Half-Assed GDT: TankTown Express a few games left

[Bye Bye Blueston]

1 in 20 aren't good odds, but it's not like that is a super-long shot, one-in-a-million chance. There is a massive difference between giving yourself a 5% chance at something and investing in Power Ball tickets. Especially when losing the draft lottery from the projected 8th pick still puts you in a better position than losing it from the projected 12th pick.

Obviously you don't make any decisions banking on winning the lottery, but a 5% chance at Bedard and 5.4% chance of getting the #2 pick are a hell of a lot better than a 0% chance at Bedard, a 2.9% chance at the #2 pick and 2.4% chance at the #3 pick.


Of course not. But the team is 7-2-2 in the last 11 games. More importantly, most these points came against teams that we are directly competing with in the tank. I didn't expect us to lose all of those games against tank rivals, but the team basically ran the table by going 4-0-1 against Washington, Vancouver, Philly, and Detroit. We only gave up a loser point in 1 of the 4 wins. Taking 9 of 10 possible points while only giving up 3 total points to the 4 teams directly near us in the standings was incredibly damaging to our draft position. Here are the current standings from 21st to 26th (21st is 12th to last):

Ottawa: 81 points with 4 games remaining
Detroit: 79 points with 5 games remaining
St. Louis: 79 points with 4 games remaining (sitting on the 10th pick pre-lottery)
Washington: 77 points with 5 games remaining
Vancouver: 75 points with 5 games remaining
Philly: 71 points with 5 games remaining

Change that 7-2-2 record to 5-4-2 with the two extra regulation losses coming against Vancouver and Philly (with nothing else changing). Here is how the standings would look today:

Ottawa: 81 points with 4 games remaining
Detroit: 79 points with 5 games remaining
Washington: 77 points with 5 games remaining
Vancouver: 76 points with 5 games remaining
St. Louis: 75 points with 4 games remaining (sitting on the 8th pick pre-lottery)
Philly: 73 points with 5 games remaining

Turn the wins against Detroit and Washington into regulation losses to get a 5-4-2 record. Here is what the standings would look like:

Detroit: 81 points with 5 games remaining
Ottawa: 81 points with 4 games remaining
Washington: 79 points with 5 games remaining
Vancouver: 75 points with 5 games remaining
St. Louis: 75 points with 4 games remaining (sitting on the 8th pick pre-lottery)
Philly: 71 points with 5 games remaining

There were tons of avenues for this team to play at a 90 point pace over the last 2+ weeks and be in a much better draft position. Instead, we played at a 119 point pace and steamrolled the teams around us in the standings.

I totally understand that players and coaches don't tank. And I get that these wins are good for team culture. And as someone who has been to several of these games, I agree that having energy in the building and winning games at home is good for the team's bottom line. But the draft consequences have been very frustrating.

It’s not that I think it’s good that we won. I think it’s good that players are trying and growing and building towards future as opposed to rolling over and playing dead. That is what I think is the value. If we could have done that and lost a couple more too, that would have been even better.

 

[Xerloris]

If we pick outside of the top 10 then this entire season was meaningless. If you're going to suck, then suck in a year where you have a CHANCE at a legit franchise player and then f*** it up in the final 3 weeks? Ya, Pretty f***ing Bluesy.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

If we pick outside of the top 10 then this entire season was meaningless. If you're going to suck, then suck in a year where you have a CHANCE at a legit franchise player and then f*** it up in the final 3 weeks? Ya, Pretty f***ing Bluesy.

The quality of player this year at 12 isn’t going to be significantly different from guy at 6.

 

[Brian39]

It’s not that I think it’s good that we won. I think it’s good that players are trying and growing and building towards future as opposed to rolling over and playing dead. That is what I think is the value. If we could have done that and lost a couple more too, that would have been even better.

I don't disagree with that at all. My annoyance about the team record lately isn't a way for me to say that I think the organization should have made different decisions.

I doubt Vrana would have been available for nothing at 50% retention if we had put that off until the summer. I think someone else would have made that deal at the deadline. If no one did, then I think a non-playoff bound Wings team would have increased his role to try and pump his value up for a summer trade.

I think there is a decent chance that another team put a claim in on Kapanen. Even if know one else did, I bet the Pens would have still found a way to move him by the deadline in order to make their deadline moves.

The Rangers moving Blais and his $1.5M seemed essential for them to make their deals work. If we hadn't taken him, someone else would have in a separate deal and who knows if he would have made it to UFA. Who knows if we could have signed him for his extension number if he hadn't been traded back here.

