noel, and even Rundblad all fizzled out here or elsewhere.

It seems like Ralph, Burns, Lindstein, and Loof are on the defensive defenseman path. Jiricek and Fischer both (I think) have the potential to be Parayko-esque unicorns that can be dominant at both ends of the ice, though I doubt either reach Colt-55's level.

I agree with your first paragraph, but not so much your second.

Finding a quality offensive defenseman who doesn't give back just as much as they generate is probably the hardest position to fill in the NHL. It's even harder then 1C, b/c you can have different types of 1Cs - the Bergeron 70ish point guy who's a Selke winner, or the McDavid/MacKinnon types who use speed and puck skills to elevate everyone around them, or even the Matthews/Thompsen who carry the puck up the ice and then wire it home themselves.

Most offensively gifted players see the ice a little different from their coach, and they also have that desire to push the pace/puck forward - which can get them into major trouble, not because they are being careless, but because making the jump from even the AHL to the NHL is extremly difficult, especially at a young age. What works at lower levels doesn't work at higher ones, and you won't learn that until you make the mistake in person - and if the team is trying to win games, they aren't really allowed to do that. Brandt Clarke seems like a completely reasonable 22 year old D-man, and yet LA is looking to move him - because they feel the pressure to win now due to the ages of their former star players in Kopitar and Doughty.

I think in a different universe, Dunn would have thrived here - but we were trying to win a Cup, and so we (rightfully) kept him on a shorter, more sheltered leash. Most other Cup contenders already have the guy who can provide offense AND defense, so your job is to not f*** it up when that guy is off the ice.

 

[Brian39]

I agree with your first paragraph, but not so much your second.

Finding a quality offensive defenseman who doesn't give back just as much as they generate is probably the hardest position to fill in the NHL. It's even harder then 1C, b/c you can have different types of 1Cs - the Bergeron 70ish point guy who's a Selke winner, or the McDavid/MacKinnon types who use speed and puck skills to elevate everyone around them, or even the Matthews/Thompsen who carry the puck up the ice and then wire it home themselves.

Most offensively gifted players see the ice a little different from their coach, and they also have that desire to push the pace/puck forward - which can get them into major trouble, not because they are being careless, but because making the jump from even the AHL to the NHL is extremly difficult, especially at a young age. What works at lower levels doesn't work at higher ones, and you won't learn that until you make the mistake in person - and if the team is trying to win games, they aren't really allowed to do that. Brandt Clarke seems like a completely reasonable 22 year old D-man, and yet LA is looking to move him - because they feel the pressure to win now due to the ages of their former star players in Kopitar and Doughty.

I think in a different universe, Dunn would have thrived here - but we were trying to win a Cup, and so we (rightfully) kept him on a shorter, more sheltered leash. Most other Cup contenders already have the guy who can provide offense AND defense, so your job is to not f*** it up when that guy is off the ice.

And to add on to this, the large majority of guys who are successful in the NHL as 'offensive D' start off as top tier prospects in their draft class. Of the top 21 D in points this year, 14 of them were selected before the 20th pick of their draft class. Parayko is currently 22nd in points. The odds of getting an offensive D man with pick 20 or later are not good. From 2009 to 2021, we made 4 total picks before pick #20. We selected Rundblad, Schwartz, Tarasenko, and Bolduc. We quickly flipped Rundblad to select Tarasenko, so I have a really hard time saying that we should have targeted D with any of these picks (especially when you look at the D drafted with the next 20 picks in these years).

Here are the 7 D currently in the top 21 scorers who were drafted after pick #19:

Josi: we passed on him twice in the 2nd round before he was drafted. Clear miss (although damn near every team in the league missed on him and he didn't become "Roman Josi" until his D+6 season).

Lane Hutson: We drafted Snuggy at #23 with our only pick before he was selected

Shea Theodore: We didn't make a selection before he was drafted late 1st round

John Carlson: We picked Petro at #4 with out only selection before he was drafted late 1st round

Adam Fox: We selected Thompson, Kyrou, and Fitzpatrick before he was drafted in the 3rd round. I have a hard time saying this was a miss since he was moved twice on his way to his preferred destination out of college.

Weegar and Pionk: clear misses by the entire league since they went in the 7th and undrafted.

After this group of D who are outscoring Parayko, you then get to a group of 13 guys with 30-35 points. We drafted 3 of them. We did a damn good job developing Parayko, I think we did a damn good job developing Dunn before we allowed him to leave since we had (at the moment) better offensive D on the roster, and then there is Walman who could never really crack our group. Call that a failure of development.

