Blues Trade Proposals 2023-2024

[LGB]

I know most of you guys probably don't agree with me (and some of you have already told me that), but I'd absolutely try to move Saad either now or at the trade deadline. Saad will turn 31 in October, is signed for three more seasons at a AAV of 4.5 million a year. I wouldn't be surprised if Saad regresses a bit the coming years and thus lowering his value (I wouldn't even be surprised if his contract might even be considered 'bad' in a few years).

The Blues are not going to all out tank, but we're also probably not going to be competitive the next two/three-ish seasons, so we might as well try to move Saad for a pick/prospect and free up some extra capspace. I wouldn't expect a huge return, but gaining 4.5 million towards the cap while so many other teams are cashstrapped might already be worthwhile: we could either weaponize our capspace to get more assets by taking on a short term bad contract or actually use that capspace for a position we're in dire need for replacement. On a very short term, I'd try to sign Sundqvist to a low AAV contract and give Saad's rosterspot to the best out of Dean/Alexandrov/Bolduc or even Perunovich (if we go 13F/7D). Again, we're not going to tank but we're definitely also not aiming for the playoffs.

Combine moving Saad with potentially moving (and using our retainment slots on) Vrana, Kapanen and Scandella for assets at the trade deadline and I think we'd have a very solid foundation for the next couple of years with guys like Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc potentially coming up in the next couple of years and more than enough assets to potentially move for improvements on Defense, etc.

I think it would be hard to move Saad without retention

 

[Xerloris]

I think both Parayko and Faulk are #2s. I don't think either is a legit #1, but I think that both are top pair caliber players. But we've been asking both to handle #1 minutes with #3, #4, or #5 caliber partners, which is setting a #2 caliber D man up for failure.

Faulk has been 9th and 10th in even strength points among all NHL D men in the last two seasons. It has required a high degree of sheltering for him to put up that production, but I don't think his defending is bad at all. I don't think he can be the centerpiece of a top pair, but I think he's absolutely good enough to be the 2nd guy on a good top pair.

Parayko has been 20th and 58th in even strength points among all D men in the last 2 years and in that time he has had the hardest shutdown responsibility in the league. He's also had a rotating door of partners with the absolute best one being Leddy (who I don't think is more than a #3 guy). He's absolutely a #2 in my book.

I think you're selling them way short if you don't think that they are top pairing guys. I'm not interested in moving either, because I think doing so immediately creates a very hard to fill hole.

When you say #2's do you mean top pair to a #1 or 2nd pairing ?

I think it would be hard to move Saad without retention

Saad is very good for what he is paid, I don't think it would be hard at all but why would we?

 

[kimzey59]

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.

I have very little problem adding 3rd pairing RHD to the list of area's needing addressed. I know Bortz brings a lot of off-ice qualities, but he was pretty rough last year. Barely played half the year, PIM's spiked, blocked shots were down, lowest ATOI since his rookie year. He wasn't quite the trainwreck that Krug was, but it wasn't his best season.

The problem; the UFA market is pretty bare and who out there would actually trade a good 3rd pair RHD right now? Don't get me wrong; in an ideal world I'd move Perunovich, Rosen and Bortz and put that money into a 4th line C and a right handed Scandella type to anchor the 3rd pair. I just don't see that move out there(Myers at half price is the best I'm seeing).

 

[Beauterham]

I think it would be hard to move Saad without retention

I wouldn't be surprised as many teams are tight against the cap, however I don't think it's impossible to do without retention, for example we could take on a 'bad contract' as part of the deal that ends after the 23/24 season with a max AAV of 4,5 million. The return will be bigger and we also replace a 3 year contract with a 1 year contract opening up more capspace for us next summer.

Biggest problem moving out Saad isn't his AAV ATM, but rather that he has a NTC. But I wouldn't be surprised if he'd waive that to get another shot at the cup.

 

[TurgPavs]

Saad's pretty solid on the forecheck, is a very good two way player, and has the ability to throw in 20+ goals., and has been pretty solid in the playoffs, can move up and down the line up, from all account very respected in the locker room.
Those guys are not easily replaced by a prospect.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Another reason to be hesitant. Sanheim doesn't move the needle for me. Would rather wait and see what other opportunities come up going forward. I can't think of many situations where a team signs a guy to an 8 year extension and then trades him before he even starts year 1.

