2024-2025 Blues Trade Proposals Thread.

[bleedblue1223]

Because Schneider might be a better lottery ticket at being a top 4 than the actual pick itself. The Blues acquired Bouwmeester (granted he was older and much more established) for a first round pick. I don’t see why it can’t be spent on an active NHL player. Maybe Schneider isn’t the right target, but using it on someone already in the league who is ideally between the ages of 23-28 currently who has is either established or has shown potential to be a top 4 would be worth it.

Let’s say that we can pencil Broberg safely in for the long-term as a top 4. That’s great. There’s no one else currently in the organization that I think you can say that about aside from Parayko, who is 32. Lindstein might be that guy but he’s too far away to be sure.

Everyone else will either be too old, a UFA, or just doesn’t have that ceiling. I still think it’s worth acquiring an external solution for top 4 either this year or next.

I agree with the general point, my disagreement is just on the target.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Drew Helleson is a very intriguing name.

I'd take him as a buy-low option for sure. I don't know that he's better than Kessel though.

He's older than Schneider and hasn't been able to crack a much worse team than the Rags. There's upside there, I just don't know how much.

 

[Oberyn]

Trading a 1st for Schneider sounds like a terrible idea.

 

[Brian39]

Why does it matter if he is a better defenseman today than Faulk is?

The team should be a playoff team next season and have a realistic goal of making the second round. The key younger forwards still have more room to grow (Neighbours, Bolduc, Snuggy) while having a black hole at 2C or 3C (it depends on how one views Schenn’s production being acceptable as a 2C or if the flaws at center are exacerbated by relying on Sunny to be 3C), and a defensive group that is relying on four defensemen 32+ to be key contributors, with 2 of them being UFAs after the conclusion of next season.

It’s necessary to get a younger long-term solution added to defense at some point between now and before 2026-2027. The defense as it stands now is OK for 2025-2026, but it is not something that should be relied on past next year.

The consensus around here for the last couple weeks has been that 2C and 2RHD are the 2 upgrades this team needs (or should be seeking). There has been a good chunk of Faulk criticism and while I think he is better than most give him credit for, I think that the consensus of wanting a 2RHD upgrade is generally very reasonable. So if we're talking about spending the 19th overall pick (one of our 5 most valuable futures assets) on a RHD, then I think we should be looking to actually upgrade the 2RHD position. We have a limited number of futures that are 'surplus' assets and trading the 1st for a player means that we're essentially sitting out the draft this year. I'm not eager to do that just to upgrade the 3rd pair with a guy whose 2nd pair upside is still pretty unclear after almost 300 NHL games.

My personal opinion is that upgrading at 2C is more important than upgrading at 2RHD. And I agree that at some point in the next 2 years we need to shore up the right side of the D. I just don't think that bringing in a 3RHD that might eventually become a 2nd pair D man is worth firing one of our limited bullets of futures assets. I'd rather use that 1st rounder in a deal for a 2C. Or if we are targeting a RHD, I'd rather use it on a guy who has proven more to me than Schneider has. I'd rather get a low-asset cost 3rd pair RHD stopgap/bandaid and continue exploring the trade market than spending that 1st on Schneider.

Like @bleedblue1223, I agree with the philosophy of seeking RHD upgrades, I just don't think that Schneider is that upgrade if his acquisition cost is a high end future.

Edit: Philosophically, I'm treating 2025/26 as a year with potentially higher expectations than just a playoff team viewing the 2nd round as a realistic goal. It's not an all-in year, but I think a productive/smart summer could get this team right in the mix of Western Conference contenders. If I'm using the 1st in a trade, I want that trade to move the needle for 2025/26 and not just 2026/27 and beyond.

 

[Brian39]

Because Schneider might be a better lottery ticket at being a top 4 than the actual pick itself. The Blues acquired Bouwmeester (granted he was older and much more established) for a first round pick. I don’t see why it can’t be spent on an active NHL player.

It absolutely can (and I'd argue should) be spent on an NHL player. But the gap between Bo and Schneider is staggering and if we are spending it on an NHL player then I think we should be spending it on more of a sure thing (like Bo was) than a lottery ticket.

Maybe Schneider isn’t the right target, but using it on someone already in the league who is ideally between the ages of 23-28 currently who has is either established or has shown potential to be a top 4 would be worth it.

I totally agree on your age range. If we're not able to use it in a package for a truly high-tier sub-23 aged guy, then I think this is exactly the age range we should be targeting for an established NHL player. I'd probably consider some 29 and maybe even 30 year olds too depending on the AAV, remaining term, and acquisition cost. I doubt I'd find one available that checks enough of those boxes to make it worthwhile, but I wouldn't immediately exclude those ages from the search just in case there is a guy who is a pleasant surprise as a buy-low option.

