Blues Trade Proposals 2023-2024

[Blueswin]

I love Armstrong as the G.M. If he was ever replaced I wonder if they would look at someone like Marc Hunter.

 

[Spektre]

What has Army done that has been jumping from lane to lane. Do you believe that GMs are only able to sell or only able to buy at the deadline, they can't do both?

Given the right scenario they can. Adding a top 9 player to this roster isn’t the right move, in my opinion, especially if it’s a rental

 

[bleedblue1223]

Given the right scenario they can. Adding a top 9 player to this roster isn’t the right move, in my opinion, especially if it’s a rental

And do you know the exact players he looked into and for what cost?

 

[stl76]

Thoughts on Brady Skjei potentially being a UFA this summer? I think we'd like to get younger on D and this doesn't accomplish that but he could be an excellent Parayko partner. Too old at 29 to be giving term? Or a potential solution?

Good player but too old. Someone is going to sign him to a deal in excess of $6x6 and I hope it isn’t the Blues. There’s a decent chance he lives up to the contract but it doesn’t make sense for the Blues IMO given our situation.

 

[Spektre]

And do you know the exact players he looked into and for what cost?

I already gave my reasons and I stand by them. It’s okay if you disagree.

I can’t see how this team can be legitimate in 2-3 years. If you want to say turning the corner in 3 years, ok.

 

[BlueDream]

Here you go again. You tell me to "look them up" and to "stop being lazy", but all you have to offer is "guys like..." and then name guys who were hired without GM experience, but THEY AREN'T AVAILABLE! You know as well as I do that if we hired a guy that has no experience people would be calling for his head after the first bad deal. Look at all the heat (rightly so) that Grier is getting in San Jose and Conroy in Calgary - is that really what you want here?

So let's look at some of the other ex-Blues players that you and others seem to be pining for: MacInnis, Pronger, Steen - give me some specifics about why exactly you believe that any of them would be expected to do a better job than Armstrong, if they would even want the job, What skills do they have that qualifies them to hold that position, despite having never even been an assistant GM anywhere? I'm all ears if you want to start talking about some non-traditional candidates and assistants ready to move up to the GM job, but you won't even offer one name of a guy that is available. You just point to the fact that other teams have found a guy. You're the one demanding change, so until you start naming names and making a case, you're the one being lazy as far as I'm concerned.

I guess you somehow don’t understand how front offices work. Do you think there’s just one GM in there doing everything? There’s advisors, an assistant GM, director of scouting, directors of player development, etc. There’s a lot of top executives in every front office.

How do you think people get GM jobs? They work their way up and get hired from one of those positions, as a lot of them are groomed for it and want to be a GM. That’s how Bill Armstrong got poached from us.

I’m literally telling you that to find a new GM, we should identify teams that have drafted well, and made good moves, and interview those executives that are making those moves. You know, do the exact thing that every other team does when they hire a new GM. That’s how the names I gave you have become successful. They were part of good organizations and front offices until a team with a GM opening hired them away. I don’t need to give you specific names, that is irrelevant. I’m not the one that is going to be conducting the search.

You’re acting like I’m speaking a made up language when this is really just common sense. You act like it’s impossible to find a candidate when there are numerous options available. You are blind to how hockey works, in that case.

people thought bill armstrong would be amazing in Arizona...but how's that going for him? if there's to be a new GM in the near future, it shouldn't be someone internal.

He’s been fine??? I mean, that organization has terrible ownership, and doesn’t even have a real arena. No players want to go there. What is he supposed to do besides accumulate a ton of draft picks (which is what he’s done)?

 

[MissouriMook]

<snip> I’m literally telling you that to find a new GM, we should identify teams that have drafted well, and made good moves, and interview those executives that are making those moves. You know, do the exact thing that every other team does when they hire a new GM. That’s how the names I gave you have become successful. They were part of good organizations and front offices until a team with a GM opening hired them away. I don’t need to give you specific names, that is irrelevant. I’m not the one that is going to be conducting the search.

You’re acting like I’m speaking a made up language when this is really just common sense. You act like it’s impossible to find a candidate when there are numerous options available. You are blind to how hockey works, in that case. <snip>

Look, we’re on our fourth or fifth volley on this and getting nowhere, so I’m going to try to find some common ground here. I don’t disagree with you at all that plenty of GMs have been hired by identifying an executive in another team’s front office (or their own) and bringing them in to their first time in a GM role. But my first point here is that for every Sakic or Yzerman there are quite a few really bad hires.