That's fair, but I don't see an issue per se in acquiring him if Armstrong believes he's worth the risk.

I completely get the risk in taking on his contract and why people don't like it. Just that I don't see a way to easily upgrade the defense in the next year or 2 without a targeting a player like Sanheim that's on a monster contract while also trying to move Krug.

Personally, I'd go after Toews if he hits UFA and be willing to offer $7 mil. AAV next off-season. He'll be 30, but I think worth it.

For this season, I think barring Krug being moved, the Blues are stuck with the current D group for better or worse. I don't think they'll be as bad as they were last season but still not good.

The best case scenario is they play like they did after Leddy was acquired in 2021-2022 and Scandella doesn't miss much time, leading the group to be average.

I know most of you guys probably don't agree with me (and some of you have already told me that), but I'd absolutely try to move Saad either now or at the trade deadline. Saad will turn 31 in October, is signed for three more seasons at a AAV of 4.5 million a year. I wouldn't be surprised if Saad regresses a bit the coming years and thus lowering his value (I wouldn't even be surprised if his contract might even be considered 'bad' in a few years).

The Blues are not going to all out tank, but we're also probably not going to be competitive the next two/three-ish seasons, so we might as well try to move Saad for a pick/prospect and free up some extra capspace. I wouldn't expect a huge return, but gaining 4.5 million towards the cap while so many other teams are cashstrapped might already be worthwhile: we could either weaponize our capspace to get more assets by taking on a short term bad contract or actually use that capspace for a position we're in dire need for replacement. On a very short term, I'd try to sign Sundqvist to a low AAV contract and give Saad's rosterspot to the best out of Dean/Alexandrov/Bolduc or even Perunovich (if we go 13F/7D). Again, we're not going to tank but we're definitely also not aiming for the playoffs.

Combine moving Saad with potentially moving (and using our retainment slots on) Vrana, Kapanen and Scandella for assets at the trade deadline and I think we'd have a very solid foundation for the next couple of years with guys like Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc potentially coming up in the next couple of years and more than enough assets to move for improvements on Defense, etc.

I wouldn't move Saad for the following reasons:

1. He's adequately paid relative to his performance.
2. Trading him is counter-intuitive to Armstrong's goal of re-tooling/not tanking.
3. He's currently not blocking any prospects.
4. If his contract doesn't age well, you're looking at maybe 1, if not 2 years, where he's slightly overpaid vs 3-4 years of where he was producing at or above his pay level. I don't foresee his play falling off a cliff like Backes or Steen.

Excluding Krug, there's not really any long-term contracts that I view as either being movable or a hindrance to the Blues long-term. Binnington's contract won't mean anything as the cap continues to rise and will be off-set by Hofer/Zherenko/Conley/insert goalie of the week here. Schenn's contract is basically immovable for better or worse (it could age really badly), but that wouldn't prohibit the Blues from acquiring guys long-term.

 

[Reality Czech]

I would add that I am not opposed to moving Kyrou in the right deal.
I would also say, that I am not opposed to moving Krug, CP, Faulk, or Leddy either.

I dont mind the Schenn and Saad contracts at all as they are solid leaders on the team.

To your point, the Blues really dont have a top pairing defensemen on their roster, or for that matter in their pipeline.....I really liked the Lindstein pick, but I am not sure he is going to develop into a 1st pairing guy.
So if moving Kyrou gets you a guy like Chabot, then game on.

I would agree, although not without some hesitation. Personally I don't think Ottawa is in a hurry to move Chabot, but he's the kind of guy I would be targeting. The Blues aren't a team that chases players or tries to win a bidding war for guys like Sanheim or Hanifin. To me, the best two routes to getting a solid D are either find a talented guy whose stock has dropped (like Bouwmeester) and hope he finds his form again, or trade a nice piece from a position of strength for a similarly valued defenseman (a la Seth Jones for Johansen).

Kyrou for Chabot would be similar to the latter, but if we want a player of that caliber then I would imagine someone like Kyrou or top prospects would have to be available. As mentioned, I can't see Ottawa trading Chabot now. He's been a huge part of their team and taken a huge role at a very young age, so I don't see them offloading him as soon as they've got a competitive team. Provorov would have been a good fit but not sure Blues fans would have liked to pay that price.