 

[DatDude44]

Why trade assets for Schneider when we can just sign Fabbro and or perbix and get the same if not better results? Outside of longer control, schneider doesn't do much for me. Would rather keep our draft picks, develop what we have and sign Fabbro as a placeholder until the younger guys are ready.

 

[bleedblue1223]

For the record, I really enjoy these discussions and different perspectives. We are at an interesting point now, where the re-whatever is closing, but it isn't quite to the point of make all futures available for win now trades, so the options are pretty wide open.

 

[Louie the Blue]

It absolutely can (and I'd argue should) be spent on an NHL player. But the gap between Bo and Schneider is staggering and if we are spending it on an NHL player then I think we should be spending it on more of a sure thing (like Bo was) than a lottery ticket.



I totally agree on your age range. If we're not able to use it in a package for a truly high-tier sub-23 aged guy, then I think this is exactly the age range we should be targeting for an established NHL player. I'd probably consider some 29 and maybe even 30 year olds too depending on the AAV, remaining term, and acquisition cost. I doubt I'd find one available that checks enough of those boxes to make it worthwhile, but I wouldn't immediately exclude those ages from the search just in case there is a guy who is a pleasant surprise as a buy-low option.

I think we’re in agreement, just may have different views on if Schneider or a player similar to him should be the target

Bouwmeester was 29 when he was acquired, just using the age 28 an arbitrary cut off. I don’t think defensemen have as sharp of a decline age wise compared to other positions. I just don’t think it’s viable or reasonable to rely on potentially 3-4 defensemen long term (3-5 years) that are now all 32+. I’d be ok with relying on Parayko and one of Fowler/Faulk for that time period, but not all 3.

Thinking down the road for say 2027-2028 I think the defense should be structured in some fashion like this (let’s say Broberg ends up hitting his ceiling or is able to consistently be a top 4 D):

Fowler - Parayko
Broberg - External acquisition
Lindstein - Kessel/Tucker/Some random guy in the minors currently/low cost UFA

I’m OK with that.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Why trade assets for Schneider when we can just sign Fabbro and or perbix and get the same if not better results? Outside of longer control, schneider doesn't do much for me. Would rather keep our draft picks, develop what we have and sign Fabbro as a placeholder until the younger guys are ready.

My reluctance on signing a UFA D currently is that Broberg extending long-term should be the priority. Acquiring someone who is trying to get paid while Broberg’s contract isn’t resolved is not my preference. That’s why I’d much rather prefer having someone who is under team control already or will be the foreseeable future.

The only guy I’d drop the bag for who is UFA D without any hesitation is Ekblad, but that won’t happen (and it shouldn’t happen).

 

[DatDude44]

My reluctance on signing a UFA D currently is that Broberg extending long-term should be the priority. Acquiring someone who is trying to get paid while Broberg’s contract isn’t resolved is not my preference. That’s why I’d much rather prefer having someone who is under team control already or will be the foreseeable future.

The only guy I’d drop the bag for who is UFA D without any hesitation is Ekblad, but that won’t happen (and it shouldn’t happen).

I don't think Fabbro or Perbix would cost us a "bag" Ekblad we should absolutely not pursue. He's become a bit overrated and obviously extremely injury prone. I think his best days are behind him. I don't think we are worried about resigning Broberg at all. We'll open up 10.5M in cap space just with leddy and faulk off the books. Broberg already has a 4.5M contract, I doubt he gets north of 8M. So really were talking about a 2-3.5M raise give or take to cover broberg. The heftier raise is gonna be holloway next summer.

 

[Louie the Blue]

I don't think Fabbro or Perbix would cost us a "bag" Ekblad we should absolutely not pursue. He's become a bit overrated and obviously extremely injury prone. I think his best days are behind him. I don't think we are worried about resigning Broberg at all. We'll open up 10.5M in cap space just with leddy and faulk off the books. Broberg already has a 4.5M contract, I doubt he gets north of 8M. So really were talking about a 2-3.5M raise give or take to cover broberg. The heftier raise is gonna be holloway next summer.

I’m not saying they should pursue Ekblad, he’s just the only defenseman in general I’d give a blank check to and not think twice about that, regardless if he came to St. Louis or not.

I am aware that the Blues have a favorable cap situation, especially with the aforementioned contracts coming off the books + the cap going up.

It’s just my preference to not sign a UFA D until Broberg is extended.

Not concerned about Holloway either.

 

[DatDude44]

I’m not saying they should pursue Ekblad, he’s just the only defenseman in general I’d give a blank check to and not think twice about that, regardless if he came to St. Louis or not.

I am aware that the Blues have a favorable cap situation, especially with the aforementioned contracts coming off the books + the cap going up.

It’s just my preference to not sign a UFA D until Broberg is extended.

Not concerned about Holloway either.