These are all moves that tangibly address holes that existed for next year's roster that we couldn't bank on existing if we wanted to wait until summer. Playing Hofer and seeing him excel in response to Binner's suspension isn't something I will criticize. Rewarding Torpo and Neighbours when their play earns it isn't something I will criticize. Plugging young D into the lineup isn't something I will criticize. trying out Buch at C isn't something I will criticize. The players and coach still trying to win games is a good thing.

I'm not critical of the decisions the tam has made. But I am still very frustrated that we haven't found a way to drop a couple more games.

 

[Brian39]

If we pick outside of the top 10 then this entire season was meaningless.

Couldn't disagree more.

Adding two 2023 1st round picks, a 2023 3rd round pick, a 2024 2nd round pick, a 2024 3rd round pick, and a 20 year old center prospect who was picked 30th overall is a massive influx of futures assets. We've made three 1st round picks in the last three drafts combined. Bolstering the prospect pool with Dean AND having as many 1st round picks as we've made in the last three drafts combined is a large infusion of futures assets. None of this gets acquired if this team was battling it out with Dallas/Colorado/Minnesota in the standings. The West is wide open this year with no real frontrunner in the Central. If we were in that mix, I don't think Army would have sold anything.

Adding Blais, Vrana, and Kap for a combined $6.825M against the cap next season is pretty far from meaningless. MAYBE we'd have found a way to add one of them if we were in playoff position, but it would have been very difficult given how close to the cap we were before selling. Plugging multiple holes for a very reasonable cap hit without giving up other assets to do it is huge. It gives us a reasonable chance to turn things around in 1 summer and if we don't then it gives us multiple assets to sell as rentals.

There has been a huge accumulation of assets completely independent of being in the Bedard lottery. This isn't like a lot of teams that are in the mushy middle and either give up picks to get/stay there or simply stand pat without accumulating assets. We improved our prospect pool with Dean, improved the top 9 for next year with minor cap consequences, and put ourselves in position to be one of the major players at the draft (either by picking multiple sought after prospects or moving draft capital for roster help).

Miles away from meaningless.

 

[Robb_K]

I don't disagree with that at all. My annoyance about the team record lately isn't a way for me to say that I think the organization should have made different decisions.

I doubt Vrana would have been available for nothing at 50% retention if we had put that off until the summer. I think someone else would have made that deal at the deadline. If no one did, then I think a non-playoff bound Wings team would have increased his role to try and pump his value up for a summer trade.

I think there is a decent chance that another team put a claim in on Kapanen. Even if know one else did, I bet the Pens would have still found a way to move him by the deadline in order to make their deadline moves.

The Rangers moving Blais and his $1.5M seemed essential for them to make their deals work. If we hadn't taken him, someone else would have in a separate deal and who knows if he would have made it to UFA. Who knows if we could have signed him for his extension number if he hadn't been traded back here.

These are all moves that tangibly address holes that existed for next year's roster that we couldn't bank on existing if we wanted to wait until summer. Playing Hofer and seeing him excel in response to Binner's suspension isn't something I will criticize. Rewarding Torpo and Neighbours when their play earns it isn't something I will criticize. Plugging young D into the lineup isn't something I will criticize. trying out Buch at C isn't something I will criticize. The players and coach still trying to win games is a good thing.

I'm not critical of the decisions the tam has made. But I am still very frustrated that we haven't found a way to drop a couple more games.

I agree with everything you stated. And, I don't like management ordering a coach to deliberately lose games. Nevertheless, The Blues could have innocently orchestrated a few more losses by playing Greiss 7-8 more times, and resting veterans like Schenn, Saad, Parayko, etc. And playing Walker, and more Springfield youngsters for look-sees (although that might have risked pissing-off the veterans).

 

[BlueSeal]

Well I hope the Tuna Boat rower enjoys his worse pick because that's all he's getting from this "win".

You would think that. But you'd be wrong.

We are seeing the emergence of Vrana and Kap, the love for the logo from a hard working and wanting to be here Blais, The proof in the hope we have in Hofer and a few others who are working on finding a place here. While we are not -there-, we are on our way there and I'll take that over the promise of a low pick that we are just too good to have gotten given the absolute trash of teams below us. Army won't let the team tank, he'll retool.

Had we wanted Bedard -that- badly, we would have traded everyone off, but like a surgeon Army cut away the meat that had become fat and we now see a leaner team with skill and promise. We're building to compete, not to rebuild. Big, huge, difference.