It's a lot harder to find someone like J-Bo, but maybe McDonagh would be a comparable. Those deals really come down to timing, in terms of who becomes available and which teams have the assets/cap room to get them.

 

[Reality Czech]

That's fair, but I don't see an issue per se in acquiring him if Armstrong believes he's worth the risk.

I completely get the risk in taking on his contract and why people don't like it. Just that I don't see a way to easily upgrade the defense in the next year or 2 without a targeting a player like Sanheim that's on a monster contract while also trying to move Krug.

Personally, I'd go after Toews if he hits UFA and be willing to offer $7 mil. AAV next off-season. He'll be 30, but I think worth it.

For this season, I think barring Krug being moved, the Blues are stuck with the current D group for better or worse. I don't think they'll be as bad as they were last season but still not good.

The best case scenario is they play like they did after Leddy was acquired in 2021-2022 and Scandella doesn't miss much time, leading the group to be average.


I wouldn't move Saad for the following reasons:

1. He's adequately paid relative to his performance.
2. Trading him is counter-intuitive to Armstrong's goal of re-tooling/not tanking.
3. He's currently not blocking any prospects.
4. If his contract doesn't age well, you're looking at maybe 1, if not 2 years, where he's slightly overpaid vs 3-4 years of where he was producing at or above his pay level. I don't foresee his play falling off a cliff like Backes or Steen.

Excluding Krug, there's not really any long-term contracts that I view as either being movable or a hindrance to the Blues long-term. Binnington's contract won't mean anything as the cap continues to rise and will be off-set by Hofer/Zherenko/Conley/insert goalie of the week here. Schenn's contract is basically immovable for better or worse (it could age really badly), but that wouldn't prohibit the Blues from acquiring guys long-term.

I would agree. Obviously freeing up salary (most likely Krug) is the prerequisite for any of these hypothetical moves. I don't see that realisticially happening in the immediate future so we'll have to wait and see who becomes available and when. I do think a full season of Scandella would help a lot as it would bump everyone else's matchups down a notch as he always gets the heaviest minutes along with Colt.

Toews would be interesting though I think there could easily be a bidding war for him. Looking at 2024 UFAs there aren't a ton of needle movers outside of Toews and Hanifin. Skjei, Brodie, Zadorov Forsling, maybe OEL if he bounces back could be solid depth guys but not game changers.

 

[PJJJP]

Well K'Andre Miller signed a 2 year 3.8 mil extension with the Rangers. In my fantasy world I wanted to get him

 

[Brian39]

When you say #2's do you mean top pair to a #1 or 2nd pairing ?

The answer is complicated because teams use their #2 in different ways. Some teams pair their #1 and #2 together to try and form an elite top pair while others split their #1 and #2 to create a more balanced top 4. A #2 could play either role that you listed.

But by #2, I mean a guy who would be the 2nd best D man on most teams around the league. He can be a top pair guy if that is how the team wants to use him or he can be the anchor of a 2nd pair that logs close to even minutes with the 'top' pair.

A #1 is a guy who can give you 19+ even strength minutes a night and anchor your top pair without a stud partner. These guys are either considered very good in all 3 zones or are in the conversation for top 5 in the league on one side of the ice. On special teams, he is the leader of either the PK or PP (or he is on the 2nd unit for both and logging 20+ minutes a night at even strength).

A #2 can't do all of that, but is still a top 30-60ish D man in the league and does a lot of things very well. These guys can give you more like 18-19 minutes a night at even strength and are good at multiple aspects of the game (but fall noticeably short of being in the conversation for 'top 5 in the league' at either end of the ice). Usually they are noticeably better at either pushing offense or defending, but they still above average in all 3 zones. They are going to log a decent amount of special teams minutes, but may or may not be the leader of either. If their pair is deployed like a top pair, then they need a partner who is roughly on par with them (or better). If they are used more like a 2nd pair, then they can get by with a #3 or #4 caliber partner.

This is where I have Faulk and Parayko. They are both above average in all 3 zones, and very good (albeit not in the conversation for top 5) on one side of the ice. I think either is capable of effectively playing 19+ even strength minutes a night if their partner was roughly on par with them (or better) and I think either is capable of effectively handling 18-19 even strength minutes of more sheltered usage if playing with a #3/4 kind of D man.

