Confirmed with Link: Suter signs 1 year

[Stupendous Yappi]

It’s possible a team would take him in the right deal but JR’s reporting a source close to Krug says he will still block any trade.

“Krug has one more season with a fully protected no-trade clause before it changes to a modified clause in 2025, when he’ll provide the Blues with a 15-team no-trade list. Until then, he must approve any deal the club tries to make, and as of now, a source close to him says that he would not be willing to waive his no-trade clause.”

Cool, more of being the mouthpiece for the player’s agent.

I’m not very worried about this. Maybe he gets traded, maybe not. I do wonder if you offered him a buyout or a trade to Detroit, would he prefer the buyout?

 

[AVictoryDive]

Cool, more of being the mouthpiece for the player’s agent.

I’m not very worried about this. Maybe he gets traded, maybe not. I do wonder if you offered him a buyout or a trade to Detroit, would he prefer the buyout?

Can’t buy anyone out as the buyout window has passed unless I’m wrong, which I totally could be

 

[SirPaste]

It’s possible a team would take him in the right deal but JR’s reporting a source close to Krug says he will still block any trade.

“Krug has one more season with a fully protected no-trade clause before it changes to a modified clause in 2025, when he’ll provide the Blues with a 15-team no-trade list. Until then, he must approve any deal the club tries to make, and as of now, a source close to him says that he would not be willing to waive his no-trade clause.”

He also said this though:

https://x.com/i/web/status/1811409343343898937

Basically covering his ass no matter what happens and can say he had the scoop

 

[Spektre]

Can’t buy anyone out as the buyout window has passed unless I’m wrong, which I totally could be

Buyouts can start either on June 15 or 48 hours after the Playoffs finish - whichever comes later. The buyout period wraps up on June 30th at 5pm Eastern Standard Time.

 

[BlueDream]

The Blues could waive Krug. I think a few weeks of riding the bus and playing in the AHL would get him to waive his NTC for basically any team. I’d much rather play for the worst NHL team than the best AHL team, and I think the vast majority of people would agree.

Now, obviously if he doesn’t get claimed on waivers then that means we will have to attach an asset or two to trade him. But I’m totally fine with that.

I think we have to get ruthless and make that move happen if he’s not going to waive. Because quite frankly I still don’t get why he would be so against it. If the team doesn’t want you here, why stay? I understand he has a young family but come on, they are going to live a perfectly fine life no matter what city they’re in.

 

[Quaz]

The Blues could waive Krug. I think a few weeks of riding the bus and playing in the AHL would get him to waive his NTC for basically any team. I’d much rather play for the worst NHL team than the best AHL team, and I think the vast majority of people would agree.

Now, obviously if he doesn’t get claimed on waivers then that means we will have to attach an asset or two to trade him. But I’m totally fine with that.

I think we have to get ruthless and make that move happen if he’s not going to waive. Because quite frankly I still don’t get why he would be so against it. If the team doesn’t want you here, why stay? I understand he has a young family but come on, they are going to live a perfectly fine life no matter what city they’re in.

They can retain 50% for the last 3 years in a trade. Teams may have more interest at $3.25M/year.

 

[Brian39]

Advanced metrics tend to influenced by the players you play with, and alarm bells should be ringing when you have someone whose majority minutes were played with Heiskanen but has a whole 5% lower xGF.

Suter had an xGF% of 53.4 in the 639 minutes he played without Heiskanen at 5 on 5 (and those 639 minutes were more than the 573 he played with Heiskanen. He played the plurality of his minutes with Heiskanen, not the majority). Suter was also above 50% in scoring chance percentage, high danger chance percentage, corsi, and fenwick in those minutes he played without Heiskanen.

I think we can all agree that Suter shouldn't be a top pair guy at this stage of his career and that Dallas had better partners for Heiskanen than Suter. But it is not accurate that Suter's underlying metrics were only what they were because of Heiskanen. Suter was moved throughout the lineup last year and got good results and underlying metrics in the 600+ minutes he wasn't riding Heiskanen's coat tails.