Had we had -this- group at the start of the season, we would be contending for the playoffs.

To be fair? We're trading that pick many of y'all care so much about and bringing in help. You heard it here first. If we can get the blueline straightened out, we will come back roaring.

Just got to believe.

 

[TK 421]

You would think that. But you'd be wrong.

We are seeing the emergence of Vrana and Kap, the love for the logo from a hard working and wanting to be here Blais, The proof in the hope we have in Hofer and a few others who are working on finding a place here. While we are not -there-, we are on our way there and I'll take that over the promise of a low pick that we are just too good to have gotten given the absolute trash of teams below us. Army won't let the team tank, he'll retool.

Had we wanted Bedard -that- badly, we would have traded everyone off, but like a surgeon Army cut away the meat that had become fat and we now see a leaner team with skill and promise. We're building to compete, not to rebuild. Big, huge, difference.

Had we had -this- group at the start of the season, we would be contending for the playoffs.

To be fair? We're trading that pick many of y'all care so much about and bringing in help. You heard it here first. If we can get the blueline straightened out, we will come back roaring.

Just got to believe.

He's not trading our 1st, one of the latter 1st's I think he will but not our top pick.

 

[Brian39]

He's not trading our 1st, one of the latter 1st's I think he will but not our top pick.

I don't think trading the 1st is the most likely scenario, but an 8th-12th overall pick is absolutely not an untouchable asset. If we can use it to bring in a true top pair LHD with some term, then you absolutely make that pick expendable.

 

[tfriede2]

I don't think trading the 1st is the most likely scenario, but an 8th-12th overall pick is absolutely not an untouchable asset. If we can use it to bring in a true top pair LHD with some term, then you absolutely make that pick expendable.

Generally agreed. Any LHD in their mid 20’s with term left that a team may shop? Serious question - just curious if there’s a team out there that DA may inquire with.

 

[TK 421]

I don't think trading the 1st is the most likely scenario, but an 8th-12th overall pick is absolutely not an untouchable asset. If we can use it to bring in a true top pair LHD with some term, then you absolutely make that pick expendable.

Hard disagree with that idea. If a LHD with term is available you dangle one of your later 1sts + other asset/s and see if that's enough. If not you pursue other avenues. Under no circumstances should they be entertaining trading their own 1st, you can only get cheap productive ELC talent like that in the draft and the players available at our own 1st will be better than those available with our later 1sts.

 

[Thallis]

You would think that. But you'd be wrong.

We are seeing the emergence of Vrana and Kap, the love for the logo from a hard working and wanting to be here Blais, The proof in the hope we have in Hofer and a few others who are working on finding a place here. While we are not -there-, we are on our way there and I'll take that over the promise of a low pick that we are just too good to have gotten given the absolute trash of teams below us. Army won't let the team tank, he'll retool.

Had we wanted Bedard -that- badly, we would have traded everyone off, but like a surgeon Army cut away the meat that had become fat and we now see a leaner team with skill and promise. We're building to compete, not to rebuild. Big, huge, difference.

Had we had -this- group at the start of the season, we would be contending for the playoffs.

To be fair? We're trading that pick many of y'all care so much about and bringing in help. You heard it here first. If we can get the blueline straightened out, we will come back roaring.

Just got to believe.

Converting on double your expected chances vs teams with nothing to play for doesn't make a playoff team the next year

 

[BlueSeal]

Converting on double your expected chances vs teams with nothing to play for doesn't make a playoff team the next year

Neither did a last place team in December turn around and win the Cup. This franchise defies logic and when logic is used here, nothing works.

 

[Thallis]

Neither did a last place team in December turn around and win the Cup. This franchise defies logic and when logic is used here, nothing works.

An unlikely thing happening once is not indication that future unlikely things will happen. That team had significantly better underlying numbers in last place than we have had on this mini surge. We’ve given up the 2nd most high danger chances in the league this year. Without significant defensive overhaul we aren’t a playoff team, much less a contender.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Converting on double your expected chances vs teams with nothing to play for doesn't make a playoff team the next year

Agree. i think we would need significant upgrades to be playoff team next year. Whether that is Bedard or Lindholm or Chabot or whomever, just rolling out basically same team isn’t likely to lead to playoffs next season.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Hard disagree with that idea. If a LHD with term is available you dangle one of your later 1sts + other asset/s and see if that's enough. If not you pursue other avenues. Under no circumstances should they be entertaining trading their own 1st, you can only get cheap productive ELC talent like that in the draft and the players available at our own 1st will be better than those available with our later 1sts.

