Blues Discussion Thread 2018-2019

[EastonBlues22]

Speed isn't important because it directly equates to better offense. It's important because it helps immensely when attempting to apply pressure to the other team to force them into mistakes, and to cover up the mistakes your own team makes. It has numerous positive benefits for both defense and goal scoring.

Want to pressure your opponent quickly to prevent him from finding an open man and cleanly moving the puck? Speed helps. Want every turnover you generate to become a scoring threat back the other way? Speed helps. Want to generate more odd man rushes on the breakout? Speed helps. Want to prevent other teams from getting odd man breaks against you? Speed helps. Want to apply consistent pressure on the backcheck while allowing all your forwards to go deep in the offensive zone? Speed helps. Want to consistently outnumber your opponent at the point of attack without overly exposing yourself? Speed helps. Want to win more races to loose pucks? Want to win the transition game battle? Want to stretch the ice and interfere with the other team's ability to play as a five man unit? Want to punish the other team if they activate their defense in the offensive zone? Want to wear down a team physically? Speed helps with all of that.

It's true that speed isn't the end-all-be-all of hockey. It won't help you much when you are tied up in a physical battle deep in the zone or around the net, for example. Other things (like high hockey IQ) can certainly help compensate for a lack of speed, and having only speed isn't nearly enough. Still, it can impact a lot of important areas in the modern game. Areas that give teams a decided advantage on both offense and defense.

If I could choose between two teams that were perfectly average in all respects (IQ, vision, shooting, passing, etc.), save for one being a top 5 net front presence team (both offensive and defensive for the sake of conversation), and one being a top 5 team in terms of speed, I'd take the team with more speed without hesitation. It just has too many advantages over the other team.

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Ok, take the right-handed shot out of the equation for the Center. Who is that player that checks the rest of the boxes?

Who is the right winger (and please don’t say Mark Stone)?

 

[The Note in MI]

Ok, take the right-handed shot out of the equation for the Center. Who is that player that checks the rest of the boxes?

Who is the right winger (and please don’t say Mark Stone)?

Agreed. I’ve spent a decent amount of time looking at all active players that would be a top 6 player for us and the list is very small, and it gets smaller when you consider franchise players/untouchables.

 

[The Note in MI]

Browse - CapFriendly - NHL Salary Caps

Both handed players, who do you think is actually going to be available via trade or FA?

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Ok, take the right-handed shot out of the equation for the Center. Who is that player that checks the rest of the boxes?

Who is the right winger (and please don’t say Mark Stone)?

Wayne Simmonds.

 

[The Note in MI]

Wayne Simmonds.

Good player and a lot of what we need, is he going to be available? He’s a year or two older than a perfect fit unfortunately. But that’s something I think we could live with assuming our prospects develop. He’s a righty who plays in front of the net.

I would find it painful to pay the flyers so many duties for two players in two years haha.

What’s his worth? He would be a one season rental at 4m does he re sign?

WPG first + Thompson + B/C level prospect + conditional pick (2nd?) if he resigns

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Good player and a lot of what we need, is he going to be available? He’s a year or two older than a perfect fit unfortunately. But that’s something I think we could live with assuming our prospects develop. He’s a righty who plays in front of the net.

I would find it painful to pay the flyers so many duties for two players in two years haha.

What’s his worth? He would be a one season rental at 4m does he re sign?

WPG first + Thompson + B/C level prospect + conditional pick (2nd?) if he resigns

If that’s the cost, the market just isn’t right for us, imo. I have no interest in sending Philly 3 first round picks and a former first rounder (plus some!) in two years. It isn’t even that it’s to the same team, you just can’t be that careless with your assets, period. So if that’s the cost for a top-6 winger, count us out. We still need to be building through the draft, it’s the best way to successfully build a squad, and we won’t do that by trading away all of our assets (some of which we paid a big price for) for 1 year of a top-6 fix.

