Speculation: Alex Pietrangelo Megathread: contract talks with the Blues have stalled.

[wintersej]

Still think if he makes it to UFA that Boston signing him and dealing Carlo for help up front makes a lot of sense.

 

[Fatass]

Still think if he makes it to UFA that Boston signing him and dealing Carlo for help up front makes a lot of sense.

With no Chara, no Krug, and no Carlo, would gaining Pietrangelo make up for the losses of the other three?

 

[Chayos]

Still think if he makes it to UFA that Boston signing him and dealing Carlo for help up front makes a lot of sense.

I was under the impression that secondary scoring was more of an issue than defence, but I may be wrong.

 

[maxim84]

With no Chara, no Krug, and no Carlo, would gaining Pietrangelo make up for the losses of the other three?

Avs have Zadorov and Graves to offer...hell they'll throw in Jost too

 

[wintersej]

With no Chara, no Krug, and no Carlo, would gaining Pietrangelo make up for the losses of the other three?

Well it’s also what they get back for Carlo to strengthen their forward group, which wouldn’t be a nobody.

 

[voyageur]

I still say Chicago. Chicago's trades Seabrook (who conveniently retires LTIR) to Arizona with a draft pick/prospect. Pietrangelo, gets to take over the Hawks defense from Keith.

 

[BB88]

With no Chara, no Krug, and no Carlo, would gaining Pietrangelo make up for the losses of the other three?

Pietrangelo is a true #1D and with McAvoy Boston would have 2 #1D's.

2 issues Boston needs to improve are 5on5 play and secondary scoring.
Pietrangelo would be a massive boost for the 5on5 play

 

[quityerwhinin]

From a hockey and $ standpoint, Vegas absolutely makes a lot of sense. They're a great team, have shown a willingness to spend money, have little on the right side, and can make the space with 1-2 moves. They're also a sun-destination, which of course a lot of players prefer. However, given Pietrangelo's personal circumstances, I just can't see it.

The problem is -- of the two teams he'd ideally want to go to -- St. Louis and Toronto -- I don't think either one really wants him.

The Blues will be happy to have him back, but there is a limit to how badly. Obviously nobody knows exactly what the number is -- but at some point they're going to decide that they're better off with Parayko & $Xm in cap freedom than they are with Pietrangelo and whatever they get for Parayko.

Toronto is desparate for a big-time RHD, and Pietrangelo likely fits their style of play, but what's it going to mean in terms of long term costs?

If signing Pietrangelo means you really should trade Marner, then that's a problem, because the likely scenario is that you'll trade Nylander, only to find next year that you need to get less top-heavy, but now no longer have Nylander, then you've got a problem. If you're signing Pietrangelo to ultimately replace Rielly who walks as UFA, then again you have to ask yourself -- what's the point? While the Leafs do not have an internal replacement like the Blues do, they do have a decent pool of assets with which to utilize -- including a former 17th OA pick that needs a change of scenery, at 15th OA pick in this year's draft, and a 25 year old middle-6 winger with a pretty good contract.

I think there's something to this.

Pietrangelo is a very, very good player, and is going to make some team better (or the Blues worse if he leaves). But, for STL, if it comes down to an either/or situation with him and Parayko (ie, can't afford to trade offense, can't find a reasonable deal for Faulk), it doesn't make much sense to resign Pietrangelo.

There's no situation there where the Blues are as good without both players, so if you trade Parayko you're basically sacrificing 1-2 years of the new deal you just signed Pietrangelo to, the very years of the contract that should provide the max value to the organization. If you're basically accepting that you need to take a step back, I'd rather do it with Parayko and the salary cap space.

 

[MissouriMook]

I think there's something to this.

Pietrangelo is a very, very good player, and is going to make some team better (or the Blues worse if he leaves). But, for STL, if it comes down to an either/or situation with him and Parayko (ie, can't afford to trade offense, can't find a reasonable deal for Faulk), it doesn't make much sense to resign Pietrangelo.

There's no situation there where the Blues are as good without both players, so if you trade Parayko you're basically sacrificing 1-2 years of the new deal you just signed Pietrangelo to, the very years of the contract that should provide the max value to the organization. If you're basically accepting that you need to take a step back, I'd rather do it with Parayko and the salary cap space.

