Blues Trade Proposals 2023-2024

[Brian39]

I think we all would agree that something has to give or a move needs to happen.
The Blues not only have 8 defensemen on a 1 way deal, they have a total of 17 defensemen under contract that will need to play in the AHL or NHL.

I count 15 'need to play pro' D:

8 one-way deals: Parayko, Faulk, Krug, Leddy, Scandy, Bortz, Tucker, and Perunovich

7 other pro deals: Rosen, Malmstrom, Kessel, Loof, Skinner, Jcobs, and Kalynuk

Guys with remaining junior eligibility: Buchinger and Gaudet. Buchinger is not eligible for the AHL and will be back in junior this year. Gaudet is eligible to go to the AHL, but still could be sent back to junior.

They also have a total of 6 Goalies who either played in the A or NHL last season.

Binner, Hofer, Z, and Subban are the only 4 goalies in the organization who played NHL or AHL time at all last year. Cranley played in the OHL last year and Ellis spent the entire year in the ECHL. Cranley and Ellis haven't done anything to suggest that they need (or are capable of handling) an AHL backup role at this stage of their development. Our #1 NHL goalie has 4 years left on his contract and we have two prospects firmly ahead of them on the depth chart. We don't need to jettison them from the organization, but we don't need to create space for them by moving a higher caliber prospect or removing the veteran safety net Subban provides as a potential call up option in case of injury. I'm not remotely interested in having to run a Hofer-Zherenko tandem if Binner gets hurt just so that Cranley or Ellis could get AHL minutes when everyone was healthy.

While everyone seems to concentrate on Krug, you would think that Scandy or Leddy, could potentially be moved and provide a bit of cap space.

I do think that Scandy is a candidate to get moved , but I don't think the #7-16 D behind him necessitate it. Scandy still contributes as a solid #5 D man and I wouldn't move that to avoid waiving, giving away, or loaning out Jacobs, Kalyjuk, or even Bortz. I don't see us using freed up cap space on anything but a D upgrade, so moving Scandy just to get cap space isn't appealing to me. I'd rather be patient and keep trying to move Krug.

 

[TurgPavs]

I count 15 'need to play pro' D:

8 one-way deals: Parayko, Faulk, Krug, Leddy, Scandy, Bortz, Tucker, and Perunovich

7 other pro deals: Rosen, Malmstrom, Kessel, Loof, Skinner, Jcobs, and Kalynuk

Guys with remaining junior eligibility: Buchinger and Gaudet. Buchinger is not eligible for the AHL and will be back in junior this year. Gaudet is eligible to go to the AHL, but still could be sent back to junior.


Binner, Hofer, Z, and Subban are the only 4 goalies in the organization who played NHL or AHL time at all last year. Cranley played in the OHL last year and Ellis spent the entire year in the ECHL. Cranley and Ellis haven't done anything to suggest that they need (or are capable of handling) an AHL backup role at this stage of their development. Our #1 NHL goalie has 4 years left on his contract and we have two prospects firmly ahead of them on the depth chart. We don't need to jettison them from the organization, but we don't need to create space for them by moving a higher caliber prospect or removing the veteran safety net Subban provides as a potential call up option in case of injury. I'm not remotely interested in having to run a Hofer-Zherenko tandem if Binner gets hurt just so that Cranley or Ellis could get AHL minutes when everyone was healthy.


I do think that Scandy is a candidate to get moved , but I don't think the #7-16 D behind him necessitate it. Scandy still contributes as a solid #5 D man and I wouldn't move that to avoid waiving, giving away, or loaning out Jacobs, Kalyjuk, or even Bortz. I don't see us using freed up cap space on anything but a D upgrade, so moving Scandy just to get cap space isn't appealing to me. I'd rather be patient and keep trying to move Krug.

This is clear, and thank you for breaking it down.

With Krug, I am not sure he waives his NTC. Strickland mentioned that Krug doesnt want to uproot his family and move his very young kids. That is not going to change based on the Team.
Like it or not I see Krug being here for the duration of his contract.