If we’re going to find a fix, it needs to be a (mostly) hockey trade, imo. We can even out a little bit, but I’m not filling gaps in value with top prospects or first rounders unless the return is just silly.

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Good player and a lot of what we need, is he going to be available? He’s a year or two older than a perfect fit unfortunately. But that’s something I think we could live with assuming our prospects develop. He’s a righty who plays in front of the net.

I would find it painful to pay the flyers so many duties for two players in two years haha.

What’s his worth? He would be a one season rental at 4m does he re sign?

WPG first + Thompson + B/C level prospect + conditional pick (2nd?) if he resigns

This isn’t a personal attack by any means, but I love the concept that people have that we’re giving away our future through trades.

We gave up a first last year, yet still picked twice in the first round AND acquired a 70pt C. This year, we gained another one by trading a rental(who could come back) and also have a slim chance of a top 3OA pick. If we don’t get that pick, we will have a 1st in next year’s draft.

We’ve picked 4 times in between the 20-35th picks the last two drafts and have came away with Thomas, Kyrou, Kostin, and Thompson. I think our future is just fine. Even if we trade Tage+WPG 1st, we’ll be acquiring a legit top 6 guy. Even if it’s Simmonds, I’d see him re-signing with us anyways. He’s a player that can slide into a 3RW/leadership role when he’s no longer a top 6 guy, and hell, you could always send him to Seattle if he goes on a sharp decline in a few years.

 

[Evocable Manager]

This board is incredibly confusing.

People complain about the team lacking speed but then say they wanna trade for Wayne Simmonds? The two don't go hand in hand.

As for the Simmonds idea, I'd pass. We'd be paying for his decline and players with his play style decline awfully quick. I'd rather acquire a play with more mileage or who is in his prime (or entering it).

 

[The Note in MI]

This isn’t a personal attack by any means, but I love the concept that people have that we’re giving away our future through trades.

We gave up a first last year, yet still picked twice in the first round AND acquired a 70pt C. This year, we gained another one by trading a rental(who could come back) and also have a slim chance of a top 3OA pick. If we don’t get that pick, we will have a 1st in next year’s draft.

We’ve picked 4 times in between the 20-35th picks the last two drafts and have came away with Thomas, Kyrou, Kostin, and Thompson. I think our future is just fine. Even if we trade Tage+WPG 1st, we’ll be acquiring a legit top 6 guy. Even if it’s Simmonds, I’d see him re-signing with us anyways. He’s a player that can slide into a 3RW/leadership role when he’s no longer a top 6 guy, and hell, you could always send him to Seattle if he goes on a sharp decline in a few years.

Not sure if you mean not directed at me, but my comment was entirely referring to us basically trading away a ton of assets to the flyers. It would feel less painful if it were a different team, but I could live with it assuming Simmonds brings what we need.

Of all our futures Thomas is my only untouchable and Kyrou+ should only be bringing in a stud RHS RW. I have zero qualms moving any of the rest of our picks or prospects (I’d obviously keep a lottery pick if that happens).

I’ve posted this many a time over the last 6 months or so and I think that many agree with it as I’ve seen variations lately but our penciled in bones of a top 9 would be:

Schwartz Schenn RW
Fabbri 1/2C Tarasenko
Steen Thomas —
— — —

Fill in the — with Berglund/Sobotka/Brodziak/Jaskin/Barbashev/Soshnikov/Sanford/Sundquist/Blais/Foley/Stevens/Musil/Thorburn etc if they remain after making moves (we have so many Bottom 6ers)

That means we need to sign or trade for two players, or potentially Kyrou Thompson or Kostin step in as a RW. We also need to move a few of our surplus bottom 6ers.

Even with a summer in which we fail miserably we could be looking at

Schwartz Schenn Kyrou/Thompson
Fabbri Stastny/Bozak Tarasenko
Steen Thomas Anyone

Which is while not optimal is quite competitive Compared to this seasons roster.