Nothing happens in a vacuum, and part of the flaw in this logic is the concern (real or perceived) that Parayko moves on in 2 years when he becomes a UFA. At that point you are without both of them, which is why I have pointed out (at the risks of pitchforks and boiling oil) that it might make more sense to sign Pietrangelo and trade Parayko to fill some holes up front, especially if we are going into year 1 of your 2 year window without Tarasenko.

I'd obviously prefer to be able to keep both Petro and Parayko long term, but you're not getting anything of value for Faulk, at least not this offseason with the cap staying flat, his new deal kicking in and him underperforming for most of last season. Trading Parayko now has downside risk if he continues to be a stalwart defensively for someone else -AND- finds the offensive game we've hoped he would find over the last 2-3 years. But it also has upside risk if you are able to get something(s) quite valuable for him now and it turns out that he has already peaked and never becomes more than the 3/4 guy we're using him as now.

 

[seanlinden]

I think there's something to this.

Pietrangelo is a very, very good player, and is going to make some team better (or the Blues worse if he leaves). But, for STL, if it comes down to an either/or situation with him and Parayko (ie, can't afford to trade offense, can't find a reasonable deal for Faulk), it doesn't make much sense to resign Pietrangelo.

There's no situation there where the Blues are as good without both players, so if you trade Parayko you're basically sacrificing 1-2 years of the new deal you just signed Pietrangelo to, the very years of the contract that should provide the max value to the organization. If you're basically accepting that you need to take a step back, I'd rather do it with Parayko and the salary cap space.

Faulk has a full NTC -- I think that when Armstrong signed that deal, he knew that Pietrangelo resigning would mean that they're either way overloaded in terms of right side D, or that Parayko would be an odd man out with only 2 years left until UFA -- likely returning a young impact forward. You're not rebuilding -- simply resetting.

The challenge now of course, is that if you're dealing Parayko to make "room" (both cap and actual lineup space) to resign Pietrangelo, you most likely can't go out and get a $6-7m impact forward. You've gotta look more along the lines of $3-5m forwards and maybe an opportunity to help replenish a prospect system, especially for the Blues who are fairly "experienced" up front.

 

[weinsink]

Still think if he makes it to UFA that Boston signing him and dealing Carlo for help up front makes a lot of sense.

Smfh,really?

 

[Note Worthy]

I still say Chicago. Chicago's trades Seabrook (who conveniently retires LTIR) to Arizona with a draft pick/prospect. Pietrangelo, gets to take over the Hawks defense from Keith.

 

[Djp]

I still say Chicago. Chicago's trades Seabrook (who conveniently retires LTIR) to Arizona with a draft pick/prospect. Pietrangelo, gets to take over the Hawks defense from Keith.

Arizona is cap strapped---they cant take on LTIRs

 

[BB88]

Smfh,really?

Boston has 14M in cap space.

Krejci 7.25M, Rask 7M, Backes 1.5M out in a year.

McAvoy to sign in 2 years time, Pasta 3

Boston can be a player this offseason
If Sweeney isn’t aggressive this offseason given the cap situation/need he should be fired(wouldn’t be) but should be

 

[voyageur]

Arizona is cap strapped---they cant take on LTIRs

After they trade OEL, Stepan and Kuemper they will be alot closer to the floor.

 

[Djp]

After they trade OEL, Stepan and Kuemper they will be alot closer to the floor.

do the math---they need to sign or promote 5F and 1D before even trading anyone. that puts them around $86M

If they trade OEL they will likely be getting back salaried players besides picks. say they net +$4M

trading Kemper--they will still likely get a contract back and need to replace him so likely saving only about $2M

With Stepan--same thing, they either need to retain or take something back. net space gain might be $3M

That get them still only a few million below the cap.

On top pof that they dont have low ELC contracts to go against the LTIR like other teams in the past could do. They might have 2 players on an ELC to call up against gim as well as Hossa.

Unless Chicafo plans to send Arizona 2 1st rounders with him---they arent taking him.

 

[Djp]

Boston has 14M in cap space.

Krejci 7.25M, Rask 7M, Backes 1.5M out in a year.

