Blues 2024 Off-Season Trade Proposals Thread

[Brian39]

Any way you see that raise pricing him out of NY?

I don't. I think Miller has firmly established himself as their top LD and a more important piece of their blueline than Lindgren long term. He is at worst their 3rd most important D man right now and is arguably the 2nd most important right now. I would imagine that keeping him is a much bigger priority than figuring out a Trouba extension and their top D prospect is RD so he isn't a direct challenge to Miller.

I would be very, very surprised if Miller became a cap casualty. They have every reason to make a painful cut elsewhere in order to afford Miller's extension.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'd see a Trouba trade before a Miller trade.

 

[Brian39]

Even if it's a small amount, I don't want any buyout on our books for that long. It's fine to have a buyout when you are in a transition phase, but I don't want it carrying over to when we are trying to compete.

Carolina would either have to give us a significant asset in return or be willing to take one of our cap dumps.

I don't want a buyout on the books that long, but I'm not totally opposed to the possibility of it as the 'worst case scenario' of a gamble to acquire a potential long-term middle 6 center who perfectly aligns with our timeline.

I think it is a safe bet that we would give him 2 years here before buying him out in 2026 if we decided to take the gamble. Given our team and contract status, it wouldn't make much sense to pull the trigger on a buyout in 2025. A 2026 buyout carries an $850k cap hit in 2026/27, a $470k cap hit in 2027/28-2029/30, and then back to $850k for 2030/31-2033/34. It's a long time, but a $470k cap hit with a cap approaching $100M and then an $850k cap hit with a cap almost certainly over $100M is a borderline rounding error.

Again, not ideal and certainly not something that I want. But it isn't close to a terrible outcome as a 'worst case scenario.' If the team believes that he still has genuine low-end 2C upside, then I think that it is a 'worst case' worth taking on because he'd carry real value as a stop-gap middle 6 C who (knock on wood) gets pushed down to pure 3C duty when Dvorsky surpasses him.

I'm not sure what he will become in the next 3+ years, but I do think that he has a fairly decent chance to eventually be a $4.8M player if he is given a long leash in the middle 6. A cap team or contending team can't really give him that for the next 2 years, but we are in a position where we could.

I don't think it is likely that Carolina trades him plus a high-value asset in a standalone trade since the buyout terms are pretty favorable.

However, I do wonder if he could be the cap dump piece in a separate trade. I think that Carolina is a team with the potential to make an absolute blockbuster this summer. They have a new GM, a decent chunk of expiring deals, the goaltending has repeatedly let them down, it sounds like they couldn't reach a deal with Guentzel, and I have to believe that they aren't interested in a 'step back' year. They also have a trio of high quality prospects and hold all of their future 1st/2nd round picks. Their owner doesn't like to throw money away and I'd wager that he'd very much prefer to clear his contract in a trade rather than cutting a check.

I think all of Binner, Buch, and Leddy would fit their short-term needs very well. I would be pretty damn comfortable taking on Kotkaniemi to facilitate a blockbuster with them if the other assets coming back our way were sufficient.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I don't want a buyout on the books that long, but I'm not totally opposed to the possibility of it as the 'worst case scenario' of a gamble to acquire a potential long-term middle 6 center who perfectly aligns with our timeline.

I think it is a safe bet that we would give him 2 years here before buying him out in 2026 if we decided to take the gamble. Given our team and contract status, it wouldn't make much sense to pull the trigger on a buyout in 2025. A 2026 buyout carries an $850k cap hit in 2026/27, a $470k cap hit in 2027/28-2029/30, and then back to $850k for 2030/31-2033/34. It's a long time, but a $470k cap hit with a cap approaching $100M and then an $850k cap hit with a cap almost certainly over $100M is a borderline rounding error.

Again, not ideal and certainly not something that I want. But it isn't close to a terrible outcome as a 'worst case scenario.' If the team believes that he still has genuine low-end 2C upside, then I think that it is a 'worst case' worth taking on because he'd carry real value as a stop-gap middle 6 C who (knock on wood) gets pushed down to pure 3C duty when Dvorsky surpasses him.

I'm not sure what he will become in the next 3+ years, but I do think that he has a fairly decent chance to eventually be a $4.8M player if he is given a long leash in the middle 6. A cap team or contending team can't really give him that for the next 2 years, but we are in a position where we could.

I don't think it is likely that Carolina trades him plus a high-value asset in a standalone trade since the buyout terms are pretty favorable.