 

[Xerloris]

Well K'Andre Miller signed a 2 year 3.8 mil extension with the Rangers. In my fantasy world I wanted to get him

Should have offer sheeted him, assuming he was an RFA.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

This is a bad offseason to be UFA and trying to get a payday.

 

[Reality Czech]

Should have offer sheeted him, assuming he was an RFA.

Doubt he has any interest in leaving the Big Apple and a team that's got a bright future.

 

[Spektre]

The LHD upgrade is about the long-term, not 2023/24. It needs to happen whether we acquire a guy right now, next summer, the following summer, develop an existing prospect, or get one through the draft.

I don't believe that prospect currently exists in the organization. I think Lindstein could become a 2nd pair caliber LHD and replaces Leddy. In a perfect world, he's a good 3rd pair LD in 2025/26 and plays well enough to slide up to the 2nd pair in 2026/27 when Leddy's deal expires. But I don't think we can bank on him being a top pair LHD in the next 4-5 years. And very likely not ever.

The odds of drafting a LHD in 2024 who is ready to be a top pair LHD by 2025/26 are pretty damn slim. The odds of drafting a guy ready for that role by 2026/27 aren't a ton better.

2016: Juolevi went #5, Sergachev went #8, Bean went #13 and McAvoy went #14. McAvoy was a top pair guy within that time range, but the other 3 weren't close.

2017: Heiskanen and Makar went #3 and #4 and both were top pair guys on the D+3 timeline. No D were drafted 5-13 and then 5 straight D were picked #14-#18. None of them have come close to top pair caliber.

2018: Dahlin went #1 and Q Hughes went #7. After that, there were 4 D picked 8-17 and none of them have become close to top pair caliber.

2019: Byram went #4, Seider went #6, Broberg went #8, Soderstrom went #12, and York went #14. Seider jumped straight into a top pair role in his D+3 season, but none of the others have gotten there.

2020: Sanderson went #5, Drysdale went #6, and Guhle went #16. Sanderson had a great rookie year as an arguable top pair D man in his D+3 season. Niether of the other two are close.

Most drafts just have a single guy who becomes top-pair-caliber by their D+3 season with a decent chunk of other guys drafted early who don't. More often than not, they are all off the board if you don't have a top 5 pick. Given the scarcity of these guys, you don't get to pick between LHD and RHD if you go this route. I don't think that banking on drafting such a guy next summer is a good strategy.

So now you're back to acquiring one via trade or free agency. If you can acquire a long-term solution now, you do it now. These guys are exceptionally hard to find.

Long term is the key.

Krug, Leddy,Parayko, and Faulk are the biggest reasons to me why the organization needs to look at more of a rebuild than a retool.

Clearly Army doesn’t share that opinion. If Army had his way Sanheim would be a Blue. He’s a 27 year old 2nd pairing D signed for 8 more years at 6.25 million per season.

I’m glad Krug blocked that deal. Krug has to be sheltered but it’s 4 years vs 8. At least with Krug you know there will be offensive production. Sanheim is good for 30 points.

So many Philly fans were doom and gloom over Sanheim’s contract discussing how they would never be able to give that contract away.

The attempted move by Army actually makes me dread what can happen over the next couple of years. Giving away futures for middle of the road D is the exact opposite of what the Blues need to do even if it’s getting rid of Krug in the process.

I’m actually surprised Army isn’t receiving more scrutiny over that trade. I guess fans mainly focus on Krug leaving and are satisfied.

If the Blues are steadfast in this pursuit of staying competitive, it has to translate into giving away futures at some point. Let’s try to project out 2 years from now.

Going into the 2025 season with players and ages:

Buchnevich30 Thomas26 Kyrou27
Saad33 Schenn34 Bolduc22
Neighbors23 Dvorsky20 Snuggerud21
Toropchenko26 Hayes33 Dean22

Leddy34 Faulk33
Krug34 Parayko32

Binnington33


These are the ages at the beginning of the season, not 2 years exactly from this date.

Buchnevich is the only one not signed going into 2025.