Depends on what the near-term goal is. If it's "soft rebuild, get back to competitive shortly" you give up that early 1st if you have to because you may have to wait 4-5 years for that guy to get to that same level, and we especially don't have that in the system.

Keep in mind, though, I'm on Team Rebuild because I think "soft reboot" has a high chance of merely landing us in the 6-10 area for a while and we never get out of it without moving "untouchable" prospects, and we can't have 4-6 of those.

 

[PJJJP]

Honestly it isn't surprising the team is playing better. Lots of players were underperforming plus the pending the TDL also weighed on the locker room. We got reinforcements at the deadline (vrana/Kap/Blais) who were hungry to prove themselves and Toro/Berube/stl media called out the players for playing like shit. If we wanted to continue to suck we probably shouldn't have gotten new players and never called out the existing players cause it lit a fire within them. I'm fine either way because I'd like a high draft pick but also I enjoy watching blues win games. So it's whatever for me

 

[TK 421]

Depends on what the near-term goal is. If it's "soft rebuild, get back to competitive shortly" you give up that early 1st if you have to because you may have to wait 4-5 years for that guy to get to that same level, and we especially don't have that in the system.

Keep in mind, though, I'm on Team Rebuild because I think "soft reboot" has a high chance of merely landing us in the 6-10 area for a while and we never get out of it without moving "untouchable" prospects, and we can't have 4-6 of those.

Yes I see your point, and Brian's as well for that matter. It's just that you can't acquire that kind of skill anywhere but high in the draft and here we are in range of that type of skill. Theoretically if a team is willing to let a desirable defenseman go then for me it follows that they may bite on say 26th + a roster player or even both late 1sts for said player if he warrants it.

Thing is I don't think we'd be waiting very long for the drafted player at our own 1st to have an impact. It's almost certain to be an impact forward and several of the guys in our range could be in the NHL in their D+2. We're used to late 1st players that take 3-4 years to become that guy so I get we don't normally see a D+2 timetable for NHL readiness but some of these guys will make an NHL roster in their D+2 and actually contribute in a significant manner. It would depend on the player of course but it's possible with some of the guys who may be available and I'd rather keep that pick and I think it's very likely DA's position as well.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Yes I see your point, and Brian's as well for that matter. It's just that you can't acquire that kind of skill anywhere but high in the draft and here we are in range of that type of skill. Theoretically if a team is willing to let a desirable defenseman go then for me it follows that they may bite on say 26th + a roster player or even both late 1sts for said player if he warrants it.

Thing is I don't think we'd be waiting very long for the drafted player at our own 1st to have an impact. It's almost certain to be an impact forward and several of the guys in our range could be in the NHL in their D+2. We're used to late 1st players that take 3-4 years to become that guy so I get we don't normally see a D+2 timetable for NHL readiness but some of these guys will make an NHL roster in their D+2 and actually contribute in a significant manner. It would depend on the player of course but it's possible with some of the guys who may be available and I'd rather keep that pick and I think it's very likely DA's position as well.

If we're taking a forward with our pick and expecting him to be contributing in a significant manner in his D+2 season, there damn well better be a forward prospect we think is untouchable getting moved to help fill a hole we have. Otherwise, we'll have like 6 young much-hyped forwards in the roster shortly + Thomas and Kyrou et. al., and still have this massive hole on defense (probably 2 or 3) that needs to be plugged for when those guys hit their NHL stride.

And no, I don't think 26 + a roster player gets us that 1D unless that roster player is someone that were all say "f***, I hate losing him."

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

If we're taking a forward with our pick and expecting him to be contributing in a significant manner in his D+2 season, there damn well better be a forward prospect we think is untouchable getting moved to help fill a hole we have. Otherwise, we'll have like 6 young much-hyped forwards in the roster shortly + Thomas and Kyrou et. al., and still have this massive hole on defense (probably 2 or 3) that needs to be plugged for when those guys hit their NHL stride.

And no, I don't think 26 + a roster player gets us that 1D unless that roster player is someone that were all say "f***, I hate losing him."