Suter actively dragged down those around him but was kept in the top 4 because Deboer couldn't help himself. He was regularly targeted and exposed, and was ultimately the reason why Edmonton broke through in the conference finals.

That is crazy hyperbole.

He was on the ice for 4 of the 14 goals that Edmonton scored in that series. He had 2 games where he was a minus player during that series and Dallas went 1-1 in those games. He wasn't on the ice for a goal against in either game 5 or game 6. He certainly wasn't at all responsible for Dallas going 0 for 14 on the PP (and allowing a shorty) during that series.

Suter wasn't good in the Conference Final and Edmonton's style/speed specifically exposed his weaknesses. But this notion that Dallas can hang that series loss on Suter as their #5 D man is absurd. If you want to argue that he is at fault because his cap hit prevented Dallas from getting a #6 D man to play, then he's still not close to 'most' at fault in that regard. He was worth much closer to his $3.6M than Seguin and Benn were to their $9.85M and $9.5M hits.

 

[Reality Czech]

same reaction as most - putting my wtf into "maybe Krug is finally gone"

that one hit on Robert Thomas in the final crippled the franchise because it made our GM erect and certain he had identified a real hockey player. he looked and was like "that guy can play" which ranks with some of the worst hockey judgment in history

Lol, what a comical take. Crippled the franchise? Krug played a key role on successful Boston teams for a decade, I'm pretty sure GMs knew what kind of a player Krug was. I hope you don't actually think Armstrong made the decision to sign him based on that hit. But we only signed Krug after it was clear Petro didn't want to stay. Such an overreaction lol

Regarding Suter, meh not really a big deal. Maybe he has a little left in the tank and gets us a draft pick at the deadline but if not then it's low risk. I feel like the phrase locker room cancer gets thrown around way to casually. It's like once a negative story comes out about a guy then he's forever labeled a cancer.

 

[Brian39]

It’s possible a team would take him in the right deal but JR’s reporting a source close to Krug says he will still block any trade.

“Krug has one more season with a fully protected no-trade clause before it changes to a modified clause in 2025, when he’ll provide the Blues with a 15-team no-trade list. Until then, he must approve any deal the club tries to make, and as of now, a source close to him says that he would not be willing to waive his no-trade clause.”

My read of that quote is that his agent is trying to keep him in St. Louis because he wants to stay in St. Louis. Same thing Trouba's agent has been doing and the same thing that Fleury's agent did in 2021 when he was publicly saying that Fleury would retire instead of reporting for camp if the Golden Knights traded him. I think Trouba is sincere about not reporting if he is traded to a different city. Obviously Fleury wasn't actually planning to retire.

Maybe it is 100% true or maybe it is only about 75% true and is at least partially an effort to cool the trade market. My gut tells me that his first choice is to stay, but there is likely a very short list of teams he'd accept a trade to (and he isn't interested in tailoring that list to teams that are good trade partners for the Blues).

Either way, I don't really care. Army should still be trying to trade him to 30 other teams around the league (every team but Philly since he already vetoed them) and if he finds a deal he should take that potential trade to Krug. Part of that conversation should be a good faith heads up that we intend to put him on waivers before the season starts if he is still in our organization because we are ready to move on. If he still vetoes that trade (as is his contractual right), then you try to get his short list and work on a trade to one of those teams. Part of those trade conversations should be an offer to give Krug to them for free if they won't give an asset up for him.

And if none of this leads to a trade, then you waive him.

I don't want the team making an empty threat of waivers to try and strong arm a player to waive their NTC. But I'm totally fine with the team using it as a last resort after 12+ months of trying to trade a guy, which includes offering him up for free to his preferred destinations before offering him to every team in the league via waivers. You reach a point in the process where you can throw your hands up as an organization and truthfully say that you did all you could to do right by a guy before putting him on waivers. I think we are nearing that point with Krug. And quite frankly, waivers is exactly why Army has a line between NTCs and NMCs. That was crystal clear before Krug put pen to paper.

