"Doug Armstrong is getting ready to Unload his roster and locker room issues"

[ChicagoBlues]

Depends on what Armstrong does.

He was able to launch Lehtera’s contract into the sun as well as Berglund’s.

Would have to move 2 of the following at least:Scandella(which is possible), Krug (possible but would have to take on some cap in return), and Leddy for immediate relief.

Schenn is virtually immovable. I like Saad but could probably return younger players for less cap if the goal is to compete long-term over a desperate attempt to make POs.

I don’t think everything’s doom and gloom here, but that also heavily depends on Thomas and Kyrou continuing to perform at a high level.

This what I expect to happen. Somehow, DA is going to unload a bad contract.

I love Saad, but he's gotta go.

I am somewhat satisfied with Krug. but he's gotta go.

 

[Louie the Blue]

This what I expect to happen. Somehow, DA is going to unload a bad contract.

I love Saad, but he's gotta go.

I am somewhat satisfied with Krug. but he's gotta go.

I don't think either have to go, but it's dependent on what Armstrong wants and does with other players as well.

I think Krug will be more challenging to move. Saad wouldn't be, but moving him makes the team worse next season immediately.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I don't think either have to go, but it's dependent on what Armstrong wants and does with other players as well.

I think Krug will be more challenging to move. Saad wouldn't be, but moving him makes the team worse next season immediately.

I agree with much of what you've posted. I approach all of this with the perspective that all points of view are valid.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I approach all of this with the perspective that all points of view are valid.

I don't. But I agree with what he said.

 

[Xerloris]

I don't. But I agree with what he said.

I don't think Saad would return enough to warrant losing his experience and the way he plays.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I don't. But I agree with what he said.

Holographic explanations are always better. They encompass all views, no matter how much you nay disagree with it.

Not gospel; just an offer.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

I don't think Saad would return enough to warrant losing his experience and the way he plays.

i think that is probably right. as our kids develop over next couple years we will need him less, but we already losing 4 of our top 10 forwards so don't see need to get rid of any others unless they yield outsized returns.

 

[Mike Liut]

This what I expect to happen. Somehow, DA is going to unload a bad contract.

I love Saad, but he's gotta go.

I am somewhat satisfied with Krug. but he's gotta go.

id take a 2nd for Saad without hesitation.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Holographic explanations are always better. They encompass all views, no matter how much you nay disagree with it.

Not gospel; just an offer.

Holographic explanations? Is that what R2D2 had stored from Princess Leah?

 

[jmwc95]

id take a 2nd for Saad without hesitation.

What does a 2nd get you? MAYBE a forward as good as Saad 5 years from now?

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Holographic explanations? Is that what R2D2 had stored from Princess Leah?

Happy to explain in a PM, if you're interested.

 

[Mike Liut]

What does a 2nd get you? MAYBE a forward as good as Saad 5 years from now?

Saad will be gone by the time we’re a good again. Why not try to get a young asset?

 

[Novacain]

I feel like I’m just always a Debby downer around here, but whatever.

I think comparing the Berglund/Lehtera contracts to the Krug/Parayko contract isn’t really workable. They are not only more expensive per year, they are both significantly longer. Getting out of them (without getting back an equally or not worse contract) will require another GM being very very stupid (Which, hey, possible! Still are stupid GMs out there, just look at the Risto contract).

And that’s kind of why I tend to be of the opinion that us “retooling” isn’t the answer: We simply have two many bad contracts and almost all of them are in the same spot: Defense. Which might be workable if we had some high end defensive prospects on the way, but we don’t. And this draft is super forward heavy, one of the weakest group of defensemen prospects we’ve seen in a long time. We might take one with our late 1sts, but using our early 1st on one this year would feel like a pure “picking for position instead of BPA” move. If Army can get us out of this giant pit we have as a D core, then I’d be ecstatic, but from where we stand now I think we are at least 4 seasons away from being a legit cup contender.

Would love to be wrong though.

 

[Mike Liut]

I feel like I’m just always a Debby downer around here, but whatever.

I think comparing the Berglund/Lehtera contracts to the Krug/Parayko contract isn’t really workable. They are not only more expensive per year, they are both significantly longer. Getting out of them (without getting back an equally or not worse contract) will require another GM being very very stupid (Which, hey, possible! Still are stupid GMs out there, just look at the Risto contract).

And that’s kind of why I tend to be of the opinion that us “retooling” isn’t the answer: We simply have two many bad contracts and almost all of them are in the same spot: Defense. Which might be workable if we had some high end defensive prospects on the way, but we don’t. And this draft is super forward heavy, one of the weakest group of defensemen prospects we’ve seen in a long time. We might take one with our late 1sts, but using our early 1st on one this year would feel like a pure “picking for position instead of BPA” move. If Army can get us out of this giant pit we have as a D core, then I’d be ecstatic, but from where we stand now I think we are at least 4 seasons away from being a legit cup contender.

Would love to be wrong though.

i think Parayko is easily movable. not so sure about Krug. It’s possible I guess. Just think, we just signed both recently, and we aren’t dumbasses. We are just in the middle of a re-tool. They are both good players.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Happy to explain in a PM, if you're interested.

Sure. hit me up.

 

[Novacain]

i think Parayko is easily movable. not so sure about Krug. It’s possible I guess. Just think, we just signed both recently, and we aren’t dumbasses. We are just in the middle of a re-tool. They are both good players.