 

[kimzey59]

I do think that Scandy is a candidate to get moved , but I don't think the #7-16 D behind him necessitate it. Scandy still contributes as a solid #5 D man and I wouldn't move that to avoid waiving, giving away, or loaning out Jacobs, Kalyjuk, or even Bortz. I don't see us using freed up cap space on anything but a D upgrade, so moving Scandy just to get cap space isn't appealing to me. I'd rather be patient and keep trying to move Krug.

At this point; I'm more interested in moving Perunovich than I am Krug or Scandella.
Scandella serves a role.
Krug is a better PP specialist than Peru, and Buchinger looks plenty capable of being the heir apparent.

Move Peru for a good 4th line center and see how things go.

 

[Xerloris]

At this point; I'm more interested in moving Perunovich than I am Krug or Scandella.
Scandella serves a role.
Krug is a better PP specialist than Peru, and Buchinger looks plenty capable of being the heir apparent.

Move Peru for a good 4th line center and see how things go.

I very much disagree. Perunovich in the playoffs when Krug was hurt did a fantastic job on the PP. It would be very short sighted and IMO questionable at best to move him for a 4th line center. That's just flat out low balling yourself. How would moving his 750k salary do anything to help the team?

 

[kimzey59]

I very much disagree. Perunovich in the playoffs when Krug was hurt did a fantastic job on the PP. It would be very short sighted and IMO questionable at best to move him for a 4th line center. That's just flat out low balling yourself. How would moving his 750k salary do anything to help the team?

We have a log jam on defense.
9 one-way contracts, not including Kessel or Loof.
If it's me; I want to clear out some of the deadweight so the kids get more of an opportunity.
And at this point, I consider Perunovich dead weight(we have Krug, Faulk, Leddy, Rosen and Parayko that all got PP time last year; what role does Perunovich really fill?).
In fact, I wouldn't just be looking to move Perunovich. Bortuzzo and Rosen would also be on the block. I'm not even looking for a lot in return. Somebody to compete with Alexandrov and Dean and some low end picks is all I really want.

Opening up the roster spots is more valuable. It does no good to have a decent prospect pool if there is no path to the NHL for any of them.
Perunovich probably has the most trade value out of those 3, so he's the one I'd hope to get the forward from.

 

[Brian39]

With Krug, I am not sure he waives his NTC. Strickland mentioned that Krug doesnt want to uproot his family and move his very young kids. That is not going to change based on the Team.
Like it or not I see Krug being here for the duration of his contract.

It absolutely might change if he is informed that we don't want him on our NHL roster and his role in the organization might be in San Antonio. Or claimed by waivers by any one of the 31 other NHL teams.

He refused to waive the NTC when the choice was Philly or St. Louis. And he very well might feel the same way about any NHL team vs St. Louis. But that isn't the only choice that we can present him. Presenting him with that choice is the nuclear option and every other option should be explored first. But he doesn't have the ability to force the Blues to keep him in St. Louis for the rest of his contract.

 

[Shwabeal]

It absolutely might change if he is informed that we don't want him on our NHL roster and his role in the organization might be in San Antonio.

This slip made me miss having Rampage Nate provide us in person updates on our guys in San Antonio.

 

[LGB]

It absolutely might change if he is informed that we don't want him on our NHL roster and his role in the organization might be in San Antonio. Or claimed by waivers by any one of the 31 other NHL teams.

He refused to waive the NTC when the choice was Philly or St. Louis. And he very well might feel the same way about any NHL team vs St. Louis. But that isn't the only choice that we can present him. Presenting him with that choice is the nuclear option and every other option should be explored first. But he doesn't have the ability to force the Blues to keep him in St. Louis for the rest of his contract.

Are you sure that's even something we'd be allowed to do? Seems like the Player's Association might have something to say about that.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Are you sure that's even something we'd be allowed to do? Seems like the Player's Association might have something to say about that.

It's what Tampa did with McDonagh and why people want NMC.