However, I do wonder if he could be the cap dump piece in a separate trade. I think that Carolina is a team with the potential to make an absolute blockbuster this summer. They have a new GM, a decent chunk of expiring deals, the goaltending has repeatedly let them down, it sounds like they couldn't reach a deal with Guentzel, and I have to believe that they aren't interested in a 'step back' year. They also have a trio of high quality prospects and hold all of their future 1st/2nd round picks. Their owner doesn't like to throw money away and I'd wager that he'd very much prefer to clear his contract in a trade rather than cutting a check.

I think all of Binner, Buch, and Leddy would fit their short-term needs very well. I would be pretty damn comfortable taking on Kotkaniemi to facilitate a blockbuster with them if the other assets coming back our way were sufficient.

Yeah, they are in a weird spot. I can't see them wanting to take a step back and rebuild, they have Aho, Svechnikov, and Jarvis, with Nikishin coming soon, and some other nice prospects. They also have a ton of talent leaving, and an owner that has a different view on how to handle contracts. They don't want to repeat the KK contract with Necas, and we'll see how that ends up, but they also don't like giving extensions to those that are older, so Pesce and Skjei are likely out the door, as is Guentzel and Teravainen. That's 3 top 6 forwards and 2 top 4 dmen. And what are they doing with Slavin and Orlov next summer?

I agree that I'd be fine with KK as a return piece in a trade where he's viewed as a cap dump. I also have no idea what they are planning on doing because they take a pretty extreme view towards contracts. It works when you are winning, but they could also be a surprise team that crashes with all the talent that they have leaving, they do have more than enough talent where it won't be a crash out of the playoffs or anything, but do they remain a 111+ point team?

While they have talent leaving, they also have a ton of cap to work with, so they will have a crazy summer, one way or another.

 

[Xerloris]

I don't. I think Miller has firmly established himself as their top LD and a more important piece of their blueline than Lindgren long term. He is at worst their 3rd most important D man right now and is arguably the 2nd most important right now. I would imagine that keeping him is a much bigger priority than figuring out a Trouba extension and their top D prospect is RD so he isn't a direct challenge to Miller.

I would be very, very surprised if Miller became a cap casualty. They have every reason to make a painful cut elsewhere in order to afford Miller's extension.

Disappointing but kind of expected.

 

[Frenzy31]

As the NHL is a copy cat league - and since Buch is a big physical, defensively sound, point producer - Do you think his demand has increased this post season?

I am not talking about adding additional assets (like going from 2 1st rounders to 3) but more of type of first rounder and/or prospect. Is a team like NJ willing to move the number 10 for him? Or a team like Detroit willing to put ASP into play?

I like Buch, but I don't know if he fits our timeline very well. Granted, he could be Steen for us so who really knows.

 

[Xerloris]

As the NHL is a copy cat league - and since Buch is a big physical, defensively sound, point producer - Do you think his demand has increased this post season?

I am not talking about adding additional assets (like going from 2 1st rounders to 3) but more of type of first rounder and/or prospect. Is a team like NJ willing to move the number 10 for him? Or a team like Detroit willing to put ASP into play?

I like Buch, but I don't know if he fits our timeline very well. Granted, he could be Steen for us so who really knows.

We're never going to get a draft pick that lands us a top 2 Dman for him but maybe a team would be willing to trade a prospect that is more than likely a top 2? That's my feeling anyway.

 

[kimzey59]

We're never going to get a draft pick that lands us a top 2 Dman for him but maybe a team would be willing to trade a prospect that is more than likely a top 2? That's my feeling anyway.

Other way around.
NO team is going to trade a blue chip prospect that they have invested time into developing and is on pace to reach their potential unless there are other factors in play(trade requests, injuries, late developing character problems).

Top 10-15 picks DO occasionally get traded(see last year with the Chychrun trade), and it happens more frequently than people want to admit.

 

[LogosBlue]

As the NHL is a copy cat league - and since Buch is a big physical, defensively sound, point producer - Do you think his demand has increased this post season?

I am not talking about adding additional assets (like going from 2 1st rounders to 3) but more of type of first rounder and/or prospect. Is a team like NJ willing to move the number 10 for him? Or a team like Detroit willing to put ASP into play?

I like Buch, but I don't know if he fits our timeline very well. Granted, he could be Steen for us so who really knows.

I think Buch's stock is rising this off season. Lots of chatter from various talking heads (of different teams) about him.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I think Buch's stock is rising this off season. Lots of chatter from various talking heads (of different teams) about him.

I think reality is he had big price at deadline and it wasn’t met. I expect price hasn’t dropped significantly, but the flexibility of summer and ability to extend him starting next month, brings more teams into discussion. Buffalo wasn’t going to pay price at tdl because they knew they were missing playoffs. Now they could be option. There will be others.

