NYR Viper
Registered User
Rangers aren't moving either of their top pairing defensemen. They would have ti blown away by the offer. Perron + Cole + late 1st? That's the best you could offer?
Blues Trade Proposals Part 4
- Thread starter EastonBlues22
- Start date
Rangers aren't moving either of their top pairing defensemen. They would have ti blown away by the offer. Perron + Cole + late 1st? That's the best you could offer?
Maybe we can trade Berglund Perron and Stewart for Garth Butcher...
Or maybe Oshie Schwartz and our 1st round picks for the next 4 years for Keith Tkachuk...
Some people here are hilarious. It's like you have learned nothing from past mistakes the team has made yet still enjoy looking back and bashing the moves you now wish to replicate. Yes, let's overpay from our core for a defensive defenseman to pair with Petro. If we had a name brand superstar, we would win the Cup for sure because look at how many the Blues won with Hull, Gretzky, Pronger, Chopper, Tkachuk etc.
8-2-1.
That is the record when Brian Elliott doesn't play. You want to know the difference between this year and last year, Elliott is the biggest difference by far. The Blues made mental mistakes last season and at times the system broke down. The difference is the Blues won those games because our goalies saved more than 85% of the shots they faced, and those mistakes were forgotten.
Or maybe Oshie Schwartz and our 1st round picks for the next 4 years for Keith Tkachuk...
Some people here are hilarious. It's like you have learned nothing from past mistakes the team has made yet still enjoy looking back and bashing the moves you now wish to replicate. Yes, let's overpay from our core for a defensive defenseman to pair with Petro. If we had a name brand superstar, we would win the Cup for sure because look at how many the Blues won with Hull, Gretzky, Pronger, Chopper, Tkachuk etc.
8-2-1.
That is the record when Brian Elliott doesn't play. You want to know the difference between this year and last year, Elliott is the biggest difference by far. The Blues made mental mistakes last season and at times the system broke down. The difference is the Blues won those games because our goalies saved more than 85% of the shots they faced, and those mistakes were forgotten.
ExJbeck
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2012
- 1,423
- 7
Yea its better than Cole + Schwartz + Perron for Gaborik. The Blues were " blown away" by that offer let me tell you. I could have just low balled you like you did us and said how about Nichol for Richards? What does Gaborik offer? speed and scoring. What does Perron offer? Scoring and slick hands. So for what little bit Gaborik's speed is going to help the Blues, who don't have a playmaker to even give Gaborik the puck, why in the hell would we trade Perron + Cole + Schwartz for him?
Oh yea Gaborik is 31 and has 7.5 mil cap. Perron is cost controlled and would probably score more goals with Richards than with Backes or Beglund. Let me get this straight, you want us to help make your team better by adding the depth your GM so wisely traded away this off season, but in return do nothing for us. Sounds like a good plan to me.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 52,925
- 16,380
Lets be real here, Handzus, Nagy, Taffe, and a 1st (Ben Eager) for Tkachuk was a great trade.
Hell, if we could replicate the Doug Weight trade, I would be ecstatic as well.
There are plenty of other examples of horrible trades in our history though. Maybe we can tamper with ROR.
Multimoodia
Sicker Than Usual
Odd, I did not know the Rangers could tamper with time and thus bring back Gaborik from about 10 years ago.
I mean even the most addled Rangers fan would not seriously believe Gaborik would merit that sort of return, certainly not from a budget conscious team like the Blues.
Personally, I would keep that sort of technology to myself were I the Rangers...rather than attempting to line up insanely one-sided deals.
ExJbeck
Registered User
- Jul 29, 2012
- 1,423
- 7
poobags
8) 8) 8( 8)
Any interest in Jussi Jokinen out of Carolina? He struggled to start the year as the 3C but since being moved to wing with Riley Nash he's been playing a lot better.
Halak Ness Monster
Registered User
I offered up Perron, Cole, and a 1st for McDonagh on the trade forum a few days ago and a lot of Ranger fans thought that was fair value. It is indeed a great offer but McDonagh just isn't going anywhere.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 52,925
- 16,380
HockeyGuy73
Registered User
I am not opposed to trading Perron. He has some sweet hands, and pulls off some amazing moves. But it seems for every time that it works, there is 10 that it doesnt. Part of this teams problem is they are trying to be too pretty with the puck, instead of simple passes out of their own zone, and get the puck to the net in the offensive zone.
