Blues 2024 Off-Season Trade Proposals Thread

[Linkens Mastery]

Calgary acquired Hanifin when he was 22, Columbus got Jones at 21, Tampa got Sergachev at 19, Hamilton was traded a couple times. It's not unreasonable to trade for a young top pair defender, or if the team is good enough to acquire a prime aged dman.

Or even Dunn, while Seattle got him in the expansion, he was available for trade before that. A team would've had to take some faith, since he didn't come as a 20-23+ minute dman, but once he was in a big minute and offensive role, he thrived. Not every 3rd pair offensive dman can do what he did, but it's a realistic enough scenario for a piece that we could acquire. Or when Colorado acquired Toews.

You need assets to aquire one, if you Blow all of your assets on improving the forward group you can't fix the defense which is the biggest issue we have.

 

[bleedblue1223]

You need assets to aquire one, if you Blow all of your assets on improving the forward group you can't fix the defense which is the biggest issue we have.

Maybe I misinterpreted @PocketNines post since maybe it's a post Brady trade where we moved a top prospect or 2, but I guess I'm envisioning a scenario where that doesn't happen, and maybe the BPA in this draft was a forward, and in a few years, we have a team that is very deep at the forward position, and we are able to trade one or some of them for a top defender.

I'm fine if our rebuild stays relatively forward heavy in the beginning stages because I think we can find the balance in a few years if we need to. Ideally we can get a couple defenders in this draft that develop into top 4 guys though.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Maybe I misinterpreted @PocketNines post since maybe it's a post Brady trade where we moved a top prospect or 2, but I guess I'm envisioning a scenario where that doesn't happen, and maybe the BPA in this draft was a forward, and in a few years, we have a team that is very deep at the forward position, and we are able to trade one or some of them for a top defender.

I'm fine if our rebuild stays relatively forward heavy in the beginning stages because I think we can find the balance in a few years if we need to. Ideally we can get a couple defenders in this draft that develop into top 4 guys though.

My entire argument is we need to prioritize what we are spending our assets on. A winger should be second to last on that tree. LHD then 2C then RD then Winger then Goalie. We have four 25+ goal scorers. We have no 2C and no 1LD. Those should easily be our main targets if we're trading away firsts and prospects.

 

[PocketNines]

Calgary acquired Hanifin when he was 22, Columbus got Jones at 21, Tampa got Sergachev at 19, Hamilton was traded a couple times. It's not unreasonable to trade for a young top pair defender, or if the team is good enough to acquire a prime aged dman.

Or even Dunn, while Seattle got him in the expansion, he was available for trade before that. A team would've had to take some faith, since he didn't come as a 20-23+ minute dman, but once he was in a big minute and offensive role, he thrived. Not every 3rd pair offensive dman can do what he did, but it's a realistic enough scenario for a piece that we could acquire. Or when Colorado acquired Toews.

Dunn is not a good example because he is never leading a team to the Cup. He improved from when he was with the Blues. Jones was available for a reason. Sergachev we tried to get but we had a defenseman who was more powerful than the owner then (joking, partially) and he blocked it. Hanifin ... is good but not "lead a team to a Cup" good

But the deeper issue I think you are getting at is, why not take what's available now, and hope that you can fix it another way later.

I am saying it is a bad idea to commit yourself into that option when not only it's a significantly less likely route to success but also it's not philosophically the best idea to try to augment the strongest area on the team, which happens to be a lower value position objectively than top two center or top pair D (which is the tier of player you are targeting when you target Brady Tkachuk).

 

[bleedblue1223]

Dunn is not a good example because he is never leading a team to the Cup. He improved from when he was with the Blues. Jones was available for a reason. Sergachev we tried to get but we had a defenseman who was more powerful than the owner then (joking, partially) and he blocked it. Hanifin ... is good but not "lead a team to a Cup" good

But the deeper issue I think you are getting at is, why not take what's available now, and hope that you can fix it another way later.

I am saying it is a bad idea to commit yourself into that option when not only it's a significantly less likely route to success but also it's not philosophically the best idea to try to augment the strongest area on the team, which happens to be a lower value position objectively than top two center or top pair D (which is the tier of player you are targeting when you target Brady Tkachuk).

Now, if I did misinterpret you, and your argument is just to not trade for Brady or a different player similar to him, I agree. I was pushing back against the idea that the only way to get this defensemen is to wait and draft them.