I gotcha, I'm not trying to create a Faulk/petro situation again....but perbix/fabbro would probably be fairly cheap as RHD options, i don't think it'd get in the way of extending broberg especially with faulks cap coming off. We would definitely need to trade leddy though. Unless we just aren't pursuing any free agent centers this summer.

 

[Beauterham]

Why trade assets for Schneider when we can just sign Fabbro and or perbix and get the same if not better results? Outside of longer control, schneider doesn't do much for me. Would rather keep our draft picks, develop what we have and sign Fabbro as a placeholder until the younger guys are ready.

Who says we can? It's not like we have first dibs, there will be other teams interested and there's a good chance they will offer more than us. We should definitely try though, and if we're not able to sign them (realistic chance), trading for a RD should be an option, if it's either Schneider or someone else.

 

[DatDude44]

Who says we can? It's not like we have first dibs, there will be other teams interested and there's a good chance they will offer more than us. We should definitely try though, and if we're not able to sign them (realistic chance), trading for a RD should be an option, if it's either Schneider or someone else.

Correct, essentially my point was why trade assets now, when we can explore UFA first. Then if it doesn't happen....explore the trade market. I've never been much of a Schneider fan though myself, I wouldn't be very happy if we moved a high level asset like a 1st for him. I think he's alot closer to a 4/5 type than a quality top 4 option personally.

 

[A Real Barn Burner]

I think this off season is going to be spectacular. It seems there are a ton of options for trades with the rising cap and so many looking to shake things up or get over the hump. Vancouver and New York seem to be in crisis mode. Carolina seems to actually be impatient for once do they go hard after Marner? Is Boston tanking or retooling? Where do the Islanders go? LA needs to mix things up. Does Utah try and make a big splash since they seem so close? Seems like for once there are a ton of options. What team are we not thinking of that might have that Center or RHD we need considering this? I think Armstrong will find an unlikely dance partner.

More than half the teams in the league are looking to upgrade or find a center. So I am pretty pessimistic on the chances of finding an upgrade there this off season. If we can’t land one of the Free Agents just have to hope Army can work some magic there. If we are trading our first this year I would expect it would be used for that however, it seems the options for upgrading RHD are more easily identifiable. I would really like that problem to be solved sooner rather than later. We truly do need a right handed 23-27 aged player to build with Broberg for the future.

 

[Brian39]

I think we’re in agreement, just may have different views on if Schneider or a player similar to him should be the target

Bouwmeester was 29 when he was acquired, just using the age 28 an arbitrary cut off. I don’t think defensemen have as sharp of a decline age wise compared to other positions. I just don’t think it’s viable or reasonable to rely on potentially 3-4 defensemen long term (3-5 years) that are now all 32+. I’d be ok with relying on Parayko and one of Fowler/Faulk for that time period, but not all 3.

Thinking down the road for say 2027-2028 I think the defense should be structured in some fashion like this (let’s say Broberg ends up hitting his ceiling or is able to consistently be a top 4 D):

Fowler - Parayko
Broberg - External acquisition
Lindstein - Kessel/Tucker/Some random guy in the minors currently/low cost UFA

I’m OK with that.

A 29/30 year old situated like Bo was when we got him is actually almost the exact scenario I envision when I talk about potentially being willing to use the pick on a guy that age. We got Bo mid-season when he had 1 additional year left on his deal and the intention was to extend him if he turned out to be a good fit (which we did). His AAV was inflated for what he was at that point in his career, but we had the cap flexibility to absorb it and that inflated AAV certainly impacted his trade value.

Now, I don't think that there is a guy who ticks those boxes, but I'd be more than content to use the 1st and some expendable prospects to make a similar trade if the opportunity arose.

 

[WeWentBlues]

Wonder what the ask for Byram is. Blues certainly don't need another LHD going into next year. However, Byram would give the Blues insurance on Broberg/Fowler who are not under contract beyond 25-26. Getting Byram icetime next season wouldn't be an issue as both he and Broberg have played their offhand before.

 

[WeWentBlues]

A 29/30 year old situated like Bo was when we got him is actually almost the exact scenario I envision when I talk about potentially being willing to use the pick on a guy that age. We got Bo mid-season when he had 1 additional year left on his deal and the intention was to extend him if he turned out to be a good fit (which we did). His AAV was inflated for what he was at that point in his career, but we had the cap flexibility to absorb it and that inflated AAV certainly impacted his trade value.

Now, I don't think that there is a guy who ticks those boxes, but I'd be more than content to use the 1st and some expendable prospects to make a similar trade if the opportunity arose.

Rasmus Andersson?

Same trading partner as well.

 

[bleedblue1223]

A 29/30 year old situated like Bo was when we got him is actually almost the exact scenario I envision when I talk about potentially being willing to use the pick on a guy that age. We got Bo mid-season when he had 1 additional year left on his deal and the intention was to extend him if he turned out to be a good fit (which we did). His AAV was inflated for what he was at that point in his career, but we had the cap flexibility to absorb it and that inflated AAV certainly impacted his trade value.