Multimoodia
Sicker Than Usual
I cannot imagine why anyone would be opposed to trading any player on the Blues as long as it improved the team.
If tomorrow the Rangers offered McDonagh and Staal for Petro I would want Armstrong to move ahead on that. There can be no sacred cows.
But I do not want a player shipped out because his style of play annoys me, or because I think a change is needed in how the team plays.
Trading Perron for anything other than as a package for a serious upgrade at either center or left defense would be both foolish and short-sighted and the Blues do not have the type of resources available to make such oversights.
If tomorrow the Rangers offered McDonagh and Staal for Petro I would want Armstrong to move ahead on that. There can be no sacred cows.
But I do not want a player shipped out because his style of play annoys me, or because I think a change is needed in how the team plays.
Trading Perron for anything other than as a package for a serious upgrade at either center or left defense would be both foolish and short-sighted and the Blues do not have the type of resources available to make such oversights.
542365
2018-19 Cup Champs!
- Mar 22, 2012
- 22,540
- 8,993
I don't want Perron to go anywhere. He is such a supremely talented player, the only guy on the team that can make something out of absolutely nothing. If it brings back a solid LHD, or a #1C, then of course I'd make that trade. I just don't see it happening.
- Feb 12, 2008
- 19,931
- 9,463
TheOrganist
Don't Call Him Alex
- Feb 21, 2006
- 4,242
- 1,774
The financial realties of the club are hopefully becoming more crystalized for the fanbase after observing the Arnott situation. We're like the Dewittian Cardinals pre-2006 World Series, IMO. I don't think there will be any significant payroll added beyond this season unless someone else departs.
The way I see it is Armstrong has two options:
He can either trade a pick or a prospect or both for a defenseman that is a UFA-to-be with the quality of what the Blues would part with depending on the player. He would be a player that isn't great but is better than what we currently possess like a Hainsey or Leopold type. That market would start to become clearer as teams start to fall out of the playoff race closer to the deadline. A relatively small, pro-rated contract is the only deal I could see ownership approving in a deal with no roster players going the other way. If X player really helps the Blues down the stretch and into the playoffs, the team would theoretically have some money to sign him with McDonald's likely departure and the absence of this next player in the second paragraph to follow.
Or he could make a bigger move that involves re-adjusting the makeup of the core. The drawback, of course, is that it would simply open up a new hole on a team that should be adding to what it already has. That's what contenders do. Only in STL does a contender have to allocate its resources at such a crucial time. And it's rather unanimous that resources should be allocated in the direction of a top 4 defenseman.
So with that being said, if Armstrong were to explore that route, the least damaging thing they could do in both the short run (not a game to game impact player like Perron) and the long run (contract situation very much up in the air, unlike Perron) would be to make a package with Stewart as the centerpiece in a deal for a defenseman.
His value is increasing, the team acquiring him would still control his rights for another season, the Blues have great organizational depth on right wing, and the loss of Stewart would sting much, much less than it would if they dealt a player like Perron.
The way I see it is Armstrong has two options:
He can either trade a pick or a prospect or both for a defenseman that is a UFA-to-be with the quality of what the Blues would part with depending on the player. He would be a player that isn't great but is better than what we currently possess like a Hainsey or Leopold type. That market would start to become clearer as teams start to fall out of the playoff race closer to the deadline. A relatively small, pro-rated contract is the only deal I could see ownership approving in a deal with no roster players going the other way. If X player really helps the Blues down the stretch and into the playoffs, the team would theoretically have some money to sign him with McDonald's likely departure and the absence of this next player in the second paragraph to follow.
Or he could make a bigger move that involves re-adjusting the makeup of the core. The drawback, of course, is that it would simply open up a new hole on a team that should be adding to what it already has. That's what contenders do. Only in STL does a contender have to allocate its resources at such a crucial time. And it's rather unanimous that resources should be allocated in the direction of a top 4 defenseman.
