Blues Trade Proposals 2021-2022 Part 3
- Thread starter simon IC
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Thread title reads like these are all your trade proposals. Love it!
Responding to post from the previous thread.
The Blues ARE a crappy team when it comes to what our goalies face. We are 8th worst xGA/60 (all situations) in the league. Husso has been insane on a crappy defensive team. Husso and the fact that we can score goals is what keeps us from actually being a crappy team in the standings.
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
The reality of the situation is:
The Blues are probably stuck with Binnington for the near future. I think its reasonable to expect him to function to the level of an average starter, and if he does that reliably he is movable on that contract. It doesn't mean he'll have a lot of value, but at least not an anchor. However, he has trade protection and the Blue may have to add a bit of sweetener. But I don't see a move like that being viable for a year or two mabye.
Husso has had a great year. He looks like a good option for a tandem partner and maybe an above average starter. I don't think he's going to maintain the stats he has had, but I think he'll probably outperform Binnington for the next year or two at a minimum. The playoffs are going to be a big moment for him.
As much as Armstrong would have preferred to have a low-salary back-up and let Binnington be the starter, the team is going to have to allocate more salary to that position. I could see signing Husso to more term than would be ideal, but it would be with a view toward trading one of the two within a year or so. The team will be 'overpaying' at that position in the short term (like when we had Allen/Binnington) but it gives Binnington time to rehabilitate his performance and value. If he totally goes in the tank, that is a different problem.
Husso will be able to command a pretty nice contract, I'd think. Maybe the Blues can't win that bidding regardless. But I bet Armstrong will be willing to give him a larger and longer contract than most of us are comfortable with. But it would not have strong trade protection. One of those two guys would be moved within a couple years.
The Blues are probably stuck with Binnington for the near future. I think its reasonable to expect him to function to the level of an average starter, and if he does that reliably he is movable on that contract. It doesn't mean he'll have a lot of value, but at least not an anchor. However, he has trade protection and the Blue may have to add a bit of sweetener. But I don't see a move like that being viable for a year or two mabye.
Husso has had a great year. He looks like a good option for a tandem partner and maybe an above average starter. I don't think he's going to maintain the stats he has had, but I think he'll probably outperform Binnington for the next year or two at a minimum. The playoffs are going to be a big moment for him.
As much as Armstrong would have preferred to have a low-salary back-up and let Binnington be the starter, the team is going to have to allocate more salary to that position. I could see signing Husso to more term than would be ideal, but it would be with a view toward trading one of the two within a year or so. The team will be 'overpaying' at that position in the short term (like when we had Allen/Binnington) but it gives Binnington time to rehabilitate his performance and value. If he totally goes in the tank, that is a different problem.
Husso will be able to command a pretty nice contract, I'd think. Maybe the Blues can't win that bidding regardless. But I bet Armstrong will be willing to give him a larger and longer contract than most of us are comfortable with. But it would not have strong trade protection. One of those two guys would be moved within a couple years.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,858
- 15,119
I was about to make a similar post. We aren't propping up his individual numbers with a good system, so he is probably confident that he can put up good individual numbers behind pretty much any NHL team. GMs overvalue wins in Vezina voting, but in contract negotiations they pretty regularly pay goalies putting up a competent SV% on a bad team without racking up wins.
I don't think that this team scoring goals in front of him to earn more wins will be much of a difference in his subsequent contract and there is an argument to be made that him signing here for 2-3 years could lead to the offense suffering a large hit for 2023/24 and beyond.
Going to a true bottom 5 team for a bit more money would probably be a mistake. But I don't think that we are any more appealing than 20+ other teams in terms of how the team will impact his ability to get a subsequent contract.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,858
- 15,119
I think the only way Army can do this is if he is willing to (and has ownership approval) to buy out Binner in the summer of 2023. If you sign Husso to a market value deal, there is a pretty realistic scenario where he regresses and both contracts are not moveable next summer. In that scenario, a Husso buyout would still leave the team spending $7M+ in net with no viable goalie, so buying out Binner is the only way to still have money to fix the issue.