And because of this, my second point is (and has been throughout this discussion) that saying this can happen without suggesting specific names for discussion on the topic of a potential Army replacement is, to me, nothing more than wishcasting. If someone were to toss out a specific name, we would all be able to discuss the pros and cons of their resume as it is relevant to the role of GM and share opinions about whether or not their resume and their perceived strengths and weaknesses would be an improvement over the incumbent. I just think that pointing out the history of previous GM hires, and especially pointing out the previous successes without acknowledging the previous failures, is nothing more than saying “it worked before so it will obviously work again” while ignoring that the success of going this route is totally dependent on the specific candidate. Because I feel like it doesn’t work out (way) more often than it does.

 

[Celtic Note]

Look, we’re on our fourth or fifth volley on this and getting nowhere, so I’m going to try to find some common ground here. I don’t disagree with you at all that plenty of GMs have been hired by identifying an executive in another team’s front office (or their own) and bringing them in to their first time in a GM role. But my first point here is that for every Sakic or Yzerman there are quite a few really bad hires.

And because of this, my second point is (and has been throughout this discussion) that saying this can happen without suggesting specific names for discussion on the topic of a potential Army replacement is, to me, nothing more than wishcasting. If someone were to toss out a specific name, we would all be able to discuss the pros and cons of their resume as it is relevant to the role of GM and share opinions about whether or not their resume and their perceived strengths and weaknesses would be an improvement over the incumbent. I just think that pointing out the history of previous GM hires, and especially pointing out the previous successes without acknowledging the previous failures, is nothing more than saying “it worked before so it will obviously work again” while ignoring that the success of going this route is totally dependent on the specific candidate. Because I feel like it doesn’t work out (way) more often than it does.

This weighing of pros and cons might be doable for current GMs, but it seems like it would be very difficult to do for other executives, as their work information is less publicly available. Would be an interesting discussion though.

 

[Majorityof1]

Look, we’re on our fourth or fifth volley on this and getting nowhere, so I’m going to try to find some common ground here. I don’t disagree with you at all that plenty of GMs have been hired by identifying an executive in another team’s front office (or their own) and bringing them in to their first time in a GM role. But my first point here is that for every Sakic or Yzerman there are quite a few really bad hires.

And because of this, my second point is (and has been throughout this discussion) that saying this can happen without suggesting specific names for discussion on the topic of a potential Army replacement is, to me, nothing more than wishcasting. If someone were to toss out a specific name, we would all be able to discuss the pros and cons of their resume as it is relevant to the role of GM and share opinions about whether or not their resume and their perceived strengths and weaknesses would be an improvement over the incumbent. I just think that pointing out the history of previous GM hires, and especially pointing out the previous successes without acknowledging the previous failures, is nothing more than saying “it worked before so it will obviously work again” while ignoring that the success of going this route is totally dependent on the specific candidate. Because I feel like it doesn’t work out (way) more often than it does.

You want names. Ok, talk intelligently about the pros and cons of the following:

Mathieu Darche
Laurence Gilman
Ryan Martin
Emilie Castonguay
Ray Whitney
Jamie Langenbrunner
Martin Brodeur
Chris Pronger.

 

[Spektre]

Isn't this the trade thread?

 

[BlueDream]

Isn't this the trade thread?

Yeah but the deadline passed so we’re really not going to see any action on that front until June. So probably doesn’t matter if we get off topic a bit.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Biggest hope for the offseason. Trade one of Krug or Faulk. Krug would be my #1 Choice, But, Faulk would most likely bring in the most Value.

 

[Brian39]

I've posted twice today that I think we should be making some effort to get Stephenson as a UFA in light of the moves Vegas made today. I don't see how Vegas can afford to retain him this summer

I feel that a 5x5 offer makes sense. Could see that being outbid, but I don't like the idea of giving over 5 years to Stephenson given the career path (unremarkable until recently) and his age under the contract (likely to be Schenn/Steen status as overpaid and too slow after ~3 years of term).