A dream lineup would be

Schwartz Schenn Gallagher
Fabbri Tavares Tarasenko
Steen Thomas Berglund
Barbashev Brodziak Soshnikov

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Not sure if you mean not directed at me, but my comment was entirely referring to us basically trading away a ton of assets to the flyers. It would feel less painful if it were a different team, but I could live with it assuming Simmonds brings what we need.

Of all our futures Thomas is my only untouchable and Kyrou+ should only be bringing in a stud RHS RW. I have zero qualms moving any of the rest of our picks or prospects (I’d obviously keep a lottery pick if that happens).

I’ve posted this many a time over the last 6 months or so and I think that many agree with it as I’ve seen variations lately but our penciled in bones of a top 9 would be:

Schwartz Schenn RW
Fabbri 1/2C Tarasenko
Steen Thomas —
— — —

Fill in the — with Berglund/Sobotka/Brodziak/Jaskin/Barbashev/Soshnikov/Sanford/Sundquist/Blais/Foley/Stevens/Musil/Thorburn etc if they remain after making moves (we have so many Bottom 6ers)

That means we need to sign or trade for two players, or potentially Kyrou Thompson or Kostin step in as a RW. We also need to move a few of our surplus bottom 6ers.

Even with a summer in which we fail miserably we could be looking at

Schwartz Schenn Kyrou/Thompson
Fabbri Stastny/Bozak Tarasenko
Steen Thomas Anyone

Which is while not optimal is quite competitive Compared to this seasons roster.

A dream lineup would be

Schwartz Schenn Gallagher
Fabbri Tavares Tarasenko
Steen Thomas Berglund
Barbashev Brodziak Soshnikov

Yeah it wasn’t directed at you personally. I’ve just seen people thinking we need to hoard our 1st we got from WPG this year. I agree all of it to one team is kinda weird, but both teams won that last trade so why not try it again IMO.

I, like many others, full on agree with your roster construction for next year. We need to bring in a RHS for our top 6 whether it’s C or RW. I do think we’ll make a deal at the draft, then sign a big name UFA.

 

[Brian39]

The Ryan O'Reilly situation in Buffalo is really interesting. His contract is a risk since it's almost all signing bonuses and he has another 5 years at $7.5 mil against the cap. Eichel is clearly their top center moving forward and the plan is obviously for Mittlstadt to be the 2C in the not-so-distant future. The exit interview, past contract negotiations, and the Tim Horton's incident a few summers ago definitely raise character issues but you have to wonder how much being on a not terrible team would remedy any issues that are there. On the ice, he's still a lock for 55 points and a good bet for 60-65 while playing amazing defensive hockey. This year he had 24 goals and 61 points despite in the defensive zone 57% of the time.

I have to imagine that Buffalo will listen to offers and I'd be curious to see what it would actually take to get him (and how much salary they would be willing/need to retain to make it work). I tend to be in the camp that believes winning solves everything and believe that our lineup would be a heck of a lot better with him in it (assuming no Tavares). I doubt Buffalo gets the value they'd want for him at the draft with Tavares still in play, so maybe part of a 'we missed Tavares' consolation plan is going after him. Even taking all red flags into account, a 55-65 point center who wins 60% of his draws, is borderline elite defensively and willing to be a net front presence would go along way towards helping this team.

 

[MissouriMook]

The Ryan O'Reilly situation in Buffalo is really interesting. His contract is a risk since it's almost all signing bonuses and he has another 5 years at $7.5 mil against the cap...

If you can swallow the cap hit, he would make an intriguing acquisition on July 2. He is owed a signing bonus on July 1 of $7.5M and another $1M in salary for the coming season. Based on my understanding of the salary cap, if we acquire him after that bonus is paid we are not on the hook to reimburse it to BUF. At that point, if this is correct, we would owe him $25M for the last 5 years of his contract even though his cap hit would still be $7.5M per year. For this organization, that might be a deal worth exploring depending on the cost in picks and players.