At this point, I don't think we should really pursue many big time trades of of higher value assets. Maybe swapping Kyrou for something that is a better fit, but I'm not trading 1sts or top prospects right now. The only exception is a pretty young top pair defenseman. Assuming that trade doesn't fall into our laps, I think it's best to continue to draft BPA at the draft, trade someone like Buchnevich for more picks/prospects, and once we get a better idea of what our actual strengths and weaknesses will be in the next core as we acquire more pieces and they begin to develop, then pursue trades to get the balance in the group.

I'll disagree on Dunn. It's not that he can lead a team to a Cup, but I do think his current level combined with a Parayko type handling the defensive minutes would be strong enough for a team to contend. Jones was available because Nashville needed a center and they had plenty of other defense. Sure, he was overhyped, but he also played a huge role in Columbus having a few of the good seasons in their history.

 

[PocketNines]

Now, if I did misinterpret you, and your argument is just to not trade for Brady or a different player similar to him, I agree. I was pushing back against the idea that the only way to get this defensemen is to wait and draft them.

At this point, I don't think we should really pursue many big time trades of of higher value assets. Maybe swapping Kyrou for something that is a better fit, but I'm not trading 1sts or top prospects right now. The only exception is a pretty young top pair defenseman. Assuming that trade doesn't fall into our laps, I think it's best to continue to draft BPA at the draft, trade someone like Buchnevich for more picks/prospects, and once we get a better idea of what our actual strengths and weaknesses will be in the next core as we acquire more pieces and they begin to develop, then pursue trades to get the balance in the group.

I'll disagree on Dunn. It's not that he can lead a team to a Cup, but I do think his current level combined with a Parayko type handling the defensive minutes would be strong enough for a team to contend. Jones was available because Nashville needed a center and they had plenty of other defense. Sure, he was overhyped, but he also played a huge role in Columbus having a few of the good seasons in their history.

We need someone better than Parayko, not two Parayko calibers. And I would not trade Parayko straight up for Dunn. We have always had different standards for the defensemen we are looking at. I am not just looking for "top pair" I'm looking at, "player who is going to be the #1 minutes all situations defenseman for a franchise for a decade" type.

To me, Seth Jones would be absolutely unacceptable as the answer to what we need. We just disagree about the caliber of defenseman needed. Sure, it's possible there will a shoot the moon miracle and we get a true #1 defenseman in trade when he's 21. That cannot be the plan.

IMO It's outright irresponsible to advocate a choice to pad an area of luxury that is objectively less valuable on the open market ... and in order to do this, take away two years of top picks when they really need to draft this guy in house. And now you're in a position where you have to shoot the moon and the type of guys that move are not sufficient anyway.

 

[bleedblue1223]

We need someone better than Parayko, not two Parayko calibers. And I would not trade Parayko straight up for Dunn. We have always had different standards for the defensemen we are looking at. I am not just looking for "top pair" I'm looking at, "player who is going to be the #1 minutes all situations defenseman for a franchise for a decade" type.

To me, Seth Jones would be absolutely unacceptable as the answer to what we need. We just disagree about the caliber of defenseman needed. Sure, it's possible there will a shoot the moon miracle and we get a true #1 defenseman in trade when he's 21. That cannot be the plan.

IMO It's outright irresponsible to advocate a choice to pad an area of luxury that is objectively less valuable on the open market ... and in order to do this, take away two years of top picks when they really need to draft this guy in house. And now you're in a position where you have to shoot the moon and the type of guys that move are not sufficient anyway.

Just curious of guys that fit your standard. Would Hamilton fit, or is he in that Seth Jones mold, where he's tilted offensively and hasn't really been tested in a heavy minute, all-situtions role? Is Slavin high-end enough? Would Toews qualify or since he hasn't been away from Makar, we don't really know? What about Burns when he was traded from Minnesota to San Jose?

Is your position that you basically have to acquire this player through the draft because the ones that do become available are almost always flawed enough to not meet the standard, and the ones that do become available, you need the luck of perfect timing to be able to take advantage of it? I think that's a reasonable enough position, I'm just curious at what your minimum standard is for that defenseman.

I do agree though, trading for Brady now doesn't make sense. Trading premium assets right now for any forward doesn't really make sense, even for a C. Let Dvorsky develop first. Any forward upgrade should be someone that is cheap to acquire.

 

[Celtic Note]

Now, if I did misinterpret you, and your argument is just to not trade for Brady or a different player similar to him, I agree. I was pushing back against the idea that the only way to get this defensemen is to wait and draft them.