Look at that D. None of them will be better 2 years from now. They will be lucky if they have the same overall skill as they currently have. The odds are not in their favor.

So the thought is to replace a guy like Krug with a top LHD. You still have those 3 other D who are aging.

I don’t see it. It’s impossible to predict the roster year to year, but these are guys under contract, and assuming the young guys make the roster 2 years from now.

I see that roster and say embrace the rebuild. That D will be ugly. The best case scenario is Thomas and Kyrou at 27-28 with a team full of bright, talented, young players.

 

[Xerloris]

Long term is the key.

Krug, Leddy,Parayko, and Faulk are the biggest reasons to me why the organization needs to look at more of a rebuild than a retool.

Clearly Army doesn’t share that opinion. If Army had his way Sanheim would be a Blue. He’s a 27 year old 2nd pairing D signed for 8 more years at 6.25 million per season.

I’m glad Krug blocked that deal. Krug has to be sheltered but it’s 4 years vs 8. At least with Krug you know there will be offensive production. Sanheim is good for 30 points.

So many Philly fans were doom and gloom over Sanheim’s contract discussing how they would never be able to give that contract away.

The attempted move by Army actually makes me dread what can happen over the next couple of years. Giving away futures for middle of the road D is the exact opposite of what the Blues need to do even if it’s getting rid of Krug in the process.

I’m actually surprised Army isn’t receiving more scrutiny over that trade. I guess fans mainly focus on Krug leaving and are satisfied.

If the Blues are steadfast in this pursuit of staying competitive, it has to translate into giving away futures at some point. Let’s try to project out 2 years from now.

Going into the 2025 season with players and ages:

Buchnevich30 Thomas26 Kyrou27
Saad33 Schenn34 Bolduc22
Neighbors23 Dvorsky20 Snuggerud21
Toropchenko26 Hayes33 Dean22

Leddy34 Faulk33
Krug34 Parayko32

Binnington33


These are the ages at the beginning of the season, not 2 years exactly from this date.

Buchnevich is the only one not signed going into 2025.

Look at that D. None of them will be better 2 years from now. They will be lucky if they have the same overall skill as they currently have. The odds are not in their favor.

So the thought is to replace a guy like Krug with a top LHD. You still have those 3 other D who are aging.

I don’t see it. It’s impossible to predict the roster year to year, but these are guys under contract, and assuming the young guys make the roster 2 years from now.

I see that roster and say embrace the rebuild. That D will be ugly. The best case scenario is Thomas and Kyrou at 27-28 with a team full of bright, talented, young players.

Parayko, Faulk and Leddy are a very solid D core. Ideally Leddy should be #2 LD and not our #1 but for 4 mill he's an excellent value player. I just don't see your problem with Parayko and Faulk.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Going into the 2025 season with players and ages:

Buchnevich30 Thomas26 Kyrou27
Saad33 Schenn34 Bolduc22
Neighbors23 Dvorsky20 Snuggerud21
Toropchenko26 Hayes33 Dean22

Leddy34 Faulk33
Krug34 Parayko32

Binnington33

...

Look at that D. None of them will be better 2 years from now. They will be lucky if they have the same overall skill as they currently have. The odds are not in their favor. So the thought is to replace a guy like Krug with a top LHD. You still have those 3 other D who are aging. I don’t see it. It’s impossible to predict the roster year to year, but these are guys under contract, and assuming the young guys make the roster 2 years from now. I see that roster and say embrace the rebuild. That D will be ugly. The best case scenario is Thomas and Kyrou at 27-28 with a team full of bright, talented, young players.

(your post above was edited for legnth but i don't think i changed meaning)

in 2 years, 25-28, the cap will have risen by about $9mm. buchy's contract will have expired, as you say, and it's too early to know whether he will be here although i have my doubts. saad, hayes, and leddy will be on last year of their contract, and faulk and krug will only have 2 years left. any of those guys should be moveable at that point without having to pay assets to move them. maybe krug would be negative asset but the rest should all be positives, some maybe even pretty decent value. so while i agree with you that we don't want that as our top 4 d in 2 years, i don't think that is particularly likely (unless they somehow are all playing so great we don't want to move them).