Despite being an immediate boost to the team, I don't think we're in a position where committing to 6+ years for ages 30-35 seasons makes sense. We're certainly not competing for a cup in the front half of a hypothetical contract and outside of pushing Schenn down, buying Dvorsky time and insulation I don't think Stephenson solves our problems - but he'd definitely help us avoid being a laughing stock and doormat for the league over the next 2-3 years while the kids develop and adjust.

Stephenson is an intriguing UFA option, but I think I might be more interested in kicking the tires about a trade for William Karlsson.

Eichel and Hertl are the 1-2 center punch in Vegas next season and Karlsson makes $5.9M for another 3 seasons. That's not crazy 3C money, but it is definitely luxury 3C money. They have clearly decided they like Stephenson more than him, so if they are willing to pay $5.9M for a 3C then I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to ship out Karlsson and offer a nice AAV to Stephenson as a luxury 3C. Or maybe they would be content letting Nicolas Roy play the 3C role at $3M AAV in order to make a bigger push to extend Hanifin and/or Marchessault.

I could very much see Karlsson being dealt for pennies on the dollar as a cap casualty this summer.

I think we have a pretty good chance of not being on his 10 team no-trade list. You have to assume that Arizona and Columbus are on his list as well as most (or all) of Canada. That only leaves him with a couple more slots for us, Buffalo, San Jose, Anaheim, Chicago, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Washington, and any other market he might not want to go to. Who knows his preferences, but I think we have a pretty good chance of landing on the right side of that cutoff line.

Stapehnson is only signing here as a UFA if we offer him more total dollars than anyone else. I think I'd prefer Karlsson at $5.9M x 3 years than Stephenson at $5M+ x 4+ years. The 3 year term on his deal is a nice duration as a stopgap until prospects are ready. He's good at the dot, he's good defensively, and he can score at even strength. He checks a lot of boxes for what this team needs in the middle 6 while making enough that the acquisition cost might be very low. He's still a good player, but the age likely scares teams (rightfully so as he just turned 31) and I could see Vegas being willing to basically give him away to clear cap space as they have done before.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Stephenson is an intriguing UFA option, but I think I might be more interested in kicking the tires about a trade for William Karlsson.

Eichel and Hertl are the 1-2 center punch in Vegas next season and Karlsson makes $5.9M for another 3 seasons. That's not crazy 3C money, but it is definitely luxury 3C money. They have clearly decided they like Stephenson more than him, so if they are willing to pay $5.9M for a 3C then I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to ship out Karlsson and offer a nice AAV to Stephenson as a luxury 3C. Or maybe they would be content letting Nicolas Roy play the 3C role at $3M AAV in order to make a bigger push to extend Hanifin and/or Marchessault.

I could very much see Karlsson being dealt for pennies on the dollar as a cap casualty this summer.

I think we have a pretty good chance of not being on his 10 team no-trade list. You have to assume that Arizona and Columbus are on his list as well as most (or all) of Canada. That only leaves him with a couple more slots for us, Buffalo, San Jose, Anaheim, Chicago, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Washington, and any other market he might not want to go to. Who knows his preferences, but I think we have a pretty good chance of avoiding that cutoff line.

Stapehnson is only signing here as a UFA if we offer him more total dollars than anyone else. I think I'd prefer Karlsson at $5.9M x 3 years than Stephenson at $5M+ x 4+ years. The 3 year term on his deal is a nice duration as a stopgap until prospects are ready. He's good at the dot, he's good defensively, and he can score at even strength. He checks a lot of boxes for what this team needs in the middle 6 while making enough that the acquisition cost might be very low.

Brian out here giving me heart attacks. I forgot there was a 2nd Karlsson in the NHL for a few seconds there.

 

[kimzey59]

Stephenson is an intriguing UFA option, but I think I might be more interested in kicking the tires about a trade for William Karlsson.

Eichel and Hertl are the 1-2 center punch in Vegas next season and Karlsson makes $5.9M for another 3 seasons. That's not crazy 3C money, but it is definitely luxury 3C money. They have clearly decided they like Stephenson more than him, so if they are willing to pay $5.9M for a 3C then I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to ship out Karlsson and offer a nice AAV to Stephenson as a luxury 3C. Or maybe they would be content letting Nicolas Roy play the 3C role at $3M AAV in order to make a bigger push to extend Hanifin and/or Marchessault.