I don't know if this signing is evidence that Army would waive Krug, but his addition does add legitimacy to a claim that the roster would be better off without Krug than it would be with him. Krug is worse overall than Leddy and we had a tangible need to improve the blueline defensively. For all his warts, Suter is a more effective pure defender than Krug. The team is very much in a transition phase and there is a plausible argument that we need the 3LD spot to go to younger guys vs an older guy. Waiving Krug makes sense from a roster building standpoint even if you ignore the cap standpoint.

 

[TurgPavs]

For whatever Krug is or is not, the guy has 146 points, .57 PPG, and +23, since arriving in St. Louis.
He is 35th in point per game among NHL defensemen in that span.
Suggesting you are going to buy him out or waive him? Ridiculous.
Krug is 35th in PPP/60 in that span. at 4.88. To give some comparison: Dunn 4.66, Hannifin 4.44, Petro 3.89.
He is tied for 50th in even strength points in that same span.

The guy has limitations on defense, there is no doubt, however I wish every Blue played as hard as that dude does each shift.

Like it or not, the top 6 this season is going to be CP, Faulk, Leddy, Suter, Krug, and more then likely Kessel, and that is an improvement over last year.
I do not think the mistake was signing Suter, IMO the mistake was wasting cap space on Perunovich who has showed very little growth and will be 26 years old when camp starts. How much more time, effort, energy, and cap space are you going to spend on this guy?

 

[bleedblue1223]

I could 100% see them running the following, and there not be any other moves coming.

Leddy-Parayko
Suter-Faulk
Krug-Kessel

That would make me question the Joseph signing. I think this is an upgrade and it allows us to not have both Perunovich and Krug in the lineup at the same time. And to be honest, I don't really see Perunovich, Joseph, or Tucker having much of a NHL future anyway. I'd like to see Perunovich or Joseph get minutes, but that's really just blind hope ignoring what they've done so far, in the hopes that they magically figure it out.

The main reason I still sort of expect some move, why sign Joseph if you were in discussions with Suter. Maybe Joseph would've signed elsewhere, but who cares.

 

[Brian39]

For whatever Krug is or is not, the guy has 146 points, .57 PPG, and +23, since arriving in St. Louis.
He is 35th in point per game among NHL defensemen in that span.
Suggesting you are going to buy him out or waive him? Ridiculous.
Krug is 35th in PPP/60 in that span. at 4.88. To give some comparison: Dunn 4.66, Hannifin 4.44, Petro 3.89.
He is tied for 50th in even strength points in that same span.

The issue is that his stint here is the tale of two Krugs.

2020/21 and 2021/22: 75 points in 115 games while going +34. He had a PPP/60 of 5.92 (10th among D men with 50+ PP minutes) and was tied for 50th in even strength points.

2022/23 and 2023/24: 71 points in 140 games while going -57. He had a PPP/60 of 4.05 (57th among D men with 50+ PP minutes) and tied for 65th in even strength points.

FWIW, you are off on his +/-. He's -23 in his stint as a Blue, not +23. I'm guessing that was a typo, but it paints a pretty different picture.

In a league where scoring has noticeably increased, his scoring has dipped across the board. But by far the biggest issue is the defending. He allowed 2.42 and 2.32 goals against per 60 at 5 on 5 in his first 2 years here. Those jumped to 3.126and 2.83 in the most recent 2 years. He's declined by a noticeable margin on both sides throughout his 4 year stint here.

No one is suggesting waiving or buying out the Krug from 2020/21 or 2021/22. But that isn't the player we've seen the last 2 years.

 

[Brian39]

I could 100% see them running the following, and there not be any other moves coming.

Leddy-Parayko
Suter-Faulk
Krug-Kessel

That wouldn't surprise me at all and I think it is the most likely outcome.