Considering the lack of opportunities to draft the high end guys who had decent odds of turning into the successful offensive D man and the number of guys we drafted in the 2nd round and beyond who had NHL success, I can't at all say that we do a poor job drafting that type of player. If anything, it appears we did an above-average job of it.

Edit: to expand the scoring sample, let's look at the rankings for D scoring from 2019/20 through today. Josi, Carlson, Theodore, Burns, and Toews are the only 5 guys in the top 21 drafted after pick #19. I already addressed the first 3. Burns was drafted 20th and the only selection we made before him was Petro at 4th. Is Toews an 'offensive' D or is his production a result of who he plays with? And then Dunn is 22nd. Worth noting that Krug, Faulk, and Fowler all fall between 31st and 42nd on this list and we acquired all 3 for the total cost of cap space, Eddy, a former 1st rounder who busted, and a 2nd. The non-high picks in this list are almost all the caliber of guy who you can get without paying a massive asset cost. A big chunk of these non-elite offensive D were still either drafted with a top 19 pick and/or didn't find success with the team that drafted them.

 

[LGB]

If Dahlin really wants out what’s our offer?

Kyrou + Lindstein + 2025 first maybe?

 

[BlueMed]

If Dahlin really wants out what’s our offer?

Kyrou + Lindstein + 2025 first maybe?

He doesn't want to leave.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

If Dahlin really wants out what’s our offer?

Kyrou + Lindstein + 2025 first maybe?

Dahlin is one of the Defenseman I would trade Kyrou for, but zero chance that offer is anywhere close to making it work for Buffalo.

 

[LGB]

He doesn't want to leave.

Likely no, but I still don’t think it’s impossible. It’s becoming a trend in Buffalo.

Dahlin is one of the Defenseman I would trade Kyrou for, but zero chance that offer is anywhere close to making it work for Buffalo.

Yeah, I’d be willing to add more.

 

[bleedblue1223]

If Dahlin really wants out what’s our offer?

Kyrou + Lindstein + 2025 first maybe?

I mean, everything would be on the table. If he's available and they want Thomas, I'm still making an offer.

 

[Xerloris]

He doesn't want to leave.

Eichel said the same thing and so did ROR and did any more infinate amount of players when asked this kind of question.

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

Again, I think there might be some misinterpretation into what Doug is saying. I think it's pretty widely understood around here what a stop gap refers to when talking about a player, so I don't think it's super necessary to go into that bit. As far as what a hockey trade is, I think there is an argument that a hockey trade can mean trading a significant or core player between two teams ie the Erik Johnson-Stewart/Shattenkirk trade. But I think Armstrong also views a hockey trade as both sides benefitting in the immediate future as opposed to trading a player for prospects or picks. The reason I believe this is because he considered the Coyle-Mittelstadt trade to be a hockey trade despite Coyle being 33 (he's also signed for this year and next). With all that being said, I think it's clear that Doug was not interested right now in trading assets in picks and prospects for a player and/or stop gap for right now, an assertion I would hope you would agree with?

I guess what I take issue with is Doug not wanting to make a hockey trade. I feel that if you've been watching since Army took over, then you would believe that he would make a hockey trade if he felt it helped the team. I think if he wanted someone like Dobson, Nemec, or Clarke, he would have absolutely inquired about them and then at that point it's a matter of are they available or will you pay the price for them. No matter what the answer to that question is, it's very clear that either 1) None of them were available right now or 2) No one in the league was willing to pay the price for them. So to reiterate my point, I take issue with you saying that he wasn't willing to make a hockey trade during the deadline because there doesn't seem to be any evidence at all that this is the case, I don't think he was concerned whether we make the playoffs or not, but rather how we continued to play, and (this is just my nitpick here) I think the view that you should either buy hard or sell hard when you're middle of the pack is sort of a bad way to view any team in general.

We don't have to get too much into this because this is going to be difference of opinion, but I think that if this team is playing pretty well but not positioned to make a run or it's not clear if they will or won't make the playoffs, then to me it's foolish to sell off players like Schenn, Buch, and to a lesser extent Faulk and Leddy when they are the ones helping and guiding the younger players into what it means to be a pro and how to handle the pro game. For example, you take a look at Ottawa and Buffalo and see what they do each year and during the deadline and it's nearly the same thing every year - play competitive for a few months, have a rough stretch where you're out of the playoffs and spiraling, sell off valuable players for prospects and picks, draft a shit load of times each year (and draft quality at that), neglect to surround the young players coming in with good veteran leaders as opposed to letting the young players to struggle, and rinse and repeat. That, in my view, seems like what you're advocating for and I'm completely opposed to it.