McAvoy to sign in 2 years time, Pasta 3

Boston can be a player this offseason
If Sweeney isn’t aggressive this offseason given the cap situation/need he should be fired(wouldn’t be) but should be

Boston and Dallas are two very good teams who have the cap space for PA or OEL without needing to unload salary

 

[BB88]

Boston and Dallas are two very good teams who have the cap space for PA or OEL without needing to unload salary

Dallas really isn't.
They have 15M in cap space with 8 forwards, 7 D-men and 1 goalie.

Hintz+ Faksa+ Guryanov+ Khudobin waiting for new contracts, and they have potential playoff bonuses coming up?

 

[voyageur]

do the math---they need to sign or promote 5F and 1D before even trading anyone. that puts them around $86M

If they trade OEL they will likely be getting back salaried players besides picks. say they net +$4M

trading Kemper--they will still likely get a contract back and need to replace him so likely saving only about $2M

With Stepan--same thing, they either need to retain or take something back. net space gain might be $3M

That get them still only a few million below the cap.

On top pof that they dont have low ELC contracts to go against the LTIR like other teams in the past could do. They might have 2 players on an ELC to call up against gim as well as Hossa.

Unless Chicafo plans to send Arizona 2 1st rounders with him---they arent taking him.

Hossa is LTIR so he's not a salary they are paying, take that money off the Cap, they just have to get under it with him before the year I believe, but I'm not even sure about that.

You say they have to get something back. Maybe they don't. A team that was having trouble making payroll commitments seems like a potential fire sale. Selling $19 million in players, saves some money, on losses. No idea what anyone's internal budgets are, but I would not expect Arizona to repeat as a Cap ceiling team, not on the NHL's money.

Maybe they just get picks back, now that they don't have those.

 

[rumrokh]

Nothing happens in a vacuum, and part of the flaw in this logic is the concern (real or perceived) that Parayko moves on in 2 years when he becomes a UFA. At that point you are without both of them, which is why I have pointed out (at the risks of pitchforks and boiling oil) that it might make more sense to sign Pietrangelo and trade Parayko to fill some holes up front, especially if we are going into year 1 of your 2 year window without Tarasenko.

I'd obviously prefer to be able to keep both Petro and Parayko long term, but you're not getting anything of value for Faulk, at least not this offseason with the cap staying flat, his new deal kicking in and him underperforming for most of last season. Trading Parayko now has downside risk if he continues to be a stalwart defensively for someone else -AND- finds the offensive game we've hoped he would find over the last 2-3 years. But it also has upside risk if you are able to get something(s) quite valuable for him now and it turns out that he has already peaked and never becomes more than the 3/4 guy we're using him as now.

The Blues are not using Parayko as a 3/4 guy. He got 23 minutes of hard assignments all season long. That's a high end #2.

HOWEVER, people tend to forget that Parayko is only three years younger than Pietro is. I think Parayko's physical abilities will probably allow him to play at a high level for a really long time, but I think a lot of fans are dreaming of potential they might not otherwise dream of if they were truly conscious that he'll turn 28 during the upcoming season. So it's possible Parayko will never be more valuable in a trade than right now, but the concern I have is that I think it's unlikely they'd get a single player of similar impact back.

 

[MissouriMook]

Boston has 14M in cap space.

Krejci 7.25M, Rask 7M, Backes 1.5M out in a year.

McAvoy to sign in 2 years time, Pasta 3

Boston can be a player this offseason
If Sweeney isn’t aggressive this offseason given the cap situation/need he should be fired(wouldn’t be) but should be

You signed our Captain as a UFA four years ago and three years later we won the Cup in your barn, so...

 

[seanlinden]

The Blues are not using Parayko as a 3/4 guy. He got 23 minutes of hard assignments all season long. That's a high end #2.

HOWEVER, people tend to forget that Parayko is only three years younger than Pietro is. I think Parayko's physical abilities will probably allow him to play at a high level for a really long time, but I think a lot of fans are dreaming of potential they might not otherwise dream of if they were truly conscious that he'll turn 28 during the upcoming season. So it's possible Parayko will never be more valuable in a trade than right now, but the concern I have is that I think it's unlikely they'd get a single player of similar impact back.