 

[Brian39]

If you can swallow the cap hit, he would make an intriguing acquisition on July 2. He is owed a signing bonus on July 1 of $7.5M and another $1M in salary for the coming season. Based on my understanding of the salary cap, if we acquire him after that bonus is paid we are not on the hook to reimburse it to BUF. At that point, if this is correct, we would owe him $25M for the last 5 years of his contract even though his cap hit would still be $7.5M per year. For this organization, that might be a deal worth exploring depending on the cost in picks and players.

Yup, the same bonuses that make his contract buyout proof could help facilitate a trade after the $7.5 mil bonus is paid this year. You're correct that we would not have to 'reimburse' Buffalo if they paid his bonus on 7/1 and traded him to us 7/2. The downside of "only" owing him $25 mil over the rest of the contract is that we would owe him $5 mil on 7/1 of every season (including a potential lockout season). I have no idea how ownership would view that type of contract. In theory, it could absolutely be be a good contract for us to take on if our ownership is a little weary of spending to an increased cap right after missing out on playoff revenue. It would help the bottom line budget this year without taking away the competitive advantage of being a cap team.

Assuming we don't win the Tavares jackpot, we should absolutely be able to make the cap fit. We'd still have about $6.6 mil (plus any cap increase and any cap freed up from trades) to re-sign Ed, Fabbri, a backup and 3 more roster spots*. Realistically, we'd be looking at about $10 mil in space to make those signings and then any other 'big' acquisitions would require shedding Sobotka, Bergie, or Gunnar. Exceedingly doable. No one is due a huge raise for 2019/20, so the earliest 'cap trouble' it could cause is for the 2020/21 season. Even with O'Reilly, we are still looking to be in decent shape for that summer, it gives Army 2 years to manage the cap in preparation and I'd expect the cap to increase another few million by then.

The question would be whether the player is worth the cap allocation (which I think he would be).

*For the purpose of this calculation, I removed Nolan Stevens and Mitch Reinke from Capfriendly's estimate of next year's cap situation. That gives us 16 guys under contract next year who were on the roster this year and about a little over $14 mil in cap space. Adding O'Reilly brings us down to about $6.6 mil in space with 6 roster spots to fill. Obviously Thompson might be in the AHL, Gunnar/J-Bo might be on LTIR and we'll likely shed a contract or two, but this is the simple freehand to illustrate that we have the cap space.

 

[Ranksu]

Ok, take the right-handed shot out of the equation for the Center. Who is that player that checks the rest of the boxes?

Who is the right winger (and please don’t say Mark Stone)?

https://usatftw.files.wordpress.com...-st-louis-blues-at-c1.jpg?w=1000&h=600&crop=1

 

[Celtic Note]

Speed isn't important because it directly equates to better offense. It's important because it helps immensely when attempting to apply pressure to the other team to force them into mistakes, and to cover up the mistakes your own team makes. It has numerous positive benefits for both defense and goal scoring.

Want to pressure your opponent quickly to prevent him from finding an open man and cleanly moving the puck? Speed helps. Want every turnover you generate to become a scoring threat back the other way? Speed helps. Want to generate more odd man rushes on the breakout? Speed helps. Want to prevent other teams from getting odd man breaks against you? Speed helps. Want to apply consistent pressure on the backcheck while allowing all your forwards to go deep in the offensive zone? Speed helps. Want to consistently outnumber your opponent at the point of attack without overly exposing yourself? Speed helps. Want to win more races to loose pucks? Want to win the transition game battle? Want to stretch the ice and interfere with the other team's ability to play as a five man unit? Want to punish the other team if they activate their defense in the offensive zone? Want to wear down a team physically? Speed helps with all of that.

It's true that speed isn't the end-all-be-all of hockey. It won't help you much when you are tied up in a physical battle deep in the zone or around the net, for example. Other things (like high hockey IQ) can certainly help compensate for a lack of speed, and having only speed isn't nearly enough. Still, it can impact a lot of important areas in the modern game. Areas that give teams a decided advantage on both offense and defense.