To the first bolded, I agree that he mentioned picks and prospects, as well as stop gaps, in his response. However, I continue to assert his answer of “Not really” indicates his mindset leading up to this deadline. It’s evident that he spent a significant portion of his time this deadline fielding offers for Schenn. Therefore, it’s understandable that he was in the mindset of selling, which you oppose. If he dedicated so much time to Schenn, how much time did he have to work on hockey trades? Furthermore, if he sold Schenn, what other players does he sell? Easily Faska, Sutter, and Binny, but what about Buchnevich, Kyrou? Do you think he established the value and market for these pieces? How much time did he devote to selling compared to hockey trades, futures trades, and stop gaps? You can continue to take issue with my hockey trades statement, but there is more evidence he spent more time on other trades. Also my overall point in the original post was disappointment in his answers and that I considered the interview to be quite poor. I also mentioned that I wish he had invested the assets to acquire Dobson, Nemec, or Clarke. Doug Armstrong’s one weakness is that he rarely loses a trade. I wish he had overpayed for Dobson or Nemec, as that is the piece we really need in both the short and long term.

To your second bolded, I never advocated for any of that quite the opposite I was mad he didn’t add. Now to be fair, going off reporting that Armstrong was unhappy with the locker room and everyone was available prior to the four nations break, I speculated on a Scheen trade and asserted he had value to bring back Nemec to much derision. However, even in those post I said I thought it was a bad idea to trade Schenn. I also said that changes were needed at the time as it seemed like this team would miss the playoffs like 2011 and Army might clean house. Had we continued to play that way I would have been all for it. Since the break though I have been rooting for playoffs and really wish Armstrong had helped the team out after Colt went down.

 

[BlueMed]

Likely no, but I still don’t think it’s impossible. It’s becoming a trend in Buffalo.


Yeah, I’d be willing to add more.

Eichel said the same thing and so did ROR and did any more infinate amount of players when asked this kind of question.

That is true. Players often say one thing to the media and another thing to their agent. I will say that if he really is asking out of Buffalo, then they have lost some trade leverage here. I'd really hesitate to trade Thomas because that will leave a massive hole making the team look for another 1C unless you are absolutely sure Dvorsky can fill that in the next 2 years, and I'm not sold of that. I'd definitely consider Lindstein + Kyrou + 2025 1st round pick. That would already be a massive package.

 

[Brian39]

I mean, everything would be on the table. If he's available and they want Thomas, I'm still making an offer.

I'm not convinced that I would trade Thomas for Dahlin 1 for 1. Dahlin is a better player, but I don't know that the gap between them is much larger than the gap between their AAVs and we know with certainty that Thomas wants to be in St. Louis. I do believe that we would 'win' that trade, but there is a small fear that Dahlin wouldn't fit and request a trade a couple years down the line (which could genuinely ruin the team). Even ignoring that fear, 'winning' the trade would still leave us with a gaping hole in one of the two most important positions and I'm not sure how we fill it.

I think I would listen to an offer that included Thomas, but then counter with a massive package that doesn't include Thomas. I just don't see a scenario where Buffalo gets a center of Thomas' caliber even in a Dahlin trade. Every player of that caliber who has trade protection will veto a deal that sends them to Buffalo. That doesn't leave a whole lot of guys. Here is the list of guys listed at center who have 50+ points and don't have trade protection: Necas, Jack Hughes, Suzuki, Dylan Strome, Wyatt Johnston, Vilardi, Protas, Granlund, Rossi, Bedard, Thomas, and Kyrou. Celebrini has 48 points in 53 games, which is right around Thomas' production. How many of those guys would you consider better assets than Thomas and which are remotely available? I don't see Chicago or San Jose trading their teenage studs. I don't see the Devils trading Hughes for even a Norris caliber D given the state of their organization. I don't see Colorado trading Necas for an $11M D with Makar owed a raise. I don't see Dallas trading a just-signed Johnston for an $11M D with Heiskanen there. I think Thomas is a clear cut above Strome, Vilardi, Protas, Granlund, Rossi, and Kyrou. So that leaves Buffalo trying to pry Suzuki from a Habs team with lots of young D. More power to them if they can snag Suzuki and move Dahlin in-division.