Depending on how high pick, that could be primary value in return and we aren’t getting top 15 pick for him at tdl. 11th and krebs or ostlund could well be in ballpark of deal.

 

[ds774622]

Kakko's usage and production was damn close to a 4th line player this year. He played at a 25.5 point pace through 13:17 a night. His TOI per game was 9th in the regular season and 10th in the playoffs among Rangers forwards. Tied for 9th in total points and 11th in points per game among Rangers forwards in the regular season. He was in a 3 way tie for 9th in points among Rangers forwards in the playoffs.

He was a very low-end 3rd liner who was bordering on being a 4th liner this year.

I'm not saying you get a replacement-level 3rd liner for $1M-$1.5M, because that isn't what Kakko was. I think he very much has more to give in the right situation, but if he doesn't give more under Laviollette as the 9th/10th forward on the Rangers, then the replacement cost for the role he actually played is in that price range.

Sunny scored at a 24/25 point pace through 13:15 a night. We got him as a UFA for a league minimum contract.

Parise signed midseason and scored at a 27 point pace through 12:58 a night. He signed for $825k.

Wheeler scored at a 31.8 point pace through 12:43 a night on the same team as Kakko and signed as a UFA for $1.1M.

That is the level of player Kakko was this season. If that is who he is next year under Laviollette, then the Rangers would absolutely be setting a good chunk of cap space on fire if they are paying him around $3.5M due to offer sheet concerns. If they are willing to spend $3.5M on their 9th forward, they should be able to do much better than what Kakko was last year.

The whole point I was trying to make is that the Rangers aren’t going to ship out a guy in his early twenties with two more years of control if they feel he has any sort of growth besides being a low production third liner. Especially if that production dipped in the first year under a new coach. Kakko’s valuation is higher to the Rangers than he is outside of their organization.

If he has any potential for progression, you don’t move an asset like that. But if the Rangers don’t think he’s worth $3m now or in the future then why would STL take on a reclamation project when our needs are elsewhere? If he played center, then maybe.

But the Rangers would not be lighting cap space on fire if they didn’t think he had the potential. So you can cherry pick 3 comps where Sunny only wanted to come here, or Parise and Wheeler picked destination over money bags, or look at other UFAs that where the teams are probably having buyer’s remorse (eg, PIT with Eller and Acciari) and the replacement level is still the equivalent of a lottery ticket in hoping you have third line production. The Rangers would keep their own lottery ticket in Kakko while he’s still RFA to see if he progresses similar to Lafreniere.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Assuming Faulk is traded in some deal, would you trade for Hronek?

 

[SirPaste]

Assuming Faulk is traded in some deal, would you trade for Hronek?

I like the player, but this would be the second team trading him in a short period because of his contract demands. His next contract worries me a lot, he seems to be asking for the moon and I don't know if I would be comfortable giving him a huge deal like that, could really hurt us if it doesn't work out with the other D contracts already on the books. I am not against giving out a big contract to a dman in his age range per say, but I just don't know if Hronek is the guy I want to give it to.

 

[BleedBlue14]

Assuming Faulk is traded in some deal, would you trade for Hronek?

No, in my mind his skill set is pretty identical to Faulks. He almost certainly will get more term, and he almost certainly will get trade protection.

I can see the argument depending on how you view Faulk. And I would definitely be more open to it if we had a true #1LD. But I don't see how moving out Faulk and bringing in Hronek fixes our issues, it really just prolongs them in my mind.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Assuming Faulk is traded in some deal, would you trade for Hronek?

Obviously depends on cost, both in trade and $. Ultimately I think they are likely on same level as players, as great guy to play in top 4 (when healthy and not chained to krug) behind Parayko but not a true 1D.

If we trade Faulk for "X", I'd be comfortable giving up equivalent of "X" + a 2nd (or similar total value), if we could get him extended longterm for under $7mm AAV. Is that realistic on either count? I don't know, but that is how I would look at it, as basically a chance to get a nearly 5 year younger player who better aligns with our next window.

 

[Majorityof1]

Obviously depends on cost, both in trade and $. Ultimately I think they are likely on same level as players, as great guy to play in top 4 (when healthy and not chained to krug) behind Parayko but not a true 1D.

If we trade Faulk for "X", I'd be comfortable giving up equivalent of "X" + a 2nd (or similar total value), if we could get him extended longterm for under $7mm AAV. Is that realistic on either count? I don't know, but that is how I would look at it, as basically a chance to get a nearly 5 year younger player who better aligns with our next window.