I think the most likely scenario is that one of the two contracts would be moveable next summer. I'm not sure it will be the goalie we'd like to move, but one would be moveable and we'd probably have to move it no matter what. But it is not a guarantee and we absolutely can't box ourselves into having around $10M locked up in a tandem that isn't providing league-average goaltending in the same summer where Kyrou and Thomas are due their raises.
We have to have an escape hatch if we sign Husso to a market-value deal. If Army can't (or won't) buy out Binner in 2023 in a worst-case scenario, then we just can't give Husso a market value deal. I think we should be willing to buy out Binner if he doesn't rebound next year. But that is easy for me to say since it isn't my $21M being spent.
ChicagoBlues
Please Continue
- Oct 24, 2006
- 17,250
- 7,735
I'm glad you italicized the last sentence in your post. I think what you're saying is that understanding what is most important for Husso is the key. Does he value subsequent contract or winning or something else?
What is most important today in this scenario may not be what is most important tomorrow or in a different scenario. Kinda cool to think about.
I saw on the main board a Tkachuk for Kyrou, 1st, Kostin, and Scandella and I don't think I take that trade. I think Tkachuk is gonna get above 9 million on his next contract and having that is going to require a lot of cap gymnastics for us next year.
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
If Tkachuk wears a Bluenotes, it should be because he signed as a free agent. The notion of making a big package to acquire him makes no sense to me.
BrokenFace
Registered User
We shouldn't be considering trading Kyrou for another winger anyway. We shouldn't consider trading Kyrou for anything less than a return that somehow fixes both our LHD and goalie issues.
Kyrou and 1st for Sanderson (OTT), Edvinsson (DET), Power/Dahlin (BUF), L. Hughes (NJD), Heiskanen (DAL)....something like that would be desirable...but I have no idea why those teams would trade young, stud defenders, so it's likely wishful thinking. I don't think Kyrou has the value without some decent adds to pry the guys we'd want.
I understand this perspective but where does the money come from knowing that you have to sign Kyrou and especially Thomas who is going to be an elite center in this league? Watching the Buchy/Tarasenko/Thomas line they seem to be unstoppable so it would seem that Tarasenko is more important than ROR going forward. ROR is a 55 point player and signing him to a long term contract watching him get even slower than he is doesn’t make sense to me. I see Backes all over again, which was not a pretty site in Boston. Having Krug, Faulk, Schenn, Parayko, Binnington locked in to long term contracts, it just doesn’t make sense to lock in another aging player to a long term contract knowing that you have to pay Kyrou and Thomas. I guess I could see trading Kyrou but no way do I ever trade Thomas. If you keep them you will have to pay them and that money has to come from somewhere.
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
Even more reason not to give a big package that depletes the Blues’ futures by giving up 1sts and young ELC players. Maybe OReilly and Tarasenko are gone by then, but you need young guys who stick on the roster to help create salary space.
Bluesnatic27
Registered User
- Aug 5, 2011
- 4,806
- 3,464
This post sounds more like you wish to remove O’Reilly istead of acquiring Tkachuk. You listed a few contracts that also cost quite a bit of money and could be removed to make cap space. There will be a team that would be willing to take Krug’s contract given its term, cap hit, and his overall offensive production. Brandon Saad is making 4 mill a season, so his contract wouldn’t be hard to shed if push comes to shove. I’m not advocating to remove these guys, but to single out O’Reilly and justify it through cap hit seems myopic. There are other ways to find space and Armstrong is pretty damn good at it. Maybe that does mean to move on for O’Reilly. I can definitely see the argument for it. But there are other players that are far less important to the team’s overall infrastructure right now. Let’s not forget about how important center depth is to this team. And I would trust O’Reilly providing better value even as a 2nd line center then anyone else the Blues have on the roster or in the system.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,858
- 15,119
The exact same place the money would come from if you traded for Tkachuk before he hit UFA. I think Tkachuk will cost way too much for us. But he isn't going to cost less if we trade for him this summer instead of signing him next summer. If the Blues decide to allocate the insane cap dollars it will cost to bring him here, then they absolutely should do it via free agency and not by sending a bunch of trade assets to get him a year earlier.
