Proposal: Blues Devils

[Colt55]

OP is from St.Louis. So it seems from HFB perspective the Blues were asking to put Bozak in the deal. Obviously you can disagree with the intention of OP.
From a Devils perspective Bozak is a cap dump and would not have positive trade value. There are enough teams out there with dire need for cap space, that would treat a similar contract as a cap dump and offer a team with cap space an asset for accepting said contract. If the Blues aren't that team fine. Just remove Bozak from the equation and go on from there.

Thats what I'm trying to say Dunn is worth a first +. If we decide to move Dunn that's what it will take. Putting bozak with him is just not happening. Especially when bozaks contract is up after this year

 

[Pavlikovsky]

Also bozak and Steen fall off next year at combined 13.125 mil. Blues are just fine. I also think that Seattle takes faulk thats 6.5 more gone

You guys paying Seattle a 1st to take Faulk ? Don't see why they willingly take him him and his anchor of a contract.

 

[TK 421]

The 'getting rid of Faulk to Seattle' ship sailed out of harbor when Petro signed in Vegas.

 

[usekakkorightquinn]

Typical Devils offer. We are a crap team that drafts poorly, give us a good, young player for guys that won't be good NHL players. Dunn should return a first and an NHL ready d man that stands a good chance of being in the top 4.

 

[Eggtimer]

Typical Devils offer. We are a crap team that drafts poorly, give us a good, young player for guys that won't be good NHL players. Dunn should return a first and an NHL ready d man that stands a good chance of being in the top 4.

I understand that you are underwhelmed with offers but a 1st ( that will be very high most likely) plus " dman that has a good chance of being in the top 4 " is a little much. Why would a team trade a dman that is under team control / young / has potential to be Dunn or better be traded for Dunn PLUS a first?
That not happening . I can see a late first and a decent prospect but not a lottery 1st plus a very good prospect.

 

[Zajacs Bowl Cut]

Typical Devils offer. We are a crap team that drafts poorly, give us a good, young player for guys that won't be good NHL players. Dunn should return a first and an NHL ready d man that stands a good chance of being in the top 4.

this guy hates the Devils so much it actually makes me laugh

wonder what they did to hurt him

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

The 'getting rid of Faulk to Seattle' ship sailed out of harbor when Petro signed in Vegas.

I'm not convinced it has. Here are the scenarios I see:

If Faulk is great next year:
Blues can either feel more confident that their long-term investment is a good one and roll, or expose with the strong likelihood that Seattle drafts him (remember, Ron Francis loves him right?). Use the money to sign another top 4 RD. Either way, things are okay.

If Faulk is average next year:
Blues protect Parayko, Krug, and Dunn/Scandella - expose Faulk, and Seattle has to live with the reality that they have to reach the cap floor. Faulk might not be the most attractive Blues piece out there, but remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Attach a 3rd rounder to him and see what happens. Again, use the cap space to sign another top 4 RD. Not the best situation and, yes, lost Petro because of the signing - but long-term damage is minimized, and we all move forward.

If Faulk is terrible next year:
Blues expose him and give Seattle the sweetheart deal. Faulk, a 1st, and a good prospect. Yes, this sucks. But remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Seattle gets futures and gets closer to the cap floor. Blues lose significantly here, and we'll always regret the ultimate outcome of the Petro saga - but Faulk will be gone and cap freed to try again.

To me, in any of the three scenarios - the Blues can get out of this. Remember, Ron Francis loves Faulk, right?

 

[Mike Liut]

Sanford might be a 25g scorer if he keeps improving. That injury last year set him back. He’s healthy now. Don’t want to move him unless for an overpayment.

 

[Colt55]

You guys paying Seattle a 1st to take Faulk ? Don't see why they willingly take him him and his anchor of a contract.

To reach the floor. He is making 6.5 he is over paid by a million. Had a bad year last year but great year for Carolina a year prior.

I am really starting to think people on hf boards have no clue what a boat anchor is. He is defiantly a #2 rhd with puck moving offensive up side. Powerplay qb. So yeah payingvthem a first.

Can you name a batter rhd that will be available for Seattle

 

[Colt55]

I'm not convinced it has. Here are the scenarios I see:

If Faulk is great next year:
Blues can either feel more confident that their long-term investment is a good one and roll, or expose with the strong likelihood that Seattle drafts him (remember, Ron Francis loves him right?). Use the money to sign another top 4 RD. Either way, things are okay.

If Faulk is average next year:
Blues protect Parayko, Krug, and Dunn/Scandella - expose Faulk, and Seattle has to live with the reality that they have to reach the cap floor. Faulk might not be the most attractive Blues piece out there, but remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Attach a 3rd rounder to him and see what happens. Again, use the cap space to sign another top 4 RD. Not the best situation and, yes, lost Petro because of the signing - but long-term damage is minimized, and we all move forward.

If Faulk is terrible next year:
Blues expose him and give Seattle the sweetheart deal. Faulk, a 1st, and a good prospect. Yes, this sucks. But remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Seattle gets futures and gets closer to the cap floor. Blues lose significantly here, and we'll always regret the ultimate outcome of the Petro saga - but Faulk will be gone and cap freed to try again.

To me, in any of the three scenarios - the Blues can get out of this. Remember, Ron Francis loves Faulk, right?

That's very well thought out.

 

[Forge]

Seattle won't have any issues reaching the floor. They don't need to take on a long term bad contract to do it

 

[sfvega]

The 'getting rid of Faulk to Seattle' ship sailed out of harbor when Petro signed in Vegas.

Not really. If we can get out of that contract, we should. I know everyone is ready to get on the Faulk optimism train this off-season, but if the cost is right, we should absolutely get out of that.