My counter is that I think in regarding giving out contracts Army clearly has made a lot of dumbass moves that led us to being in this position, but not everyone will agree there.

And good players on absolute nightmares of contracts still tend to not be moved. I don’t think Colt has been worth 6.5 million a year this year, and he’s locked up for the rest of this decade. It’s already looking pretty awful, and it’s going to get worse, not better.

 

[Mike Liut]

My counter is that I think in regarding giving out contracts Army clearly has made a lot of dumbass moves that led us to being in this position, but not everyone will agree there.

And good players on absolute nightmares of contracts still tend to not be moved. I don’t think Colt has been worth 6.5 million a year this year, and he’s locked up for the rest of this decade. It’s already looking pretty awful, and it’s going to get worse, not better.

I don’t think he’s over paid for anybody. 6.5 isn’t really that much. I don’t like the term on Schenn, Leddy and Saad, but the aav isn’t that bad. I wish all had 1 year less.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

id take a 2nd for Saad without hesitation.

I mean, you like to lowball yourself on value for everyone. Weren't you just saying that we weren't going to get a 1st for Tarasenko?

 

[Mike Liut]

I mean, you like to lowball yourself on value for everyone. Weren't you just saying that we weren't going to get a 1st for Tarasenko?

Probably. I just hate the term on Saad. 3 more years after this one. Ughh

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Probably. I just hate the term on Saad. 3 more years after this one. Ughh

Three years at 4.5mil for a defensively sound, all situations LW, who pots 20+ goals a season is perfectly fine. It's barely 5.5% of the Cap, and the cap should have a major jump after next year.

This is also 1 of the 2 guys that held Makar to 3 points in 6 games last playoffs.

 

[Mike Liut]

Three years at 4.5mil for a defensively sound, all situations LW, who pots 20+ goals a season is perfectly fine. It's barely 5.5% of the Cap, and the cap should have a major jump after next year.

This is also 1 of the 2 guys that held Makar to 3 points in 6 games last playoffs.

I don’t think we’ll be happy with his final 2 years. Just a hunch.

 

[BlueSeal]

All this talk of Perron being a locker room problem seems really f***ing stupid considering we were arguably the second best team in the league last year and the only other losses from last year’s roster were Bozak (who we replaced with Acciari) and a backup goaltender. I’m gonna go out on a limb here and say Perron wasn’t the f***ing problem.

I’m going to say based on personal opinion alone, that Army’s the problem.

Hear me out:

Logically speaking, the entire room can be a problem if they’re reacting to what you’re doing. Army made moves, folks disagreed and maybe Perron got vocal about it and because he’s not agreeing, he’s seen as poison to the room.

This might have happened several times already and the voices of the room, the ones folks followed and stood by, were removed. That will cause issues faster than anything and swapping out players won’t fix the problem because we’ll just have it again and again.

Saying all of that, If we got sources posting crap like that, we need and need to demand details about what it was that made them ‘cancers’ in the room.

I believe there’s a pattern going on right in front of us but we either refuse to see it or make excuses for it. Without context, it’s all the same thing.

I refuse to believe Perron is anything but a leader who leads by example. If that’s not the type of people we want, fire Army right now.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

I don’t think we’ll be happy with his final 2 years. Just a hunch.

And we shouldn't be taking a low ball offer just to get rid of a player because his deal might look bad in 2 years when the deal is working out wonderfully right now. Plus he's only 30, doesn't have any mobility issues, and his style of play isn't extremely taxing on his body.

 

[LyNX27]

I hope the plan is to keep him and extend him before his current deal is up.

We've got a full year between the time when all the full NTCs become limited NTCs and the time a Buch extension would kick in. The cap should be up to $90M+ by the first year of an extension and Bolduc, Snuggy and any player we pick between now and then will all still be on ELCs for the first year of a Buch extension. Any prospect who doesn't go pro next year will still be on his ELC for year 2 of a Buch extension. And then the large majority of bad money comes off the books.

Saad and Leddy come off the books after year 1 of a Buch extension. Binner, Faulk, and Krug come off the books after year 2 of a Buch extension. We should have plenty of cap space to pay Buch UFA value without hindering our ability to pay Snuggy/Bolduc/picks as they become owed raises.

A Buch extension will cover his 30 year old season and beyond. I'm very comfortable with him as the veteran forward who helps our young guys develop as we pull out of a retool and is still in his very early 30s when we are trying to legitimately contend again.

Like everyone, he's not untouchable if a team offers a massive return for him. But I wouldn't be looking to move him and I'd need an absolute haul to move him.

Would Blais and a 2nd move the needle for you? Ahh wait...

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Three years at 4.5mil for a defensively sound, all situations LW, who pots 20+ goals a season is perfectly fine. It's barely 5.5% of the Cap, and the cap should have a major jump after next year.

This is also 1 of the 2 guys that held Makar to 3 points in 6 games last playoffs.

Completely agree with this. His utility and flexibility in the lineup makes him great to have. And Saad doesn't seem like the kind of player that will completely fall off in his early 30s(baring injuries), and his term puts him right in time to be off the books at the same time as our top prospects would be coming off their ELCs.

I personally don't see a need to move any of our forwards that are under contract next year, we went into this season roughly in the middle of the pack in terms of cap spent towards forwards. I'd much rather focus on moving out cap from the D in order to gain the flexibility that we need.