I could very much see Karlsson being dealt for pennies on the dollar as a cap casualty this summer.

I think we have a pretty good chance of not being on his 10 team no-trade list. You have to assume that Arizona and Columbus are on his list as well as most (or all) of Canada. That only leaves him with a couple more slots for us, Buffalo, San Jose, Anaheim, Chicago, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Washington, and any other market he might not want to go to. Who knows his preferences, but I think we have a pretty good chance of landing on the right side of that cutoff line.

Stapehnson is only signing here as a UFA if we offer him more total dollars than anyone else. I think I'd prefer Karlsson at $5.9M x 3 years than Stephenson at $5M+ x 4+ years. The 3 year term on his deal is a nice duration as a stopgap until prospects are ready. He's good at the dot, he's good defensively, and he can score at even strength. He checks a lot of boxes for what this team needs in the middle 6 while making enough that the acquisition cost might be very low. He's still a good player, but the age likely scares teams (rightfully so as he just turned 31) and I could see Vegas being willing to basically give him away to clear cap space as they have done before.

To be frank, I'm more concerned with the defense than I am the offense.
Yes, we need a #2 center. But you can sign a guy like Domi or Wennberg as a placeholder there until Dvorsky is ready.

But if we're going to spend 6-ish mil on 1 position, I'd rather it be on a legit top 4 LHD. The UFA market is pretty bare so I'm really not sure what the answer is there.

 

[LetsGoBooze]

Isn't this the trade thread?

Preach. Seems like all the GM talk should be moved to the multi-purpose thread. Reminds me of all the times Pietrangelo discussions take over this thread. I prefer to keep things light, and choose to avoid a lot of the subjectivity of disagreements. It's nice when this thread is reserved for actual trade ideas and avoids the long drawn out arguments and name calling.

 

[MissouriMook]

You want names. Ok, talk intelligently about the pros and cons of the following:

Mathieu Darche
Laurence Gilman
Ryan Martin
Emilie Castonguay
Ray Whitney
Jamie Langenbrunner
Martin Brodeur
Chris Pronger.

In brief:

Darche seems to be one of the premier names on the list. He has been credited with much of the success of the Lightning in managing their cap in recent years as their DoPD and has apparently been invaluable to Julien Briesbois in negotiating contract extensions. Obviously part of the Stevie Y tree. If he could add transaction skills to his resume (perhaps learning as a GM in waiting for GMDA) he could arguably be the top candidate.

Gilman has been in the good old boy network for over 25 years, starting in 1998 as the DoHO for the Coyotes, but has never made it into the GM chair in that time frame. Teams along the way seem to have been content to ask him to run their AHL teams (where there isn't much need for cap management, contract negotiations and deal making skills) so the little I can find of his resume sounds like he is unlikely to be (or want to be) more than an AGM.

Martin has an almost identical resume as Gilman (different teams of course) but interestingly spent some time as an attorney and an agent before joining the Wings in 2005. His analytics role with the Wings (as well as his contracts and CBA experience) appear to be one of the reasons that the Rags hired him away in 2021, but like Gilman there doesn't really seem to be anything on his resume that screams "hire this guy" like Darche.

Castonguay is a feel good story (especially on the heels of International Women's Day) but her resume is still paper thin. With a few years as an agent and barely two years as an AGM, I think she will need a few more years (and a beefier resume) before getting any serious consideration for taking the keys to a franchise. She might end up being the GM of the Year by 2034 if her drive to do more and be better sustains.

Whitney, for whatever his intentions may be, seems to be more content to be a celebrity and a content creator than paying dues in an NHL front office. I suspect he was a candidate for the Sharks job (before they hired Grier) more for his connection to the organization than his qualifications, and I'm not surprised that he didn't get the hire. I don't see him being the guy Stillman brings in to "save" the Blues.

Langenbrunner, Brodeur and Pronger I would place in the "Brett Hull category" where they have more PR value around the organization than skills running a franchise. Unlike Whitney, they legitimately seem willing to pay their dues in the front office for a chance at a GM role. There is certainly value with them serving in the AGM role, but I see that as more of a buffer between the GM/DoHO and the roster players (because they have been there) while learning the day-to-day operations behind the scenes, but I don't see any of them as being imminent GM material. As previously pointed out, Pronger even recently withdrew from this role.