 

[simon IC]

The 'getting rid of Faulk to Seattle' ship sailed out of harbor when Petro signed in Vegas.

Maybe, but leaving Faulk unprotected is still a good idea. If he doesn't have a good season, Seattle is not likely to select him, and we get to protect another defenseman. I suggest Mikkola or Scandella, depending on how well they respectively play. If Faulk does bounce back, (which I consider unlikely), they still might not take him, but if they do, we will be out of a bad contract. We will have to scramble to obtain another #2 RD, but I would be okay with that if it meant being out of that contract. ( I think Faulk will have a better season than the last one, but expecting him to reproduce his production that he had in Carolina, when playing second offensive fiddle to Torey Krug, is a bit naive).

 

[westc2]

I'm not convinced it has. Here are the scenarios I see:

If Faulk is great next year:
Blues can either feel more confident that their long-term investment is a good one and roll, or expose with the strong likelihood that Seattle drafts him (remember, Ron Francis loves him right?). Use the money to sign another top 4 RD. Either way, things are okay.

If Faulk is average next year:
Blues protect Parayko, Krug, and Dunn/Scandella - expose Faulk, and Seattle has to live with the reality that they have to reach the cap floor. Faulk might not be the most attractive Blues piece out there, but remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Attach a 3rd rounder to him and see what happens. Again, use the cap space to sign another top 4 RD. Not the best situation and, yes, lost Petro because of the signing - but long-term damage is minimized, and we all move forward.

If Faulk is terrible next year:
Blues expose him and give Seattle the sweetheart deal. Faulk, a 1st, and a good prospect. Yes, this sucks. But remember, Ron Francis loves him, right? Seattle gets futures and gets closer to the cap floor. Blues lose significantly here, and we'll always regret the ultimate outcome of the Petro saga - but Faulk will be gone and cap freed to try again.

To me, in any of the three scenarios - the Blues can get out of this. Remember, Ron Francis loves Faulk, right?

Faulk better be Bobby Orr next season...we just lost our franchise d-man because of that ridiculous trade.

 

[Colt55]

Maybe, but leaving Faulk unprotected is still a good idea. If he doesn't have a good season, Seattle is not likely to select him, and we get to protect another defenseman. I suggest Mikkola or Scandella, depending on how well they respectively play. If Faulk does bounce back, (which I consider unlikely), they still might not take him, but if they do, we will be out of a bad contract. We will have to scramble to obtain another #2 RD, but I would be okay with that if it meant being out of that contract. ( I think Faulk will have a better season than the last one, but expecting him to reproduce his production that he had in Carolina, when playing second offensive fiddle to Torey Krug, is a bit naive).

I have a feeling he will be better for two reasons.
1) the elephant in room is gone in petro.
2) he will mostly play on the rhd side

 

[simon IC]

I have a feeling he will be better for two reasons.
1) the elephant in room is gone in petro.
2) he will mostly play on the rhd side

Agreed, but I am not buying into this nonsense that he will go back to producing points like he did in Carolina.

 

[Guttersniped]

Typical Devils offer. We are a crap team that drafts poorly, give us a good, young player for guys that won't be good NHL players. Dunn should return a first and an NHL ready d man that stands a good chance of being in the top 4.

A Blues fan made the original offer but you do you buddy.

 

[Guttersniped]

Seattle won't have any issues reaching the floor. They don't need to take on a long term bad contract to do it

Seattle certainly won’t be 6.5m away from the floor. I guess now that Ottawa has reached the cap floor people need a new team with this imaginary problem.

 

[simon IC]

Seattle certainly won’t be 6.5m away from the floor. I guess now that Ottawa has reached the cap floor people need a new team with this imaginary problem.

Exactly. This supports my endorsement of leaving Faulk unprotected. Seattle is not likely to select him, and we can protect another defenseman. If they do take him, well yahoo.

 

[Colt55]

Agreed, but I am not buying into this nonsense that he will go back to producing points like he did in Carolina.

I would be happy with 40 and solid two way play. I would also be happy with an impproved powerplay.

 

[simon IC]

I would be happy with 40 and solid two way play. I would also be happy with an impproved powerplay.

You will NEVER get solid two-way play from Justin Faulk. However 40 pts is possible, and the PP will definitely improve with Krug and Faulk.

 

[Colt55]

You will NEVER get solid two-way play from Justin Faulk. However 40 pts is possible, and the PP will definitely improve with Krug and Faulk.

I think solid with a system is possible. Not great just slightly above average and 40pts.. I girl can dream right lol

 

[Blackjack]

Exactly. This supports my endorsement of leaving Faulk unprotected. Seattle is not likely to select him, and we can protect another defenseman. If they do take him, well yahoo.

Who gets protected? Krug, Parayko, Dunn? Does that leave anyone exposed on D that you wouldn't want to lose?

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

Who gets protected? Krug, Parayko, Dunn? Does that leave anyone exposed on D that you wouldn't want to lose?

As a Blues fan, this is why I want to trade Dunn this offseason. I protect Parayko, Krug, and Scandella. As Simon said earlier, no risk in exposing Faulk. Trade Dunn for a similar-aged forward or futures.

Blues don’t have to protect Mikkola or Perunovich, right?

 

[TK 421]

As a Blues fan, this is why I want to trade Dunn this offseason. I protect Parayko, Krug, and Scandella. As Simon said earlier, no risk in exposing Faulk. Trade Dunn for a similar-aged forward or futures.

Blues don’t have to protect Mikkola or Perunovich, right?

It's my understanding that if Mikkola has 40 games played at the time of the expansion draft that the Blues would have to protect him. Could be wrong about that though so hopefully someone else can confirm.