Realistically... Pietrangelo & Parayko are impact players... but you've gotta lose one. The question is -- are you better off with:

1. Pietrangelo and whatever you get for Parayko (likely youth, and guys who for right now will be considered depth)

or

2. Parayko and somewhere between $3 and $4.5m of cap flexibility, with a contract discussion in 2 years?

 

[MissouriMook]

The Blues are not using Parayko as a 3/4 guy. He got 23 minutes of hard assignments all season long. That's a high end #2.

...

He may be #2 in terms of TOI, but in terms of usage he rarely plays with our #1, which contrary to the belief of some has been Pietrangelo for several years now. I consider him a clear #3 now in the sense that he anchors the second pairing, but even as recently as this past season I think you could argue that JBo was anchoring the second pairing, which is why I characterized him as a 3/4.

I don't disagree that he could be considered the second best D we have our roster at the moment and I would hate to lose him while our window is open. Still, paying $21M (and eventually more) to the right side of your D when there are needs elsewhere isn't very cost effective. I would prefer to keep Petro as I believe he is our true #1, and as you point out Parayko's value may never be higher so it might be a great opportunity to sell high on him. Faulk may not even give us 70% of what Parayko can do defensively, but I think he is clearly better offensively and it is my belief that:

Petro + Faulk + (what you can get for Parayko)
> Petro + Parayko + (what you can get for Faulk)
> Parayko + Faulk

I don't think keeping all three of them (and their related cap hits) is the most efficient use of roster resources, especially after the issues created last season trying to force a square peg into a round hole by playing one of them on their off side.

 

[quityerwhinin]

Nothing happens in a vacuum, and part of the flaw in this logic is the concern (real or perceived) that Parayko moves on in 2 years when he becomes a UFA. At that point you are without both of them, which is why I have pointed out (at the risks of pitchforks and boiling oil) that it might make more sense to sign Pietrangelo and trade Parayko to fill some holes up front, especially if we are going into year 1 of your 2 year window without Tarasenko.

I'd obviously prefer to be able to keep both Petro and Parayko long term, but you're not getting anything of value for Faulk, at least not this offseason with the cap staying flat, his new deal kicking in and him underperforming for most of last season. Trading Parayko now has downside risk if he continues to be a stalwart defensively for someone else -AND- finds the offensive game we've hoped he would find over the last 2-3 years. But it also has upside risk if you are able to get something(s) quite valuable for him now and it turns out that he has already peaked and never becomes more than the 3/4 guy we're using him as now.

Yeah, I get that, but you can always get caught up in the what ifs. I think you have to make the best decisions you can with the info you have right now. The risk of losing Parayko isn't particularly greater than it is Pietrangelo. You will also likely have greater payroll flexibility then.

 

[quityerwhinin]

He may be #2 in terms of TOI, but in terms of usage he rarely plays with our #1, which contrary to the belief of some has been Pietrangelo for several years now. I consider him a clear #3 now in the sense that he anchors the second pairing, but even as recently as this past season I think you could argue that JBo was anchoring the second pairing, which is why I characterized him as a 3/4.

I don't disagree that he could be considered the second best D we have our roster at the moment and I would hate to lose him while our window is open. Still, paying $21M (and eventually more) to the right side of your D when there are needs elsewhere isn't very cost effective. I would prefer to keep Petro as I believe he is our true #1, and as you point out Parayko's value may never be higher so it might be a great opportunity to sell high on him. Faulk may not even give us 70% of what Parayko can do defensively, but I think he is clearly better offensively and it is my belief that:

Petro + Faulk + (what you can get for Parayko)
> Petro + Parayko + (what you can get for Faulk)
> Parayko + Faulk

I don't think keeping all three of them (and their related cap hits) is the most efficient use of roster resources, especially after the issues created last season trying to force a square peg into a round hole by playing one of them on their off side.

That's kind of playing semantics a little bit. He might fill that "3rd slot" but Parayko is very much the team's number 1b at worst in terms of use. He's the guy who takes the majority of defensive-end starts, draws the most minutes against the other team's top line, etc.

Also, the whole "sell high" thing is faulty logic. No team ever really trades a player at their peak. You will never win that way as you'll always be waiting on prospects who may/may not pan out.