At this point, I don't think we should really pursue many big time trades of of higher value assets. Maybe swapping Kyrou for something that is a better fit, but I'm not trading 1sts or top prospects right now. The only exception is a pretty young top pair defenseman. Assuming that trade doesn't fall into our laps, I think it's best to continue to draft BPA at the draft, trade someone like Buchnevich for more picks/prospects, and once we get a better idea of what our actual strengths and weaknesses will be in the next core as we acquire more pieces and they begin to develop, then pursue trades to get the balance in the group.

I'll disagree on Dunn. It's not that he can lead a team to a Cup, but I do think his current level combined with a Parayko type handling the defensive minutes would be strong enough for a team to contend. Jones was available because Nashville needed a center and they had plenty of other defense. Sure, he was overhyped, but he also played a huge role in Columbus having a few of the good seasons in their history.

But none of the defensemen you mentioned are true #1s. At least top end #1s.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And while I would agree, we should lower our standards just to get someone that could fill the need, at the same time, we shouldn't keep to high of standards thinking a unicorn will come around, and then we miss an actual opportunity. Many here weren't sold on Bouwmeester when we acquired him, and I don't think ROR had many doubters, but I'm sure there were reasonable questions whether his offense would be good enough to be a #1C on a Cup team, but to his credit, he elevated his offense.

And yes, the difference with Bouwmeester is we already have Petro.

 

[PocketNines]

Bouwmeester was a healthy scratch during the Cup year. There was never one moment where they were equal

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'm not saying they were equal, not even sure who they are. Petro? Me adding that line about Petro was giving the counter argument that the quality of the LD that we acquired for that core group wasn't as important because we already had the #1 all-situations guy.

That being said, that's an odd way to sum up Bouwmeester's contributions on the 2019 squad.

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

With Vegas needing to cut cap this summer, what would you guys give up for a Karlsson and Hague package?

 

[Xerloris]

With Vegas needing to cut cap this summer, what would you guys give up for a Karlsson and Hague package?

When vegas has a cap crunch they tend to just dump the players they want to get rid of for nearly nothing. If I was Armstrong I would be all about it. #2 LD and 2C in one stop? Sure thing. Maybe Hague can take #1 LD from Leddy but I don't care as long as he would be a solid #2 with Faulk and or Kessel.

 

[Eldon Reid]

When vegas has a cap crunch they tend to just dump the players they want to get rid of for nearly nothing. If I was Armstrong I would be all about it. #2 LD and 2C in one stop? Sure thing. Maybe Hague can take #1 LD from Leddy but I don't care as long as he would be a solid #2 with Faulk and or Kessel.

Pretty much. Look at the last few cap dump trades.

Traded Reilly for 3rd round pick

Traded Patches & another prospect for future considerations

Trade Fleury for prospect who literally retired that next season

Traded Stastny for prospect that hasn't played game for them (probably never will) and pick they traded later

Traded Schmidt for 3rd (later traded that)

 

[Reality Czech]

Pretty much. Look at the last few cap dump trades.

Traded Reilly for 3rd round pick

Traded Patches & another prospect for future considerations

Trade Fleury for prospect who literally retired that next season

Traded Stastny for prospect that hasn't played game for them (probably never will) and pick they traded later

Traded Schmidt for 3rd (later traded that)

That may be true but most of these deals were made in a flat cap world. Teams had no cap space and were basically holding teams hostage in order to take unwanted contracts off their hands. I'm guessing that won't be the case this year, and it all depends on how many other teams we'd be bidding against.

 

[PocketNines]

I'm not saying they were equal, not even sure who they are. Petro? Me adding that line about Petro was giving the counter argument that the quality of the LD that we acquired for that core group wasn't as important because we already had the #1 all-situations guy.

That being said, that's an odd way to sum up Bouwmeester's contributions on the 2019 squad.

Of course you know I meant Petro and you also know that there is an ongoing effort to equate those two players. How many times have we heard the mouthbreathing argument that the real loss wasn't Petro it was Bouwmeester? You know that is a thing here. And it is imbecilic. So the healthy scratch comment tries to puncture any attempt to equate those two players, which again, is a thing that has to be guarded against continually here

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

That may be true but most of these deals were made in a flat cap world. Teams had no cap space and were basically holding teams hostage in order to take unwanted contracts off their hands. I'm guessing that won't be the case this year, and it all depends on how many other teams we'd be bidding against.