Trading for him requires a $9M+ cap commitment immediately. Either $9M+ for next season followed by $10M+ on a long term deal or $10M+ right off the bat. Possibly/probably $11M+. We would need to shed dollars ASAP. We would be much better off shedding those dollars for other cost controlled assets instead of shedding them (and more assets) to get him a year earlier.
Again, I don't want the Blues to bring him in at the price he will demand. But if they do, they absolutely shouldn't pay other assets for the chance to do so.
Last edited:
ScratchCatFever
Registered User
- Oct 14, 2018
- 1,786
- 3,069
Jersey Fan 12
Positive Vibes
- Nov 20, 2006
- 7,496
- 3,278
Decent bump in goals for McGing in his second AHL season but know almost nothing about him.
Is he a younger version of someone like Chase De Leo with the Devils/Comets or is there NHL potential in his game?
Is he a younger version of someone like Chase De Leo with the Devils/Comets or is there NHL potential in his game?
joe galiba
Registered User
- Apr 16, 2020
- 2,421
- 2,705
I am not so sure of this
if the Blues are going to try and keep Perron, ROR, and Vladi they need cheap young talent to mix in the lineup
ChicagoBlues
Please Continue
- Oct 24, 2006
- 17,250
- 7,735
I think the TDL price for a pre-injury Chychrun is now irrelevant.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
If they don't re-sign Leddy then they have a bigger cornerstone idea in mind for LD.
Perunovich and Krug do the same things and it's hard to envision both on the roster. If Michigan State's Krug were traded, a rising Detroit might be appealing for him.
Perunovich and Krug do the same things and it's hard to envision both on the roster. If Michigan State's Krug were traded, a rising Detroit might be appealing for him.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,858
- 15,119
Detroit makes sense as an eventual destination, but I don't see him having any interest in waiving for them this summer. They may be on the rise, but they aren't yet in the ballpark of actual contenders yet. They finished with 74 points and a -82 goal differential.
But more importantly, most of the roster are still just seat warmers until their prospects and young players actualize. Fabbri is the only player on the roster under contract beyond 2023/24 and the bulk of their veterans become UFAs a year from now (Larkin, Bertuzzi, Suter, Sunny, Erne, Gagne, DeKeyser, M Staal, Oesterle, and all the goalies hit UFA either this summer or next).
That team is still multiple years away from competing in the playoffs. There is little incentive for Krug to waive his NTC to go from being a top 4 guy on a top 10 team to go to a team that is still midway through a long-term rebuild.
I cold see him waiving to go there in a couple years when they have actually risen into and through the middle of the pack (and we are potentially fading in the other direction). But that's a couple years out.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 53,386
- 17,279
Not really sure where to put this thought, but I'll put it here since it fits with off-season plans. If Binnington finishes off Minnesota and plays well against Colorado, I'm going to be fascinated what happens with Binnington/Husso. Most likely scenario will simply be that Husso walks, but part of his hope for a big payday was a strong playoffs. He'll still get good money, but a strong playoff series or 2 would've guaranteed a team making a bet on him being their long-term starter IMO. Now, if Binnington has that strong playoff performance, then his trade value returns to some extent.
joe galiba
Registered User
- Apr 16, 2020
- 2,421
- 2,705
Girard, Toews, Makar, and Byram are all 190 lbs or less, and Toews and Byram are listed at 6-1, Makar is listed at 5-11 and Girard is listed at 5-10, so I really do not see us having a 5-9 Krug and 5-10 Perunovich as being a big deal, especially as they are the only guys who will be under 200 lbs
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
GDT: 2024-25 season game 57 LA Kings vs Dallas Stars @ 5:00pm 2/28/25- Latest: RayMartyniukTotems
-