 

[Xerloris]

We have a log jam on defense.
9 one-way contracts, not including Kessel or Loof.
If it's me; I want to clear out some of the deadweight so the kids get more of an opportunity.
And at this point, I consider Perunovich dead weight(we have Krug, Faulk, Leddy, Rosen and Parayko that all got PP time last year; what role does Perunovich really fill?).
In fact, I wouldn't just be looking to move Perunovich. Bortuzzo and Rosen would also be on the block. I'm not even looking for a lot in return. Somebody to compete with Alexandrov and Dean and some low end picks is all I really want.

Opening up the roster spots is more valuable. It does no good to have a decent prospect pool if there is no path to the NHL for any of them.
Perunovich probably has the most trade value out of those 3, so he's the one I'd hope to get the forward from.

Perunovich was hurt for the entirety of the year so it's no surprise that others would get PP time. If you notice, teams try different players on the PP when things don't work out. It's pretty obvious by how many players were used on the PP that our PP was struggling at times during the season. We're also literally trying to trade Krug, which would leave us short of one PP specialist and a very cheap one at that. I also think with the year Rosen had and Bortz specialty of PK usage their trade value would be higher than a dude that's always hurt. Though still not worth very much.

Are you sure that's even something we'd be allowed to do? Seems like the Player's Association might have something to say about that.

I see no way that anyone could stop us. I don't see any clause that says you can't waive someone if you're being mean to them.

 

[LGB]

It's what Tampa did with McDonagh and why people want NMC.

Did not know that. Almost the same contracts as well. If we have the option to get rid of Krug, he should be gone.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

This is clear, and thank you for breaking it down.

With Krug, I am not sure he waives his NTC. Strickland mentioned that Krug doesnt want to uproot his family and move his very young kids. That is not going to change based on the Team.
Like it or not I see Krug being here for the duration of his contract.

I think issue with flyers was 3fold- team sucks and is gonna for awhile, Torts is not fun coach for vet like Krug, and flyers were likely thinking they would flip him in a year and then Krug has to move again. If we dealt him to more desirable team that wanted him I think likely he would waive.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

It absolutely might change if he is informed that we don't want him on our NHL roster and his role in the organization might be in San Antonio. Or claimed by waivers by any one of the 31 other NHL teams.

He refused to waive the NTC when the choice was Philly or St. Louis. And he very well might feel the same way about any NHL team vs St. Louis. But that isn't the only choice that we can present him. Presenting him with that choice is the nuclear option and every other option should be explored first. But he doesn't have the ability to force the Blues to keep him in St. Louis for the rest of his contract.

dunno how he would feel if we sent him to San Antonio when all the rest of our minor leaguers are in Springfield. would that be a positive or negative that he can wander river walk with his family instead of having to practice?

 

[Brian39]

Are you sure that's even something we'd be allowed to do? Seems like the Player's Association might have something to say about that.

The ability to place a player on waivers or not is the (by definition) difference between a NTC and a NMC. The CBA recognizes that no-trade clauses and no-move clauses are separate things and indicates that a no-move clause prohibits a player from being involuntarily relocated via trade, loan, or waiver claim. No-trade clauses aren't specifically defined, but the common-sense understanding of the term is that it prevents a player from being involuntarily relocated via trade.

It is exactly why we didn't need Tarasenko's permission to expose him in the expansion draft. If he had a NMC, he would have needed to approve. But since he just had a NTC, his protection didn't include expansion drafts.

No trade clauses and no move clauses are different things. That is well established and the distinction has been well known since well before the most-recent CBA. The PA might very well be pissed. And they might file a grievance if they suspect collusion. But they would have to prove collusion, not just that the player was waived after he rejected a trade. Telling a player with a NTC that you intend to send him to the AHL if he doesn't accept a trade is absolutely allowable under the CBA.

I disagree with how hard Army's line is regarding NMCs, but it exists for a reason. There is a very real difference between a NTC and a NMC.