Exactly this, which is why I asked haha.

 

[TurgPavs]

That may be true but most of these deals were made in a flat cap world. Teams had no cap space and were basically holding teams hostage in order to take unwanted contracts off their hands. I'm guessing that won't be the case this year, and it all depends on how many other teams we'd be bidding against.

It will be interesting to see how Vegas plays this off-season. 40% of their cap has a NMC, another 41% of their cap has some sort of NTC. Chandler Stephenson is going to command 5+ million in UFA. Marchessault, will likely get a 2-3 year deal in the 6-7 range.

The question, is what are they going to do with Theodore, who will be a UFA next summer. His agent has indicated that Theodore wants the same contract that Petro received, 8.80 AAV. Theodore will be a year younger then Petro was when he signed with Vegas.

I doubt he gets to UFA but a top pairing of CP and Theodore would be pretty wicked.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

They’re going to have to make some moves like they have previously where they basically give players away. I would not be the slightest bit upset if that involved in us snagging William Karlsson for a good price.

 

[Eldon Reid]

That may be true but most of these deals were made in a flat cap world. Teams had no cap space and were basically holding teams hostage in order to take unwanted contracts off their hands. I'm guessing that won't be the case this year, and it all depends on how many other teams we'd be bidding against.

I don't see them getting much still for them now either. Maybe pick and prospect at best. When you are up against the cap, other teams still have some leverage. Before it was the flat cap, now it is they can't take much salary back in return. So at most prospect and pick.

They already have 80 mill committed to 10 forwards, 7 dman, and 2 goalies and they have significant holes to fill if they don't resign Stephenson or Marchesaault, but if they resign one of them there goes the little cap space they had. That production will be tough to replace.

 

[Celtic Note]

I don't see them getting much still for them now either. Maybe pick and prospect at best. When you are up against the cap, other teams still have some leverage. Before it was the flat cap, now it is they can't take much salary back in return. So at most prospect and pick.

They already have 80 mill committed to 10 forwards, 7 dman, and 2 goalies and they have significant holes to fill if they don't resign Stephenson or Marchesaault, but if they resign one of them there goes the little cap space they had. That production will be tough to replace.

Some high dollar player will be on LITR. Don’t worry

 

[Brian39]

With Vegas needing to cut cap this summer, what would you guys give up for a Karlsson and Hague package?

Before I answer, I think it is important to recognize that Vegas doesn't need to cut cap.

Capfriendly shows them with just $1.82M to fill 4 roster spots, but that number doesn't include Lehner on LTIR. Lehner is very clearly done with pro hockey and will be on LTIR. They are functionally sitting at roughly $6.82M for those 4 roster spots.

Here is the currently signed group they'd be building around with that $6.82M (roughly using their lines as they stand right now):

Barby-Eichel-????
????-Hertl-Stone
Howden-Karlsson-????
????-Roy-Kolesar

Extras: Cotter and Rondberg

Hanifin-Petro
McNabb-Theodore
Hague-Whitecloud

Extra: Hutton

Hill/Thompson

That's the guts of a good 1st line, a great 2nd line, a good 3rd line, a good 4th line, a great D group and goaltending that has been good enough. Cotter has been a useful bottom sixer all year and would plug one question mark. Rondberg may or may not get a chance to fill in another, but should be a cheap 13th forward if not. That $6.82M is enough to extend (or replace) one of Stephenson/March if they are willing to run a 21 or 22 man roster all year (which they have been willing to do in the past).

That is a lineup that should be more than good enough to put them in playoff position by next year's deadline when they can bring in a rental or two (with double retention) to fill in gaps without impacting the cap.

They can bring back a damn good group without shedding cap. The "need" to shed cap would come if they want to extend both guys. They very well might want to extend Stephenson and/or March and it would very much fit their organizational philosophy to move aging/declining guys to create that space. But they aren't in a position where they need to shed space to fit already-signed guys. Vegas will move guys quickly to create space to do what they want, but they aren't in a position of desperation.

Now, to the trade proposal:

Given Hague's contract, I don't see them moving him as part of a cap clearing move. He only makes $2.2M next year, he is already outplaying that number an then he is an RFA in the summer of 2025. He may or may not be in their long-term plans to take over for McNabb, but even if he isn't he provides good value for 2024/25 and then they can deal him as an RFA for something.

From our perspective, I'd be very interested in a Hague/Karlsson package.