Now, I don't think that there is a guy who ticks those boxes, but I'd be more than content to use the 1st and some expendable prospects to make a similar trade if the opportunity arose.

Rasmus Andersson is probably the closest, but it's dependent on his contract ask. If you could convince him of a 5-6 year deal, then it might work, but maybe he sticks to wanting 7. He was underpaid on his last deal, so I'd imagine he'd want to try and maximize his contract value.

 

[Brian39]

Rasmus Andersson?

Same trading partner as well.

I go back and forth with him, but that is mainly because I very much think that he will be going to UFA or demanding a boatload of cash to extend with any team that acquires him. He reminds me way more of Faulk than Bo.

 

[Louie the Blue]

A 29/30 year old situated like Bo was when we got him is actually almost the exact scenario I envision when I talk about potentially being willing to use the pick on a guy that age. We got Bo mid-season when he had 1 additional year left on his deal and the intention was to extend him if he turned out to be a good fit (which we did). His AAV was inflated for what he was at that point in his career, but we had the cap flexibility to absorb it and that inflated AAV certainly impacted his trade value.

Now, I don't think that there is a guy who ticks those boxes, but I'd be more than content to use the 1st and some expendable prospects to make a similar trade if the opportunity arose.

I know others had mentioned Bouwmeester being a fit before the trade for over a year. Just not sure who is out there that fits similar parameters.

 

[Brian39]

Wonder what the ask for Byram is. Blues certainly don't need another LHD going into next year. However, Byram would give the Blues insurance on Broberg/Fowler who are not under contract beyond 25-26. Getting Byram icetime next season wouldn't be an issue as both he and Broberg have played their offhand before.

I have very little interest in Byram. He's reportedly unhappy with his usage in Buffalo, but he was their #2 D man at 22:42 a night. That tells me that he's frustrated about playing on the right side and wants to be a top pair guy on his natural left side. And we know that Broberg didn't love playing his off side.

I don't think Byram would sign here long term without an absolute guarantee of playing on the left side, which then means that we are sliding Broberg over. Or we're removing Fowler from the role he crushed this year and asking him to play his off side. I'm just not looking to spend assets to give Byram $9M+ and then deal with the headache of having 3 LHD who all don't really want to play on the right side. Feels like a great way to damage the relationship with Broberg and/or find ourselves in a situation where we pay a bunch for Byram and then lose him the instant he can hit UFA.

Remember, Byram can take an arbitration award this summer that walks him straight to UFA in the 2026. You pretty much have to make him extremely happy to avoid a complete disaster.

 

[Reality Czech]

I know others had mentioned Bouwmeester being a fit before the trade for over a year. Just not sure who is out there that fits similar parameters.

No one does really, but I posted a list of potential veteran trade targets that won't break the bank too much a page or two back.

 

[BrokenFace]

Wonder what the ask for Byram is. Blues certainly don't need another LHD going into next year. However, Byram would give the Blues insurance on Broberg/Fowler who are not under contract beyond 25-26. Getting Byram icetime next season wouldn't be an issue as both he and Broberg have played their offhand before.

Byram's versatility offers a lot. I don't know Byram's game enough to really advocate for trading for him, but I'm very interested in a young LHD who can play both sides. We're all thrilled with what Fowler did this year, but do we really want to count on him being a long term top 4 D for us at 33 years old? We were happy with the Leddy-Parayko pairing coming out of last season, now a lot of us hope we move Leddy. No one should be surprised if the same happens with Fowler, and we definitely shouldn't be passing up a good opportunity to acquire the right young D-man because we're assuming Fowler will be in our top 4 long term.

If Byram can come in and play the right side, he can switch to the left side if Fowler slows down and needs to be bumped down to the 3rd pair. Then our left side would be Byram, Broberg, and Fowler. At that point, if/when Fowler ages out, Lindstein might be ready to take his minutes. Or Fowler is still a top 4 D for several years and Byram stays on the right side, which is fine as long as he can truly play his off side.

Again, don't watch Byram enough and I know he has injury history, but Fowler shouldn't be blocking us from seeking out a good young LHD. In fact, having 2 LHD who are good enough to push Fowler down to the 3rd pairing sounds like cup contending depth on defense to me. If we can't get a rockstar #1 D-man, then having outstanding depth on defense is a key to contending.

tldr: a top 4 LHD is not as immediate of a need as a top 4 RHD, but it will be if we don't address it eventually. So why not address it now if that's the chance we get?

 

[bleedblue1223]

Byram ultimately wants a move where he can have a bigger role, he wants the role that Fowler pretty much has. A fit for him will be a spot on the left with PP time. We are kind of sort of an ok fit, but timing is wrong.