we ARE basically rebuilding, but Army is trying to do it without bottoming out, this is because he doesn't want losing culture to take over, he knows we need to sell tickets, and realistically we wouldn't be bad enough to get top pick so it's not likely worth it anyway. and i think we basically have the forwards for this already in the system. the reason he wanted sanheim is he saw him as guy who could be top 4 guy both now and in the future. personally, i think his contract sucks and was only palatable bc it got krug gone. but as our top guys on d get older we need to find guys to replace them in top 4. we don't have any d prospects who will likely be top 4 in 24 months (some who may be in 4 years), so that is why we would want guy like sanheim. we maybe dodged a bullet, i dunno, but we still have that need. this year's team isn't going to contend anyway so i don't care if we fill that now, but we ain't gonna be real contenders until we have strong top 4 on d that is not all over 30.

 

[Spektre]

Parayko, Faulk and Leddy are a very solid D core. Ideally Leddy should be #2 LD and not our #1 but for 4 mill he's an excellent value player. I just don't see your problem with Parayko and Faulk.

I don’t necessarily have an issue with Faulk or Leddy. I think Parayko has regressed and he’s not aggressive enough. He doesn’t have to turn into Pronger, he just has to stop being a step behind the play in the D zone.

The point though is projecting forward. In 2 years the entire D core will be definitely aged.. It doesn’t make sense to trade futures for one upgrade at LHD. That one player isn’t going to make the team a contender over the next 2 years. When those 2 years are over, the main core of the team, especially on D, are aged and will not perform as good as they once did.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

Saad will have plenty of interest around the league if we try to shop him after this year. 2 years at 4.5 AAV for a middle 6 winger who scores 20 goals almost like clockwork and has great defensive metrics is something young teams trying to compete look for. He'd be great for the Devils (As a Toffoli replacement) or Buffalo (As an Okposo replacement).

I think Saad is one of the best pieces of business Army has done in the recent past. His contract is great for what he brings and he filled a role on our roster admirably while we waited for our plethora of winger prospects to mature and fight for spots.

 

[Brian39]

Krug, Leddy,Parayko, and Faulk are the biggest reasons to me why the organization needs to look at more of a rebuild than a retool. Let’s try to project out 2 years from now.

Going into the 2025 season with players and ages:

Leddy34 Faulk33
Krug34 Parayko32

Look at that D. None of them will be better 2 years from now. They will be lucky if they have the same overall skill as they currently have. The odds are not in their favor. I see that roster and say embrace the rebuild. That D will be ugly. The best case scenario is Thomas and Kyrou at 27-28 with a team full of bright, talented, young players.

I edited your post a bit to address a couple points separately.

I just don't see Faulk and Parayko's ages as an issue for 2025/26 and 2026/27. Krug absolutely can't be in the top 4 by then and I'd want Leddy to be either the #2 LD, the #3 LD, or moved prior to 2025/26 (when his contract becomes much easier to move). But that depends on what else is added and/or how prospects develop. But having the right side of the top 4 in their age 32/33 seasons for 2025/26 and 33/34 for 2026/27 doesn't worry me.

Vegas just won the Cup with the following top 4 ages (sorted by TOI per game in the playoffs):

33, 27, 35, 32

If we swap Krug with a LHD still in his mid-late 20s by 2025/26, then the age construction of the blueline is right in line with that. I am much less concerned about the aging curve of D than I am forwards. I'm not saying that you can bank on them sustaining it to 36 and beyond, but age 32 and 33 seasons don't worry me. I don't look at those seasons and think that we should throw 2025/26 or 2026/27 in the garbage if they are in the top 4. I look at them still being damn good vets.

Nick Leddy just had arguably the best season of his career in his age 31 season. Karlsson just had his best season in years in his age 32 season. Petro just had his best season as a Knight at 33. Burns just finished 10th in Norris voting at 37 (first time getting votes in 4 years). The best 4 year stretch of Carlson's career came from 29-32 and the Caps were immediately in shambles when he got hurt this year. Martinez has been very good in Vegas in his age 32-35 seasons. The #2 version of Bouwmeester many of us still fondly remember was in his age 33-36 seasons.

32 and 33 years old doesn't scare me with D.