If I could choose between two teams that were perfectly average in all respects (IQ, vision, shooting, passing, etc.), save for one being a top 5 net front presence team (both offensive and defensive for the sake of conversation), and one being a top 5 team in terms of speed, I'd take the team with more speed without hesitation. It just has too many advantages over the other team.

First off, I agree.

With our team as assembled more quality players with speed should be favored over physicality. But, it would also be good to add a guy with net front presence on the PP IMO. Bringing in a guy who brings both would be ideal.

My issue with the need for speed quest is that too often people make it seem like speed will fix everything. I get that you are not saying that and what follows isn’t aimed at you.

We had two very fast players in MPS and Yak. Both were inept at using their speed to their advantage. Thompson also doesn’t use his speed to his advantage enough for his speed to be a big benefit. Adding players that don’t use their speed well is similar to players that can stick handle in a phone booth, but can’t make plays happen. They don’t utilize their biggest assets and in turn the team sees promise of something more but never gets it.

If we are talking about acquiring players that use their speed well, I point to two Blues on opposite ends of the talent spectrum as references. Fabbri and Upshall created a lot of positives for the Blues with how they used their speed (Upshall to a lesser extent, obviously). You documented a lot of ways that speed brings value in your post and they both brought those elements to varying degrees, so I won’t rehash those.

Both players have traits other than speed that make them valuable. Their speed is icing on the cake to me. I guess the long winded point is that speed isn’t the first thing we should look for in a player nor is it the second thing. You know this, as you said as much in your post. Others either don’t see it that way or don’t communicate that way.

If we can find a player with IQ, work ethic and good skill with some speed to top it off, then that’s the player I want. Now the challenging part is finding that player.

 

[HighNote]

I'm just gonna lay out my dream lineup that's never going to happen because I'm bored.

Fabbri - Tavares - Tarasenko
Schwartz - Schenn - Kyrou
Berglund - Thomas - Steen
Jaskin - Brodziak - Reaves

Dunn - Pietrangelo
Edmundson - Parayko
Bouwmeester - Schmaltz

Allen
Hutton

 

[tfriede2]

I'm just gonna lay out my dream lineup that's never going to happen because I'm bored.

Fabbri - Tavares - Tarasenko
Schwartz - Schenn - Kyrou
Berglund - Thomas - Steen
Jaskin - Brodziak - Reaves

Dunn - Pietrangelo
Edmundson - Parayko
Bouwmeester - Schmaltz

Allen
Hutton

Dream bigger, my friend.

 

[Zamadoo]

Dream bigger, my friend.

Ya dude, more like this:

Blues win lottery, select Tkachuk, and promptly trade Sobotka, Berglund, Steen, Sanford, Gunnarsson, Bouwmeester, Allen, 2018 1st (WPG), 2019 1st, 2020 2nd for Matthew Tkachuk and Mike Smith.

Re-sign: Ed 2y/$8mil, Sosh 1y/$1mil, Schmaltz 1y/$1mil, Binnington 1y/$1mil

UFA signings: Tavares 3y/$40mil, Minors Depth

Centers

LW	C	RW	LD	RD	G
Fabbri	Tavares	Tarasenko	Edmundson	Pietrangelo	Smith
Schwartz	Schenn	Kyrou	Dunn	Parayko	Husso
Tkachuk	Thomas	Tkachuk	Mikkola	Bortuzzo	Binnington
Blais	Barbashev	Soshnikov	Walman	Schmaltz	Fitzpatrick
Foley	Stevens	Thorburn	Butler	Reinke
MacEachern	Bleakley	Thompson	Sergeev
	Musil	Kostin
	Kaspick	Poganski

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Cap hit = $65mil

 

[Dbrownss]

I sure the hell hope the Blues dont select Tkachuk if they win the lottery with Dahlin, Zadina and Svechnikov sitting there

 

[Stealth JD]

I sure the hell hope the Blues dont select Tkachuk if they win the lottery with Dahlin, Zadina and Svechnikov sitting there

I was wondering what lottery we could have had to end up picking 6th, where selecting Tkachuk would make sense.