 

[Brian39]

Perunovich was hurt for the entirety of the year so it's no surprise that others would get PP time. If you notice, teams try different players on the PP when things don't work out. It's pretty obvious by how many players were used on the PP that our PP was struggling at times during the season. We're also literally trying to trade Krug, which would leave us short of one PP specialist and a very cheap one at that. I also think with the year Rosen had and Bortz specialty of PK usage their trade value would be higher than a dude that's always hurt. Though still not worth very much.

He was cleared for contact on February 10 and was sent to the AHL on February 12. He played 22 regular season AHL games and 2 AHL playoff games.

He wasn't able to crack the NHL lineup over the last 30 games of the season, which included two nights were Krug didn't play. His injury killed his chance to make the NHL team out of camp, but that injury isn't the only thing that kept him out of NHL games and our PP last year.

 

[Mike Liut]

man I glad we didn’t trade one of our late 1sts to move Krug. I really like Lidstein and Stenberg. They both look like future studs.

 

[Xerloris]

He was cleared for contact on February 10 and was sent to the AHL on February 12. He played 22 regular season AHL games and 2 AHL playoff games.

He wasn't able to crack the NHL lineup over the last 30 games of the season, which included two nights were Krug didn't play. His injury killed his chance to make the NHL team out of camp, but that injury isn't the only thing that kept him out of NHL games and our PP last year.

You could just as easily say that we were not exactly wanting to put him into a situation to fail. Our team was terrible bad last year, the defense even more so. Coming off of a long term injury that needed surgery getting thrown into the NHL in a terrible position is not good for someone you hope can develop. AHL is where he should have been because let's not forget that he did miss out on tons of development time because of covid, that does not necessarily mean he's falling behind his pears but rather than some Dmen take a long time to mature and even more so when they miss so much time because of a pandemic.

 

[Louie the Blue]

We have a log jam on defense.
9 one-way contracts, not including Kessel or Loof.
If it's me; I want to clear out some of the deadweight so the kids get more of an opportunity.
And at this point, I consider Perunovich dead weight(we have Krug, Faulk, Leddy, Rosen and Parayko that all got PP time last year; what role does Perunovich really fill?).
In fact, I wouldn't just be looking to move Perunovich. Bortuzzo and Rosen would also be on the block. I'm not even looking for a lot in return. Somebody to compete with Alexandrov and Dean and some low end picks is all I really want.

Opening up the roster spots is more valuable. It does no good to have a decent prospect pool if there is no path to the NHL for any of them.
Perunovich probably has the most trade value out of those 3, so he's the one I'd hope to get the forward from.

I wouldn't move on from Perunovich yet as he'll be 25 when the season begins, however, I would need to see a lot of improvement from him defensively before I can consider him a top 6 defenseman that is also a full-time PP QB.

I don't think he's as good as some say he is and I think it's short-sighted to consider him as equal to Krug, when he isn't (yet).

I'd move on from Bortuzzo. Nice character guy and good PKer, but he's certainly replaceable. He'll turn 35 during the season, too.

Way more intrigued with Rosen as his underlying offensive metrics are really good.

If Blues were rolling with 8D and no other players are brought in, I'd want the lineup to be:

Leddy-Parayko
Krug-Faulk
Scandella-Tucker
Rosen/Perunovich

 

[Frenzy31]

I wouldn't move on from Perunovich yet as he'll be 25 when the season begins, however, I would need to see a lot of improvement from him defensively before I can consider him a top 6 defenseman that is also a full-time PP QB.

I don't think he's as good as some say he is and I think it's short-sighted to consider him as equal to Krug, when he isn't (yet).

I'd move on from Bortuzzo. Nice character guy and good PKer, but he's certainly replaceable. He'll turn 35 during the season, too.

Way more intrigued with Rosen as his underlying offensive metrics are really good.

If Blues were rolling with 8D and no other players are brought in, I'd want the lineup to be:

Leddy-Parayko
Krug-Faulk
Scandella-Tucker
Rosen/Perunovich

I would like to see something like this:

Scandella. Parayko
Leddy Faulk
Krug Tucker or Rosen

 

[simon IC]

As much as most of you want to move on from Bortuzzo, we don't really have an NHL-ready RD prospect to step into his spot. I don't like the idea of Perunovich filling that spot. That means either Tucker or Rosen playing their 'off" side.