Faulk will be in his age 34 season in the final year of his contract (2026/27) and I'd hope that we spend some time in the next 3+ years executing a plan for another RD to be ready to start eating into his minutes by then and transitioning Faulk into a 2nd/3rd pair tweener. As we stand right now, Parayko's $6.5M is the only money on the books for the blueline and you have enormous flexibility for the D group to be completely different as Parayko enters his age 34 season.

I think Faulk and Parayko are aged perfectly fine for a team looking to re-enter a competitive window in 2024/25. Any RHD we draft in 2024 (or beyond) absolutely won't be ready to handle their minutes until 2026/27 at the earliest. Frankly, their ages kind of perfectly align with us trying to draft and develop a RHD in the 1st round next year if that is the way we go. With a rising cap and the high likelihood of having numerous cheap forwards in the middle 6, I don't see their $6.5M cap hits as an issue either.

Clearly Army doesn’t share that opinion. If Army had his way Sanheim would be a Blue. He’s a 27 year old 2nd pairing D signed for 8 more years at 6.25 million per season.

I’m glad Krug blocked that deal. Krug has to be sheltered but it’s 4 years vs 8. At least with Krug you know there will be offensive production. Sanheim is good for 30 points.

So many Philly fans were doom and gloom over Sanheim’s contract discussing how they would never be able to give that contract away.

The attempted move by Army actually makes me dread what can happen over the next couple of years. Giving away futures for middle of the road D is the exact opposite of what the Blues need to do even if it’s getting rid of Krug in the process.

I’m actually surprised Army isn’t receiving more scrutiny over that trade. I guess fans mainly focus on Krug leaving and are satisfied.

Last season, Sanheim outproduced Krug at even strength 21-18. Krug's 23 point pace was slightly better than Sanheim's.

Sanheim has outproduced Krug at even strength 51 points to 42 points over the last 2 seasons. Their even strength points per game is identical (.323 points per game) over that stretch.

Sanheim has outproduced Krug at even strength 67 points to 60 points over the last 3 seasons (Krug's entire stint as a Blue). Krug's .34 even strength points per game is a bit better than Sanheim's .31 over that stretch.

Their even strength production is extremely similar, but Krug has had the benefit of getting some of the most offensive and sheltered deployment in the league while Sanheim has consistently been used in a shutdown role.

I think you are very much undervaluing what Sanheim does and very much overstating the production we get from Krug. Krug is a very good PP QB. He's not a good driver of offense at even strength. He has 10 fewer even strength points than Parayko in the 3 years he's been here despite being given every offensive opportunity that Parayko doesn't get.

Sanheim wasn't my preferred target, but it is tough to judge the trade without knowing all of the parts. With that said, I think he is more than a 2nd pair or middle of the road D man. His 67 even strength points in the last 3 years is tied for 46th among NHL D man and his 52 even strength points in the last 2 years is tied for 46th. Tied for 37th and 43rd in even strength goals in that stretch. His offensive production at even strength is that of a low-end top pairing guy and he's been doing it while playing a shutdown role.

This year's performance under Torts is absolutely a cause for concern, but I think you're selling him well short while overselling Krug. The gap between the two at everything but PPQB ability is enormous. And while Sanheim has more term, he is also 5 years younger and carries far less injury concerns.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Cool we got Sunny back now we can trade Kyrou. Let's gooooo

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Proposal

Blues
Nathan Walker

Kings/Yotes
Future Considerations

 

[DatDude44]

Proposal

Blues
Nathan Walker

Kings/Yotes
Future Considerations

We'll keep him for the Austria games, then probly move on lol

 

[kimzey59]

Proposal

Blues
Nathan Walker

Kings/Yotes
Future Considerations

The Dingo does not approve.

Seriously though, No.
Walker is perfectly fine as a 13th forward, he just isn't an every night player.
And I much prefer Walker sitting in the press box every night as opposed to Alexandrov.
I'm not completely opposed to moving Walker, but it would only be worthwhile if it's to make the Cap work while addressing another need.
For example: Rosen, Bortuzzo and Walker for a half price Tyler Myers(not that I'd actually do that deal because I have zero interest in Myers at any price).

 

[Spektre]

I edited your post a bit to address a couple points separately.