I think that Hague will be a legit 2nd pair D man in this league in the short-medium term. His age is perfectly aligned with our timeline/core and we'd get a full year of him on the roster before needing to make a decision on whether a long term extension is appropriate. I don't view Karlsson as a guy who carries a ton of positive trade value given his remaining contract, but he would fill a direct short-term need and our cap structure allows us to absorb his money with little consequence even as he declines.

I think Vegas will prefer to just move Karlsson for peanuts, but if they are looking to replenish some futures capital and create a spot in the lineup to audition Cormier, I'd be comfortable giving up both our 2nds for a Hague/Karlsson package. I'd obviously prefer to pay less and would be trying to do it for more like a 2nd and 3rd, but a mid-round 2nd and mid-late 2nd wouldn't be a package that would give me any heartburn.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Before I answer, I think it is important to recognize that Vegas doesn't need to cut cap.

Capfriendly shows them with just $1.82M to fill 4 roster spots, but that number doesn't include Lehner on LTIR. Lehner is very clearly done with pro hockey and will be on LTIR. They are functionally sitting at roughly $6.82M for those 4 roster spots.

Here is the currently signed group they'd be building around with that $6.82M (roughly using their lines as they stand right now):

Barby-Eichel-????
????-Hertl-Stone
Howden-Karlsson-????
????-Roy-Kolesar

Extras: Cotter and Rondberg

Hanifin-Petro
McNabb-Theodore
Hague-Whitecloud

Extra: Hutton

Hill/Thompson

That's the guts of a good 1st line, a great 2nd line, a good 3rd line, a good 4th line, a great D group and goaltending that has been good enough. Cotter has been a useful bottom sixer all year and would plug one question mark. Rondberg may or may not get a chance to fill in another, but should be a cheap 13th forward if not. That $6.82M is enough to extend (or replace) one of Stephenson/March if they are willing to run a 21 or 22 man roster all year (which they have been willing to do in the past).

That is a lineup that should be more than good enough to put them in playoff position by next year's deadline when they can bring in a rental or two (with double retention) to fill in gaps without impacting the cap.

They can bring back a damn good group without shedding cap. The "need" to shed cap would come if they want to extend both guys. They very well might want to extend Stephenson and/or March and it would very much fit their organizational philosophy to move aging/declining guys to create that space. But they aren't in a position where they need to shed space to fit already-signed guys. Vegas will move guys quickly to create space to do what they want, but they aren't in a position of desperation.

Now, to the trade proposal:

Given Hague's contract, I don't see them moving him as part of a cap clearing move. He only makes $2.2M next year, he is already outplaying that number an then he is an RFA in the summer of 2025. He may or may not be in their long-term plans to take over for McNabb, but even if he isn't he provides good value for 2024/25 and then they can deal him as an RFA for something.

From our perspective, I'd be very interested in a Hague/Karlsson package.

I think that Hague will be a legit 2nd pair D man in this league in the short-medium term. His age is perfectly aligned with our timeline/core and we'd get a full year of him on the roster before needing to make a decision on whether a long term extension is appropriate. I don't view Karlsson as a guy who carries a ton of positive trade value given his remaining contract, but he would fill a direct short-term need and our cap structure allows us to absorb his money with little consequence even as he declines.

I think Vegas will prefer to just move Karlsson for peanuts, but if they are looking to replenish some futures capital and create a spot in the lineup to audition Cormier, I'd be comfortable giving up both our 2nds for a Hague/Karlsson package. I'd obviously prefer to pay less and would be trying to do it for more like a 2nd and 3rd, but a mid-round 2nd and mid-late 2nd wouldn't be a package that would give me any heartburn.

Yep, Vegas will find a way. Really, the only day they have to figure out is the first day of the season as Lehner will have to be on the Opening Day roster and counting against the cap and not on LTIR until the next day.

So they’ll probably have a pretty funky official lineup when they break camp and may have to expose a player or two to waivers they’d rather not want to but…Vegas will find a way.

 

[PocketNines]

There's no crime in doing what Vegas is doing. The league is fine with it. The real crime was when the Blues tried to sign free agents and use the rules in place for that in the early 1990s. The league hated that

 

[Hrkac Circus]

There's no crime in doing what Vegas is doing. The league is fine with it. The real crime was when the Blues tried to sign free agents and use the rules in place for that in the early 1990s. The league hated that

Thinking about what that cost us back then hurts.