To summarize, of the list you provided, Darche is really the only viable candidate that I see from your list for an imminent hiring, and even he would either have to sink-or-swim as a deal maker (a skill that I think should be primary at the moment to reshape the current roster) with little to no experience there, or serve in an Associate GM (GM in waiting) capacity under Army before taking the reins permanently. Thanks, by the way, for not including Peter Chiarelli on your list.

 

[Brian39]

To be frank, I'm more concerned with the defense than I am the offense.
Yes, we need a #2 center. But you can sign a guy like Domi or Wennberg as a placeholder there until Dvorsky is ready.

But if we're going to spend 6-ish mil on 1 position, I'd rather it be on a legit top 4 LHD. The UFA market is pretty bare so I'm really not sure what the answer is there.

It doesn't have to be an either/or decision. We have the cap to spend $6M each to plug two positional problems without shipping anyone out. I think we will still be trying to ship someone (or multiple someones) out, but you don't need to in order to start plugging holes. A huge part of what made Kap and Vrana such low risk reclamation projects was the fact that they didn't have real term on their contracts. Letting all of Vrana, Kap, and Scandella walk frees up $9M in cap space and the cap is increasing by about $4M. Our only raise at the moment is Sunny getting an extra $725k.

Capfriendly currently shows us with $13.7M in cap space next year with 19 roster spots already filled. Remove Bolduc/Dean and you have $15.45M in cap space with 17 roster spots filled. No one is due a big raise. Add a $6M center and a $6M LHD. That leaves you about $3.5M with 19 roster spots filled. Ignore lines, but the depth chart looks roughly like this if you sort by AAV:

Schenn-Thomas-Kyrou
Saad-$6M-Buch
Neighbours-Hayes-????
????-Sunny-Torpo

Walker, ????

Krug-Faulk
$6M-Parayko
Leddy-Tucker

????

Binner, Hofer

You fill the question marks on the 3rd line with an open camp competition between Torpo and all the incoming prospects. The other depth forwards are filled with vets making $800k. The question mark at D is likely Kessel and it wouldn't be unreasonable to sent Tucker to the AHL and replace him with Perunovich or another cheap vet. No matter how you settle it, you're talking about a guy making $800k.

This doesn't mean that we have to spend the money that way or that we shouldn't be actively trying to ship out more money. But we definitely don't need to choose between D and forward when we are thinking about spending a good chunk of change. This team is more than 1 acquisition away, but we also have the cap space to make more than 1 acquisition.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

Stephenson is an intriguing UFA option, but I think I might be more interested in kicking the tires about a trade for William Karlsson.

Eichel and Hertl are the 1-2 center punch in Vegas next season and Karlsson makes $5.9M for another 3 seasons. That's not crazy 3C money, but it is definitely luxury 3C money. They have clearly decided they like Stephenson more than him, so if they are willing to pay $5.9M for a 3C then I wouldn't be surprised if they tried to ship out Karlsson and offer a nice AAV to Stephenson as a luxury 3C. Or maybe they would be content letting Nicolas Roy play the 3C role at $3M AAV in order to make a bigger push to extend Hanifin and/or Marchessault.

I could very much see Karlsson being dealt for pennies on the dollar as a cap casualty this summer.

I think we have a pretty good chance of not being on his 10 team no-trade list. You have to assume that Arizona and Columbus are on his list as well as most (or all) of Canada. That only leaves him with a couple more slots for us, Buffalo, San Jose, Anaheim, Chicago, Minnesota, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Washington, and any other market he might not want to go to. Who knows his preferences, but I think we have a pretty good chance of landing on the right side of that cutoff line.

Stapehnson is only signing here as a UFA if we offer him more total dollars than anyone else. I think I'd prefer Karlsson at $5.9M x 3 years than Stephenson at $5M+ x 4+ years. The 3 year term on his deal is a nice duration as a stopgap until prospects are ready. He's good at the dot, he's good defensively, and he can score at even strength. He checks a lot of boxes for what this team needs in the middle 6 while making enough that the acquisition cost might be very low. He's still a good player, but the age likely scares teams (rightfully so as he just turned 31) and I could see Vegas being willing to basically give him away to clear cap space as they have done before.