I just don't see Faulk and Parayko's ages as an issue for 2025/26 and 2026/27. Krug absolutely can't be in the top 4 by then and I'd want Leddy to be either the #2 LD, the #3 LD, or moved prior to 2025/26 (when his contract becomes much easier to move). But that depends on what else is added and/or how prospects develop. But having the right side of the top 4 in their age 32/33 seasons for 2025/26 and 33/34 for 2026/27 doesn't worry me.

Vegas just won the Cup with the following top 4 ages (sorted by TOI per game in the playoffs):

33, 27, 35, 32

If we swap Krug with a LHD still in his mid-late 20s by 2025/26, then the age construction of the blueline is right in line with that. I am much less concerned about the aging curve of D than I am forwards. I'm not saying that you can bank on them sustaining it to 36 and beyond, but age 32 and 33 seasons don't worry me. I don't look at those seasons and think that we should throw 2025/26 or 2026/27 in the garbage if they are in the top 4. I look at them still being damn good vets.

Nick Leddy just had arguably the best season of his career in his age 31 season. Karlsson just had his best season in years in his age 32 season. Petro just had his best season as a Knight at 33. Burns just finished 10th in Norris voting at 37 (first time getting votes in 4 years). The best 4 year stretch of Carlson's career came from 29-32 and the Caps were immediately in shambles when he got hurt this year. Martinez has been very good in Vegas in his age 32-35 seasons. The #2 version of Bouwmeester many of us still fondly remember was in his age 33-36 seasons.

32 and 33 years old doesn't scare me with D.

Faulk will be in his age 34 season in the final year of his contract (2026/27) and I'd hope that we spend some time in the next 3+ years executing a plan for another RD to be ready to start eating into his minutes by then and transitioning Faulk into a 2nd/3rd pair tweener. As we stand right now, Parayko's $6.5M is the only money on the books for the blueline and you have enormous flexibility for the D group to be completely different as Parayko enters his age 34 season.

I think Faulk and Parayko are aged perfectly fine for a team looking to re-enter a competitive window in 2024/25. Any RHD we draft in 2024 (or beyond) absolutely won't be ready to handle their minutes until 2026/27 at the earliest. Frankly, their ages kind of perfectly align with us trying to draft and develop a RHD in the 1st round next year if that is the way we go. With a rising cap and the high likelihood of having numerous cheap forwards in the middle 6, I don't see their $6.5M cap hits as an issue either.


Last season, Sanheim outproduced Krug at even strength 21-18. Krug's 23 point pace was slightly better than Sanheim's.

Sanheim has outproduced Krug at even strength 51 points to 42 points over the last 2 seasons. Their even strength points per game is identical (.323 points per game) over that stretch.

Sanheim has outproduced Krug at even strength 67 points to 60 points over the last 3 seasons (Krug's entire stint as a Blue). Krug's .34 even strength points per game is a bit better than Sanheim's .31 over that stretch.

Their even strength production is extremely similar, but Krug has had the benefit of getting some of the most offensive and sheltered deployment in the league while Sanheim has consistently been used in a shutdown role.

I think you are very much undervaluing what Sanheim does and very much overstating the production we get from Krug. Krug is a very good PP QB. He's not a good driver of offense at even strength. He has 10 fewer even strength points than Parayko in the 3 years he's been here despite being given every offensive opportunity that Parayko doesn't get.

Sanheim wasn't my preferred target, but it is tough to judge the trade without knowing all of the parts. With that said, I think he is more than a 2nd pair or middle of the road D man. His 67 even strength points in the last 3 years is tied for 46th among NHL D man and his 52 even strength points in the last 2 years is tied for 46th. Tied for 37th and 43rd in even strength goals in that stretch. His offensive production at even strength is that of a low-end top pairing guy and he's been doing it while playing a shutdown role.

This year's performance under Torts is absolutely a cause for concern, but I think you're selling him well short while overselling Krug. The gap between the two at everything but PPQB ability is enormous. And while Sanheim has more term, he is also 5 years younger and carries far less injury concerns.

I definitely don’t want to overhype Krug. He’s a worse defensive version of Shattenkirk and Shattenkirk was never a stalwart on D.

 

[Reality Czech]

I definitely don’t want to overhype Krug. He’s a worse defensive version of Shattenkirk and Shattenkirk was never a stalwart on D.

Disagree. I don't think he's worse than Shatty defensively and at least Krug plays physical despite his size.