 

[Louie the Blue]

As much as most of you want to move on from Bortuzzo, we don't really have an NHL-ready RD prospect to step into his spot. I don't like the idea of Perunovich filling that spot. That means either Tucker or Rosen playing their 'off" side.

Wasn't Tucker doing that last season, though? As well as Rosen, in some instances?

I'd rather have Tucker or Rosen play more on RD than Bortuzzo. We already know what Bortuzzo is. Tucker needs an opportunity to play and I think Rosen's earned an opportunity for more playing time as well (his underlying metrics were really good offensively).

 

[STL fan in MN]

He was cleared for contact on February 10 and was sent to the AHL on February 12. He played 22 regular season AHL games and 2 AHL playoff games.

He wasn't able to crack the NHL lineup over the last 30 games of the season, which included two nights were Krug didn't play. His injury killed his chance to make the NHL team out of camp, but that injury isn't the only thing that kept him out of NHL games and our PP last year.

While technically true, this response seems a tad disingenuous to me. He was recovering from major shoulder surgery. Was he actually a legit option to be called up to the Blues the last 1/4 of the season?

I recall Perunovich wasn’t great his first handful of games in Springfield, which would make sense as he’d very likely be rusty. He then picked it up and finished with 20 pts in those 22 games. My take on the situation was that he simply needed to play as much as he could and that was best achieved in Springfield. The Blues sucked, Scandella was already returning (and they had to make room to take him off of LTIR), Tucker had emerged…did they really need or have the roster space or cap room to add Perunovich? I don’t recall the specifics of their daily cap situation at the time but I’d think they would’ve had to really force it to get Perunovich on the roster and there was no need as what he really needed was to play as much as he could and he was already doing that in Springfield.

I could see the benefit in trading Peru if they could actually get someone solid for him but I’d prefer to keep him and continue to try to trade Krug. Peru is still waiver exempt too so I’m not just looking to give him away with no reason forcing the issue as of now. I still believe in his talent - he just needs to stay healthy.

I wouldn’t be surprised if a D is moved yet this summer or sometime during camp but I’d prefer it be one of the older guys. Peru is young and still has some potential. We should know more by the end of Sept on how he stacks up to the others and if he’d likely be able to land a full time NHL job or not.

 

[BlueOil]

As much as most of you want to move on from Bortuzzo, we don't really have an NHL-ready RD prospect to step into his spot. I don't like the idea of Perunovich filling that spot. That means either Tucker or Rosen playing their 'off" side.

bortz is still the only d-man that tries to clear the front of the net

the rest of them just jostle folks around

 

[ezcreepin]

bortz is still the only d-man that tries to clear the front of the net

the rest of them just jostle folks around

Soon enough we'll have 2 bruisers in Tucker and Loof playing full time. Tucker did a nice job last year at clearing the crease or at least making it hard for the forward in front of the net. Loof and Tucker will give this team a nice boost of physicality on the backend that we haven't had in a long time. Even Dunn to some extent was a tough dude. On the cup run we had Eddy, Dunn, and Bort to provide that presence but they also had value in other areas. I'm hopeful that along with Tucker and Loof, we'll have another defenseman graduate that will be physically imposing since it seems like without that top end elite talent, you need to wear the opponents down to win a cup. Luckily it looks like we're building back to that style with a mix of a transition game.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Tucker/Krug should be the 3rd pair, whichever is the best on their off-side will play the right. Leddy with Parayko and Scandella with Faulk. Continue to try and move Krug, and move Scandella at the deadline if we are out of the playoffs.

Sucks that Perunovich is sort of in limbo, but that's as much on him as it is on Krug's contract. Bortozzo and Rosen should not receive priority minutes, unless Rosen proves to be some magical late bloomer that can provide decent defense and 30 points in a 3rd pair role.