As much as I'm in favor of the Blues waiving Krug if he won't budge on the NTC, I am not in favor of making him ride the bus in the AHL if he clears. I see an argument that the 3LD spot is better utilized to develop/test a younger guy, but that wouldn't be my preference. If I were in charge, waivers would be an effort to get him off the roster to another NHL team, not to ruin/end the dude's career. By all accounts he is a good guy and he's busted his ass for the organization. I'm down to use waivers as a tool to move him, but I'm not down in using the AHL as punishment for exercising his NTC.

I'd waive him to try and get him to another NHL organization, but if he cleared waivers then I'd leave him on the NHL roster and that is the D group I'd run on opening night.

That would make me question the Joseph signing. I think this is an upgrade and it allows us to not have both Perunovich and Krug in the lineup at the same time. And to be honest, I don't really see Perunovich, Joseph, or Tucker having much of a NHL future anyway. I'd like to see Perunovich or Joseph get minutes, but that's really just blind hope ignoring what they've done so far, in the hopes that they magically figure it out.

The main reason I still sort of expect some move, why sign Joseph if you were in discussions with Suter. Maybe Joseph would've signed elsewhere, but who cares.

At $950k, I think Joseph is still a perfectly fine signing even if he isn't in the opening night lineup. I don't think a contract that you can fully bury in the minors needs to be justified by having the guy in your every night lineup. If Krug is still on the team, I'd prefer Joseph as the # 7D to Perunovich. And as much as I like Tucker's attitude, I think Joseph has a bigger chance to be a legit NHLer. I'd be very content replacing Tucker with Joseph as an 'extra' guy even if it means losing Tucker to waivers.

 

[bleedblue1223]

At $950k, I think Joseph is still a perfectly fine signing even if he isn't in the opening night lineup. I don't think a contract that you can fully bury in the minors needs to be justified by having the guy in your every night lineup. If Krug is still on the team, I'd prefer Joseph as the # 7D to Perunovich. And as much as I like Tucker's attitude, I think Joseph has a bigger chance to be a legit NHLer. I'd be very content replacing Tucker with Joseph as an 'extra' guy even if it means losing Tucker to waivers.

Don't really disagree. It's not that I think it's bad or an issue or a mistake by Army, just seems kind of pointless, but like you said, it can be buried, and it likely fits within our cash budget, so who cares. Joseph probably makes the most sense as the 7th with Krug on the roster.

 

[Majorityof1]

For the record, I am very much in favor of making Krug ride the bus in AHL. It's my preferred outcome, even more than trading him since we don't need the cap this year. Nobody is taking him for free

Where does the idea that he is a hard worker come from? Army said it once in a press conference after he turned down the trade but Army has no issues spinning white lies to put lipstick on a pig.

I don't see hard work on the ice. He doesn't skate hard anymore or move his feet on D. He doesn't try to use his body or engage in board battles. He ineffectually waives his stick at the puck while standig still.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I tend to lean towards the side of, play him in a sheltered role, and hopefully the PP performs well enough that his numbers improve making it easier to move him. Krug was decent enough with Kessel in that type of role, so hopefully that can continue.

 

[STL fan in MN]

It’s possible a team would take him in the right deal but JR’s reporting a source close to Krug says he will still block any trade.

“Krug has one more season with a fully protected no-trade clause before it changes to a modified clause in 2025, when he’ll provide the Blues with a 15-team no-trade list. Until then, he must approve any deal the club tries to make, and as of now, a source close to him says that he would not be willing to waive his no-trade clause.”

Great. I’d still try to trade him but if there’s no palatable deal out there that would also be an agreeable destination to Krug, then he can come to camp and try to make the team.

I don’t care how much he makes, he only stays on the team if he’s one of the 7 best options. We have 10 d-men, including him, that are absolutely viable NHL d-men. It’s totally plausible Krug isn’t one of the best 7. And if there’s a tie, I’d say tie goes to a young guy that has developmental runway ahead of them (any of Peru, POJ, Tucker or Kessel).