They may touch the nhl in d+2 season but it’s unlikely anyone we take is making much of impact unless we get Bedard, Fantilli, or carlsson. There are only 5 guys in d+2 making any real impact this year. Neighbours is d+3 and is still marginal NHLer. Bolduc will be d+3 next year and we don’t expect him to make club or if he does will be in limited role. That is part of downside of picking 10th versus 2nd- guys even if they have high end talent tend to be less ready.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Looking back at draft-day deals that involved picks in say the top-20 for established NHL defensemen, the few that stand out for defensemen traded are:

2021 - Chicago trades Adam Boqvist (#8, 2018), #11, #43 and a protected 1st in 2022 or 2023 (#6, 2022) to Columbus for Seth Jones, #31 and #173. That was the price for what was considered to be a legit 1D, [The fact that he's sucked since going to Chicago is a different story.]

2021 - Vancouver trades Loui Eriksson, Jay Beagle, Antoine Roussel, #9, a 2nd in '22 and a 7th in '24 to Arizona for Oliver Ekman-Larson and Conor Garland. There was a huge cap dump in there which the Coyotes wanted, and on paper it looked like a possible steal for the Canucks, but Garland isn't much better if any and OEL has fallen off a cliff.

2021 - Philadelphia trades Robert Hagg, #13 and a 2nd in 2023 to Buffalo for Rasmus Ristolainen. Hagg was nothing - he later went to Florida for a 6th. Ristolainen, ... not sure you'd call him a 1D now. Or even a 1st-pairing guy, except on the Flyers.

2019 - NY Rangers trade #19 and Neal Pionk to Winnipeg for Jacob Trouba. Pionk in only his 2nd season in the league was 2nd on the Rangers blueline for ice time, so that's not an insignificant price.

2015 - Calgary trades #15, #45 and #52 to Boston for Dougie Hamilton. If you want to talk about acquisitions of a young, talented defenseman with 1D potential at the time, this is it.

So the idea that we'll get a 1D - even just a 1LHD who's really a 2 (which wouldn't fix anything IMO) - for the pick at 26, even with 1-2 picks in the 2nd attached, seems far-fetched. If you're going the trade route to fill that hole, it'll take the pick at 10 and then at least another pick. If another team isn't that keen on moving the guy we want, the asking price just goes up from there.

Which again, begs the questions: do we really think this roster as it stands is a 1LHD away from being in the top-4 in the West? If not, how much more tweaking has to occur to get us there - and at what point do you say "let's just rebuild and play for a few years out?" Not saying this roster can't get to top-4 in the West very shortly without a lot of work, but it's going to take significant rebounds across the board / guys making everyone excited after the last ~10 games continuing that next season for a full season, and you're talking about doing it with a defense where everyone outside of Rosen will be 30 at the start of '23-24 [Rosen will turn 30 in February] and the "youth ready to go" is Tyler Tucker [6/7 guy], Matthew Kessel [6/7 guy] and Scott Perunovich [Krug 2.0 and with a growing injury history].

IMO, that's asking a hell of a lot.

 

[Thallis]

Looking back at draft-day deals that involved picks in say the top-20 for established NHL defensemen, the few that stand out for defensemen traded are:

2021 - Chicago trades Adam Boqvist (#8, 2018), #11, #43 and a protected 1st in 2022 or 2023 (#6, 2022) to Columbus for Seth Jones, #31 and #173. That was the price for what was considered to be a legit 1D, [The fact that he's sucked since going to Chicago is a different story.]

2021 - Vancouver trades Loui Eriksson, Jay Beagle, Antoine Roussel, #9, a 2nd in '22 and a 7th in '24 to Arizona for Oliver Ekman-Larson and Conor Garland. There was a huge cap dump in there which the Coyotes wanted, and on paper it looked like a possible steal for the Canucks, but Garland isn't much better if any and OEL has fallen off a cliff.

2021 - Philadelphia trades Robert Hagg, #13 and a 2nd in 2023 to Buffalo for Rasmus Ristolainen. Hagg was nothing - he later went to Florida for a 6th. Ristolainen, ... not sure you'd call him a 1D now. Or even a 1st-pairing guy, except on the Flyers.

2019 - NY Rangers trade #19 and Neal Pionk to Winnipeg for Jacob Trouba. Pionk in only his 2nd season in the league was 2nd on the Rangers blueline for ice time, so that's not an insignificant price.

2015 - Calgary trades #15, #45 and #52 to Boston for Dougie Hamilton. If you want to talk about acquisitions of a young, talented defenseman with 1D potential at the time, this is it.

So the idea that we'll get a 1D - even just a 1LHD who's really a 2 (which wouldn't fix anything IMO) - for the pick at 26, even with 1-2 picks in the 2nd attached, seems far-fetched. If you're going the trade route to fill that hole, it'll take the pick at 10 and then at least another pick. If another team isn't that keen on moving the guy we want, the asking price just goes up from there.