The only reason they would trade Dahlin is if he expresses a desire to get out. They would not be in a position of strength and while Thomas for Dahlin might be a trade you win, I don't think it is a trade that moves you meaningfully closer to a Cup. I think that I would decline and counter with a major package centered around Kyrou. Given the plethora of quality players who would decline a trade to them, Kyrou is among the best (or 2nd best) tier of player with term that they could realistically land. I'm not sure that they would get a better offer than Kyrou, 2025 1st, Lindstein, and another future asset if Dahlin were to ask out. Because they almost certainly won't get that much if they waited until he had his full NMC and could try to influence the market of teams like Seth Jones just did.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'm not convinced that I would trade Thomas for Dahlin 1 for 1. Dahlin is a better player, but I don't know that the gap between them is much larger than the gap between their AAVs and we know with certainty that Thomas wants to be in St. Louis. I do believe that we would 'win' that trade, but there is a small fear that Dahlin wouldn't fit and request a trade a couple years down the line (which could genuinely ruin the team). Even ignoring that fear, 'winning' the trade would still leave us with a gaping hole in one of the two most important positions and I'm not sure how we fill it.

I think I would listen to an offer that included Thomas, but then counter with a massive package that doesn't include Thomas. I just don't see a scenario where Buffalo gets a center of Thomas' caliber even in a Dahlin trade. Every player of that caliber who has trade protection will veto a deal that sends them to Buffalo. That doesn't leave a whole lot of guys. Here is the list of guys listed at center who have 50+ points and don't have trade protection: Necas, Jack Hughes, Suzuki, Dylan Strome, Wyatt Johnston, Vilardi, Protas, Granlund, Rossi, Bedard, Thomas, and Kyrou. Celebrini has 48 points in 53 games, which is right around Thomas' production. How many of those guys would you consider better assets than Thomas and which are remotely available? I don't see Chicago or San Jose trading their teenage studs. I don't see the Devils trading Hughes for even a Norris caliber D given the state of their organization. I don't see Colorado trading Necas for an $11M D with Makar owed a raise. I don't see Dallas trading a just-signed Johnston for an $11M D with Heiskanen there. I think Thomas is a clear cut above Strome, Vilardi, Protas, Granlund, Rossi, and Kyrou. So that leaves Buffalo trying to pry Suzuki from a Habs team with lots of young D. More power to them if they can snag Suzuki and move Dahlin in-division.

The only reason they would trade Dahlin is if he expresses a desire to get out. They would not be in a position of strength and while Thomas for Dahlin might be a trade you win, I don't think it is a trade that moves you meaningfully closer to a Cup. I think that I would decline and counter with a major package centered around Kyrou. Given the plethora of quality players who would decline a trade to them, Kyrou is among the best (or 2nd best) tier of player with term that they could realistically land. I'm not sure that they would get a better offer than Kyrou, 2025 1st, Lindstein, and another future asset if Dahlin were to ask out. Because they almost certainly won't get that much if they waited until he had his full NMC and could try to influence the market of teams like Seth Jones just did.

I agree, my point was just that if Dahlin is made available, I'd be open to any possible combination of players in a negotiation. It might not require Thomas, and it would certainly just shift our need from true #1 D to a true #1 C, but every asset we have would be on the table for me.

 

[LetsGoBooze]

That is true. Players often say one thing to the media and another thing to their agent. I will say that if he really is asking out of Buffalo, then they have lost some trade leverage here. I'd really hesitate to trade Thomas because that will leave a massive hole making the team look for another 1C unless you are absolutely sure Dvorsky can fill that in the next 2 years, and I'm not sold of that. I'd definitely consider Lindstein + Kyrou + 2025 1st round pick. That would already be a massive package.

Other teams would beat that quite easily as they want current NHL talent and 2 of those 3 pieces are not.

 

[StlBigFly]

I wish I had a better understanding of the challenges in Bufallo.

A deadline passes. The Sabres do hockey trades flipping a center and defense slot.

Then the teams captain and highest paid player goes to gm with desire to be better.

I wonder if Dahlin had expectations for the roster and deadline. It’s a lot of good young players in key roles. I wonder what he thinks the fix is considering he’s also a young player in a key role. Should the team not build with the good young talent it has? Are others not putting in the work?


I wonder if a big islanders trade comes?

Horvat and Dobson for Dahlin and Krebs or something.

I wonder if Dahlin realizes a 24-26 yo perennial norris finalist d with tons of term will cost so much that wherever he goes probably will need to go through a build up phase just like he’s in now. Going to be hard for the Sabres to get a fair return but I still guess it would be absolutely massive.