I don't think it's realistic. One is coming off of a good season and the other a bad one. The league has a short term memory. Plus the age difference. I'd think it would take more than a 2nd net cost for the swap.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I don't think it's realistic. One is coming off of a good season and the other a bad one. The league has a short term memory. Plus the age difference. I'd think it would take more than a 2nd net cost for the swap.

You may be right, but I suspect that Faulk has more value than you think. Advantage for Faulk is that you wouldn't need to commit longterm, and that may appeal a good bit to some teams who are leery of paying longterm money to FA.

Now, if nobody wants to pay that because he is coming off rough year where injuries held him back, that is fine we can keep him until he rebuilds value. But I would expect equivalent value of at least a 1st if we are going to deal him. If we can't get that, we should wait until we do.

 

[Majorityof1]

You may be right, but I suspect that Faulk has more value than you think. Advantage for Faulk is that you wouldn't need to commit longterm, and that may appeal a good bit to some teams who are leery of paying longterm money to FA.

Now, if nobody wants to pay that because he is coming off rough year where injuries held him back, that is fine we can keep him until he rebuilds value. But I would expect equivalent value of at least a 1st if we are going to deal him. If we can't get that, we should wait until we do.

Are they fluke injuries or is he a somewhat physical 32-year old that is breaking down, and you can expect those injuries as a matter of course?

I think teams will be hesitant to pay big trade cost for Faulk. But you never know

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Are they fluke injuries or is he a somewhat physical 32-year old that is breaking down, and you can expect those injuries as a matter of course?

I think teams will be hesitant to pay big trade cost for Faulk. But you never know

He had a high ankle sprain that slowed him much of year, which isn't age-related. He does have lots of miles, however, and that will give some pause. I guess where we differ is that I don't think late 1st is a big trade cost for a top 4 rhd who is signed for 3 more years. That seems like price that many teams could and maybe should consider paying.

 

[Majorityof1]

He had a high ankle sprain that slowed him much of year, which isn't age-related. He does have lots of miles, however, and that will give some pause. I guess where we differ is that I don't think late 1st is a big trade cost for a top 4 rhd who is signed for 3 more years. That seems like price that many teams could and maybe should consider paying.

I'm not saying he's not worth a late first. I am saying you could not get Hronek, another top 4 RHD, for what Faulk is worth + a 2nd. Hronek is better, based on last year, and younger.

 

[bleedblue1223]

The big unknown that impacts Hronek's value is his contract demands.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I'm not saying he's not worth a late first. I am saying you could not get Hronek, another top 4 RHD, for what Faulk is worth + a 2nd. Hronek is better, based on last year, and younger.

And I think late 1st and a 2nd is fair price for Hronek. He got dealt for but more last year, but he had more control then. Someone may pay more but given contract I would be surprised if he returns much more.

 

[Majorityof1]

And I think late 1st and a 2nd is fair price for Hronek. He got dealt for but more last year, but he had more control then. Someone may pay more but given contract I would be surprised if he returns much more.

He also had a career year this year. Career highs in points and TOI by a good margin. More importantly he was solid defensively. I think his increased performance outweighs the one year of cheaper contract. Unless it gets out he wants a ton, like $9m, he is worth a lot more than Faulk right now.

I don't think any team would take Faulk's 33, 34 and 35 years over Hroneks 26 thru 33 years at $1m more for just a second round pick

 

[bleedblue1223]

I could see a Necas/Hronek deal as a base.

 

[Brian39]

I'm not saying he's not worth a late first. I am saying you could not get Hronek, another top 4 RHD, for what Faulk is worth + a 2nd. Hronek is better, based on last year, and younger.

An offer sheet with an AAV up to $9.161M requires a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd as compensation.

I think a 1st and 2nd is in the ballpark of his trade value. I very much doubt he is going to get offersheeted, but it is extremely hard for a team to get 'full value' for an unsigned RFA who can hit UFA next summer. The threat of arbitration or an offer sheet lowers trade value.

He returned a mid 1st and a mid 2nd last March when he still had 1.5 years left on his deal. I'm not sold that his trade value has increased by a substantial margin. He had a great year next to the soon-to-be Norris winner, but a lot of the leverage his breakout would give the Canucks for increased trade value is offset by the reduction in remaining team control.

I'm not interested in mocing mountains for Hronek. I'd be satisfied paying a small premium as a Faulk replacement, but that's about as far as I go. I think a Faulk-out-Hronek-in swap is too complicated for Vancouver and I think the biggest hang up would be Hronek's next contract. But I'm not convinced that Vancouver will like the return they get if he doesn't extend.