Which again, begs the questions: do we really think this roster as it stands is a 1LHD away from being in the top-4 in the West? If not, how much more tweaking has to occur to get us there - and at what point do you say "let's just rebuild and play for a few years out?" Not saying this roster can't get to top-4 in the West very shortly without a lot of work, but it's going to take significant rebounds across the board / guys making everyone excited after the last ~10 games continuing that next season for a full season, and you're talking about doing it with a defense where everyone outside of Rosen will be 30 at the start of '23-24 [Rosen will turn 30 in February] and the "youth ready to go" is Tyler Tucker [6/7 guy], Matthew Kessel [6/7 guy] and Scott Perunovich [Krug 2.0 and with a growing injury history].

IMO, that's asking a hell of a lot.

You're also working against the time bombs that are San Jose, Anahiem, & Chicago. All 3 of these teams are about to get a franchise altering player even if none of them are named Bedard, and some of these teams have young talent they'll be adding to. If you're planning on bouncing back and competing soon, you need to have a plan for once these teams get enough talent and adequate coaching to become the powerhouses they're aiming for. Management needs to be asking themselves if it's worth bouncing back and getting a 2-4 year window before these teams emerge as juggernauts.

 

[Brian39]

Hard disagree with that idea. If a LHD with term is available you dangle one of your later 1sts + other asset/s and see if that's enough. If not you pursue other avenues. Under no circumstances should they be entertaining trading their own 1st, you can only get cheap productive ELC talent like that in the draft and the players available at our own 1st will be better than those available with our later 1sts.

Obviously I'd prefer to get such a guy without trading our own pick, but legit top pair D in their 20s with term are rarely (if ever) available for a trade where the best asset involved is a pick in the 20s.

Given this team's organizational needs, I'd value 5+ years of a top pair LHD on a fair contract more than the a non-elite forward prospect who will provide the team with 3-5 years of big cap savings once he's ready. Guys picked 8th-12th generally take multiple seasons of development before they start making a tangible NHL impact and they are generally below the 'elite prospect' tier and in the 'very good prospect' tier. The odds of getting a guy in that range who will meaningfully contribute before 2025/26 are extremely low. Increased cap flexibility from 2025/26 through 2030 is less valuable to me than reconstructing the blue line from 2023/24-2028.

I'm not talking about finding the best LHD who is actively being shopped and immediately offering our 1st round pick to get him even if we really view him as more of a 2nd pair guy. I'm not saying to actively avoid making the pick and settling for whoever is the best guy being shopped on draft day. I'm talking about a scenario where our organization has identified a legit top pair (defensively sound) LHD that we can fit into our cap structure and hits a point in negotiations where the only way to get it done is by moving our own 1st rounder. I don't think this will happen and such a deal would probably necessitate moving Krug. but if those things come to fruition, I'd absolutely move the #8-12 pick to get that.

If the Rangers (bafflingly) decide that they can't fit a K'Andre Miller extension into their long-term plans and decide to sell him this summer, he's absolutely a guy who I'd trade our own 1st to get. I think the Rangers will prioritize him and do what it takes to extend him, but I thought the same thing about Buch and they wound up moving him because $5.8M was too rich for their blood.

Let's say the Islanders miss the playoffs and decide that they need to retool the roster to prioritize being better than 30th on the PP and 25th in league scoring. If they have any type of willingness to move Pelech in a deal involving our 1st and Torey Krug, I'm pulling the trigger on that deal every time. Again, I assume that they would explore other avenues to clear the money needed to address their offensive woes, but most of their big money is tied to tough to move guys. I could see them looking at Sorokin and believing that he is good enough to cover for the loss in defensive structure.

If Ottawa is looking to move Chabot in order to free up the cap space they need to address other holes, I'd consider giving up our own 1st. There would need to be more moving parts to make the money work on our end and my guess is that the parts required to do so would make such a deal not make sense for us. But if we could make the money work without giving up substantial additional value, he is a player that I think would help our organization more than keeping the 1st.

At the end of the day, none of these deals are likely, but they are avenues of discussion for Army to engage in and they are all good enough players that would require us to not immediately take our own 1st off the table in order to keep the dialogue open. And if our own 1st is ultimately what it took to get it done, I think all of these players would help the organization more than making a selection between 8th and 12th.

 

[stlbluz]

When's our next tank?