 

[MissouriMook]

When moving players off the roster or cobbling together a proposed roster for next year, don't forget that we occasionally have to kill penalties. I'm all for moving on from Sobotka, but we would be losing a good PK player. I would really like to bring Brodziak back as 4C if only for his excellence in killing penalties. Despite the fact that he will eventually excel at it, I don't see a kid like Thomas being given too much responsibility on the PK early on, so you're going to need at least 6 forwards in the lineup that can do it well.

 

[carter333167]

Speed isn't important because it directly equates to better offense. It's important because it helps immensely when attempting to apply pressure to the other team to force them into mistakes, and to cover up the mistakes your own team makes. It has numerous positive benefits for both defense and goal scoring.

Want to pressure your opponent quickly to prevent him from finding an open man and cleanly moving the puck? Speed helps. Want every turnover you generate to become a scoring threat back the other way? Speed helps. Want to generate more odd man rushes on the breakout? Speed helps. Want to prevent other teams from getting odd man breaks against you? Speed helps. Want to apply consistent pressure on the backcheck while allowing all your forwards to go deep in the offensive zone? Speed helps. Want to consistently outnumber your opponent at the point of attack without overly exposing yourself? Speed helps. Want to win more races to loose pucks? Want to win the transition game battle? Want to stretch the ice and interfere with the other team's ability to play as a five man unit? Want to punish the other team if they activate their defense in the offensive zone? Want to wear down a team physically? Speed helps with all of that.

It's true that speed isn't the end-all-be-all of hockey. It won't help you much when you are tied up in a physical battle deep in the zone or around the net, for example. Other things (like high hockey IQ) can certainly help compensate for a lack of speed, and having only speed isn't nearly enough. Still, it can impact a lot of important areas in the modern game. Areas that give teams a decided advantage on both offense and defense.

If I could choose between two teams that were perfectly average in all respects (IQ, vision, shooting, passing, etc.), save for one being a top 5 net front presence team (both offensive and defensive for the sake of conversation), and one being a top 5 team in terms of speed, I'd take the team with more speed without hesitation. It just has too many advantages over the other team.

Wonderful post. And imo the Blues need to add significantly in this area. Fabbri is often cited as a speedy player, and I agree that he has a nice burst, but he doesn’t have really high top end speed.

Speed will help massively on dump and chase, on the forecheck, etc. o think the fastest straight line skater we have right now is parayko. On the rare occasion where he skates the puck up the ice, he always wins the race to thre puck on his own dump and chase.

In any case, it’s why I’ve stressed that we need to keep kyrou to see what we have in him. He would instantly be our fastest forward, one of our best overall skaters, and he seems to have a lot of skill at top speed. This team needs a player like that immensely. Oh, he’s also a RHS RW. In sum, he fills a huge need.

 

[HighNote]

Dream bigger, my friend.

It's more of a dream scenario that is actually relatively possible. Tavares signing, Kyrou pushing for Calder, Thomas plays great. I didn't go too far into fantasy land.

 

[HighNote]

Wonderful post. And imo the Blues need to add significantly in this area. Fabbri is often cited as a speedy player, and I agree that he has a nice burst, but he doesn’t have really high top end speed.

Speed will help massively on dump and chase, on the forecheck, etc. o think the fastest straight line skater we have right now is parayko. On the rare occasion where he skates the puck up the ice, he always wins the race to thre puck on his own dump and chase.

In any case, it’s why I’ve stressed that we need to keep kyrou to see what we have in him. He would instantly be our fastest forward, one of our best overall skaters, and he seems to have a lot of skill at top speed. This team needs a player like that immensely. Oh, he’s also a RHS RW. In sum, he fills a huge need.

I find Kyrou more untouchable than Thomas at the moment because of the reasons you listed, but that could change depending on if we miss out on JT/don't acquire center help, or if we go after a right winger.