I'm not sure where I saw the article, but the other day I was reading a fascinating piece on how the Golden Knights have brought in a ton of cap during the trade deadline, when prices are actually very low for high cap hit players, and then turned around and sold a bunch of high cap players during the summer, when returns are much higher due to a larger potential marketplace. I wouldn't be surprised if they are interested in moving on from Karlsson, especially if they like Hanifin as more then a rental.

 

[STL fan in MN]

All this talk of potential Army replacements and nobody has mentioned Ryan Miller.

No, not that one. The other one.

 

[MissouriMook]

All this talk of potential Army replacements and nobody has mentioned Ryan Miller.

No, not that one. The other one.

I’ve heard that he’s not quite as good at stopping pucks as the other Ryan Miller, but in the context of his role I’ve only heard of him being referred to as a “capologist”. Do we know if there is more to his role here? Some people just really love to live in the math and don’t necessarily have the desire to be a leader or build the necessary relationships around the league.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Thoughts on Brady Skjei potentially being a UFA this summer? I think we'd like to get younger on D and this doesn't accomplish that but he could be an excellent Parayko partner. Too old at 29 to be giving term? Or a potential solution?

That’s an S, a K and a J all next to each other so that’s a nope.

 

[STL fan in MN]

I’ve heard that he’s not quite as good at stopping pucks as the other Ryan Miller, but in the context of his role I’ve only heard of him being referred to as a “capologist”. Do we know if there is more to his role here? Some people just really love to live in the math and don’t necessarily have the desire to be a leader or build the necessary relationships around the league.

I honestly have no idea what all Ryan Miller does for the Blues or his intentions or interest in the job. But agree with Ted that if I were to consider replacing Army, it’d be the AGMs in the org and outside the org I’d look at.

That said, I personally wouldn’t get rid of Army just yet. I’ve said many times that I think his big mistake was Petro and then many mistakes after trying to fix that gaping hole. But the pandemic also absolutely decimated his plans. He’s not perfect and I’m not happy with where the org currently is and I lay that at his feet but there’s also few I’d want as GM over him…but acknowledge there’s probably quite a few qualified guys out there that just haven’t been given a shot yet. But that’s the unknown, especially for us fans.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Ignore lines, but the depth chart looks roughly like this if you sort by AAV:

Schenn-Thomas-Kyrou
Saad-$6M-Buch
Neighbours-Hayes-????
????-Sunny-Torpo

Walker, ????

Krug-Faulk
$6M-Parayko
Leddy-Tucker

????

Binner, Hofer

If you restructure that best case, it's ... still messy. I see it as something like

Buchnevich-Thomas-Kyrou
Neighbours-$6M-????
Schenn-Hayes-Saad
Walker-Sunny-Toropchenko

$6M-Faulk
Leddy-Parayko
Krug-Kessel

Binner, Hofer

Is it better? Maybe marginally, but not 15 points better to the point you know this team is landing in a playoff spot. You're throwing a kid on the 2nd line, hoping he + MV63 + new guy = success. [If Schenn or Saad are up on the 2nd line instead of Neighbours, that would be bad.] That 3rd line could be great, or it could quickly become a black hole and opponents are skating laps around and through them. The 4th line is the 4th line. Krug/Kessel seemed to do OK, but that's been in short stints and not for 82 games. I wouldn't break up Leddy/Parayko absent an early-camp showing that Parayko + $6M = elite pairing.

Maybe the thing that jumps out to me: it's piling all the eggs into the basket re: Buchnevich. If that lineup works, great - it will go to the playoffs ... and we're not trading Buch at the deadline, and he's walking in the offseason. If that lineup doesn't work, you can still hopefully sell Buch at the deadline for a high price [if he's playing well and not hurt, and assuming it's not another weird trade deadline like this season] but now you have to look at Schenn, Hayes, Saad, Faulk, Leddy, Krug, whoever else and figure out how to rip them out and get assets for them because they're not getting any better, and it kicks off at least a semi-rebuild restructuring.

This is not the worst idea I can imagine for '24-25, but it requires finding the right $6M guys on the market and IMO it's edging back toward "everything has to go right" which worked great in '21-22, failed spectaularly last season and isn't cutting it this season

 

[jjniner]

Any chance to get KK on the cheap as a 4th liner?