So with that being said, if Armstrong were to explore that route, the least damaging thing they could do in both the short run (not a game to game impact player like Perron) and the long run (contract situation very much up in the air, unlike Perron) would be to make a package with Stewart as the centerpiece in a deal for a defenseman.
His value is increasing, the team acquiring him would still control his rights for another season, the Blues have great organizational depth on right wing, and the loss of Stewart would sting much, much less than it would if they dealt a player like Perron.
BadgersandBlues
Registered User
- Jun 6, 2011
- 1,893
- 1,420
I disagree Stewart has great goal scoring potential. He also adds a toughness to the lineup that no one else does. Well I guess Reaves does as well. We lose Stewart and we become a much softer team and easier to play against.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
Both Perron and Stewart bring elements that the other forwards don't. Perron dangles and creates offense out of nothing; Stewart will fight. Being St. Louis fans, we hate individualism and love tough big man fighting. That is why Perron is in FAR more trade threads than Stewart.
- Feb 12, 2008
- 19,931
- 9,463
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 52,925
- 16,380
Neither are a great fit, but both are a good enough fit. Perron will get more than Stewart in a trade, simple as that.
Halak Ness Monster
Registered User
Definitely not a good example. DeWitt spent loads of money(smart money) before 2005:
-In 1995, he spent a ton of money to renovate Busch Stadium 2.
-In the 95-96 offseason, DeWitt had Walt Jocketty also renovate the roster by signing/acquiring Andy Benes, Ron Gant, Dennis Eckersley, Todd Stottlemyre, Gary Gaetti and Tony LaRussa.
-In 1997 he acquired Mark McGwire then signed him to a 3 year, 28.5 mil extension with a 4th year option for 10 mil. His contract made him the 4th highest paid player in 1998. McGwire was then signed to a 2 year, 30 mil extension before the 2001 season.
-In 2000 he traded for Jim Edmonds then signed him to a 6 year, 57 mil extension.
-He also acquired Darryl Kile and signed him to a 3 year, 23 mil extension.That was in addition to bringing in Edmonds, Fernado Vina, Pat Hentgen, Andy Benes, and Dave Veres.
-In 2002 he traded for Scott Rolen who turned down a 10 year, 140 million extension from Philadelphia. DeWitt would sign Rolen for 8 years, 90 million.
-Before the 2004 season, he inked Albert Pujols to an 8 year,116 mil extension buying out his cheaper arbitration years and first five years off free agency.
DeWitt has been one of the best owners in all of sports. He spends money on the right players. Hence why you are hearing rumors that he has Mozeliak looking at Troy Tulowitzki and his 140 mil contract.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
Which is weird because the trend on the boards is to value Stewart more highly on the Blues because he "brings an element no other forwards bring." I agree Perron would bring more, and it's because he brings more to a team's offense than Stewart does. Which is the exact reason I'd prefer to keep him. Perron brings more to the Blues, and IMO you can still get what you need in trade with a Stewart package.
bleedblue1223
Registered User
- Jan 21, 2011
- 52,925
- 16,380
I think one will be traded, so I guess we will just wait and see. Stewart also makes more sense from a roster standpoint with Oshie and Tarasenko on the roster and Rattie and Jaskin coming up.
If anything, moving a LW might make more sense from a roster point of view. Next year then we should have Steen, Schwartz and Perron all on LW, assuming that McDonald isn't back. Of our prospects, Jaškin is the closest to the NHL and has played LW this season and will probably find himself on the LW in Peoria as well.
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
He also makes more sense from a contract standpoint – Perron is locked up with some good work by Armstrong while Stewart is an unknown.
Here's how I see the progression of thought. Team plays poorly in circumstances where there should be great urgency = team has no heart = well at least Stewart fights = we can't trade him for this reason.
But the fights don't spark the team and they don't make the team more likely to win. Perron's dangles can be frustrating when they don't materialize into goals, but when they do you realize nobody else on the team can really do this. If the Blues give up this scoring dimension they will be even more predictable in the offensive zone and even easier to defend, which means winning games will be harder.
IMO fighting isn't as much a sign of team spirit as winning board battles all over the ice is. I don't believe this Blues group generates its board battles determination out of seeing a teammate fight. It comes from somewhere else – essentially, within – and lately nothing has been able to generate that determination.