If he doesn’t look like he’ll be making the team I’d try one last time to see if he’d expand his NTC list but absent that, off to AHL busses he goes.

 

[Brian39]

For the record, I am very much in favor of making Krug ride the bus in AHL. It's my preferred outcome, even more than trading him since we don't need the cap this year. Nobody is taking him for free

Where does the idea that he is a hard worker come from? Army said it once in a press conference after he turned down the trade but Army has no issues spinning white lies to put lipstick on a pig.

I don't see hard work on the ice. He doesn't skate hard anymore or move his feet on D. He doesn't try to use his body or engage in board battles. He ineffectually waives his stick at the puck while standig still.

I feel like we are watching completely different players.

I see him constantly moving his feet, but still struggling to be in the right place or keep up due to poor positioning and the fact that he's lost at least a couple steps from where he was at in his prime. 'Not moving his feet or skating hard' is one of the last ways I'd describe his game. If anything, I think he moves around too much instead of staying in good ice and waiting for the play to come to him. I think he tries to use his body too much against larger players where he would be better getting inside position with an active stick to take away a passing lane. He's frequently getting involved in scrums with guys well outside of his weight class while other guys stand around doing nothing, he was 3rd on the team in blocked shots, and his 64 hits last year was more than respectable.

I very much see a guy working hard, but with poor defensive hockey IQ and diminished tools that put him behind the play way too often to outskate his mistakes.

Beyond Army's presser that you're referring to, Berube also praised his practice habits, the team has praised his hard work rehabbing/returning from injuries, and he does as much ore more of the marketing stuff as anyone on the team.

 

[SirPaste]

https://x.com/i/web/status/1811873513176989781

Sounds like Suter is expecting to have a pretty big role this season, at least my take away from the "Opportunity I'm going to be given" part

 

[bleedblue1223]

Safe to assume they'll start him off with Faulk, which makes sense. Another big factor is having him for the PK.

 

[Majorityof1]

I feel like we are watching completely different players.

I see him constantly moving his feet, but still struggling to be in the right place or keep up due to poor positioning and the fact that he's lost at least a couple steps from where he was at in his prime. 'Not moving his feet or skating hard' is one of the last ways I'd describe his game. If anything, I think he moves around too much instead of staying in good ice and waiting for the play to come to him. I think he tries to use his body too much against larger players where he would be better getting inside position with an active stick to take away a passing lane. He's frequently getting involved in scrums with guys well outside of his weight class while other guys stand around doing nothing, he was 3rd on the team in blocked shots, and his 64 hits last year was more than respectable.

I very much see a guy working hard, but with poor defensive hockey IQ and diminished tools that put him behind the play way too often to outskate his mistakes.

Beyond Army's presser that you're referring to, Berube also praised his practice habits, the team has praised his hard work rehabbing/returning from injuries, and he does as much ore more of the marketing stuff as anyone on the team.

Yea, definitely watching different players. Krug, in the Faulk Krug pairing is usually the one staying home while Faulk goes into the corners. He will leave good ice for bad, but he doesn't go there hard. He kinda glides a lot on D. And I do not see urgency to get to net when he does get caught away from it.

He does not use his body when contesting for pucks. He leans at the puck rather than skating into the guy. He may be small but his low center of gravity can be used to leverage guys out of position if he used his body. Instead, if he tries to be physical, he keeps his feet planted and and pushed with a single arm. Maybe he is not lazy, I don't know. But I have not seen the Tory Krug that rushed down the ice to level Thomas in years.

https://x.com/i/web/status/1811873513176989781

Sounds like Suter is expecting to have a pretty big role this season, at least my take away from the "Opportunity I'm going to be given" part

Yea, as many of us assumed and pointed out. You don't take that type of contract from a non-contending team in the Midwest unless you think you can get ice time (or almost literally nobody else wanted you).

 

[GoldenSeal]

Just read this: Torey Krug breaks silence after declining to waive his no-trade clause earlier this summer. I don't care if someone's posted this or not, so don't waste your time telling me that or whatever else. Let this old man post in peace.

After reading this I'm genuinely curious, if Krug is really honest about what he says and the reality is that anything outside of playing him is going to cost us more than we really want to pay to move or force him out, what do we do? He doesn't look terrible but he's starting to make me think of a lesser version of Nurse and I absolutely hate that guy.

Army definitely wants to move him, so I'm curious how we move forward with this. Krug loves the Note and that kind of bothers me to tell someone like that, that the best thing you can do for us is leave, so how do we do that? I don't see Army waiving him or buying him out.

 

[TheDizee]

Suter is a whatever move. If he performs well, you can flip him at the deadline and hopefully replenish the 2nd round pick they gave up for Hayes. If he bombs, its only 1 year with a low cap hit.

all this talk bashing Krug. while it is deserved, we also have a similar but even bigger issue. we have a player making 8 million dollars but not living up to that contract as well. both players must perform or be moved out. there is no other way forward for this franchise. Both players are anchors hurting the team and one is signed very long term.

 

[Reality Czech]

My read of that quote is that his agent is trying to keep him in St. Louis because he wants to stay in St. Louis. Same thing Trouba's agent has been doing and the same thing that Fleury's agent did in 2021 when he was publicly saying that Fleury would retire instead of reporting for camp if the Golden Knights traded him. I think Trouba is sincere about not reporting if he is traded to a different city. Obviously Fleury wasn't actually planning to retire.

Maybe it is 100% true or maybe it is only about 75% true and is at least partially an effort to cool the trade market. My gut tells me that his first choice is to stay, but there is likely a very short list of teams he'd accept a trade to (and he isn't interested in tailoring that list to teams that are good trade partners for the Blues).

Either way, I don't really care. Army should still be trying to trade him to 30 other teams around the league (every team but Philly since he already vetoed them) and if he finds a deal he should take that potential trade to Krug. Part of that conversation should be a good faith heads up that we intend to put him on waivers before the season starts if he is still in our organization because we are ready to move on. If he still vetoes that trade (as is his contractual right), then you try to get his short list and work on a trade to one of those teams. Part of those trade conversations should be an offer to give Krug to them for free if they won't give an asset up for him.

And if none of this leads to a trade, then you waive him.

I don't want the team making an empty threat of waivers to try and strong arm a player to waive their NTC. But I'm totally fine with the team using it as a last resort after 12+ months of trying to trade a guy, which includes offering him up for free to his preferred destinations before offering him to every team in the league via waivers. You reach a point in the process where you can throw your hands up as an organization and truthfully say that you did all you could to do right by a guy before putting him on waivers. I think we are nearing that point with Krug. And quite frankly, waivers is exactly why Army has a line between NTCs and NMCs. That was crystal clear before Krug put pen to paper.

I don't know if this signing is evidence that Army would waive Krug, but his addition does add legitimacy to a claim that the roster would be better off without Krug than it would be with him. Krug is worse overall than Leddy and we had a tangible need to improve the blueline defensively. For all his warts, Suter is a more effective pure defender than Krug. The team is very much in a transition phase and there is a plausible argument that we need the 3LD spot to go to younger guys vs an older guy. Waiving Krug makes sense from a roster building standpoint even if you ignore the cap standpoint.

Seriously what is the rush to get rid of Krug right this second? Waive him? That will never happen. Y'all need to find something else to complain about. Krug has his weaknesses but he's not as bad as 75% of this forum makes him out to be.

 

[Robb_K]

Must be something really smart. Maybe Army will pull out his head out of arse.

By signing a 40-year old has-been, who's been washed out for the past 5 years, and Wild fans claimed he was a self-centred, devisive, locker room cancer?????