SalarySwishSalarySwish
Avatar

AC14

Membre depuis
23 déc. 2022
Équipe favorite
Blues de St-Louis
Messages dans les forums
2819
Messages par jour
5.6
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 6 minutes
Sujet: Berkly Catton save us Berkly Catton
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>NHLfan10506</b></div><div>I'd keep 10 overall for (if they fall)....

Celebrini
Demidov
Buium
Levhsunov
Dickinson
Catton

could either way...
Eiserman
Silayev

Move down for others</div></div>

The only plausible reason for the Blues to move up in this draft would be for Dickinson/Buuim/Silayev. I'm not certain the first two make it to 10 and I am unsure of how the Blues feel about wasting assets to jump up to draft a Russian.

If we're discussing a jump that way though the add to 16 wouldn't be Buchnevich. It would probably start with one of the 2nds and a later pick or some form of prospect. The only other forseeable thing would be Binnington but I don't think the Blues are ready to make that jump and count on Hofer/Zherenko as an NHL tandem
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 9 minutes
Sujet: Berkly Catton save us Berkly Catton
I'd say it's pretty doubtful Buch is traded at the draft. Both sides have outwardly expressed interest in an extension, I'd bet he's not moved regardless.

Assuming this is post draft and 2024's aren't an option.

I don't see any reason the Blues wouldn't wait for a better package than Filmon and the Devils 1st. You have to at least assume the Devils will bounce back. The more conservative route which pretty much every GM takes when they aren't in a teardown like this would be to wait for you to get completely blown away from an offer or wait til close to the deadline to make sure of a couple of things 1. you aren't in contention or plans didn't change with said player. 2. You have a better understanding of what you're receiving.

I believe in the circumstance that this were to happen sometime after the draft but before the season, you would be looking at Casey and your 1st with some sort of protection. Filmon was a 6th round draft pick and didn't really improve on anything, he's a long-shot prospect to say the least. Blues have an immediate need within their system to add high end defensemen. Though I personally don't love Casey as a prospect, he would fit that bill alot better.
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 4 heures
Sujet: Crazy idea that will never happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>I would absolutely love if they signed Demelo. We have a Godzilla amount of cap space/cash the next two years. Below is a link to a team I created earlier today because I think you're 100% correct. We need to find veterans that play a role. We need a RD and another veteran center imo. Wouldn't hurt for another vet winger either. That extra Vet winger can allow for injury or potential trade of a pending UFA. I'd pay Demelo basically anything he's asking for as long as it's a shorter term deal. Getting the RIGHT guy is crucial and money is secondary. No one on the LD though. Were way to heavy there.

https://www.capfriendly.com/armchair-gm/team/5110188</div></div>

I think the issue with a guy like DeMelo is he hasn't won anything and he's still in a position where alot of competitive teams will come calling and be bidding on his services. I think what it would take for the Hawks would be a guy that's either declined to the point where you don't love their contract but they're a very good pro who is still servicable. Or a guy on the twilight of their career who it's hard to get another contract for and they'd have to overpay a bit (Foligno, Perry) on the defensive side. I just don't see the allure for a guy like Tanev or Demelo who have a short window left to maximize what they're doing for their own prestige to come to Chicago currently. I think that changes in 3-4 years once the core starts to firmly implement themselves as productive regulars.
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 5 heures
Sujet: Crazy idea that will never happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>Its a very fair conversation to have. It's why I want to keep him with the same DPair/Murphy. I don't want to mix him around and complicate things. The less changes and more ice time he can get, the better he can focus on different aspect of his game that need developing. There is no substitution for NHL ice time.
His outlet passing and mobility are there. I'm not worried about that. It's the defensive side of his game. Both defensive against the rush and in his own zone. I hope he and Murphy stick near each other for much of the offseason. Continue to develop off ice chemistry, but they should be a DPair for at least the next 2 years.</div></div>

Trying to think of someone that would be a good fill in there to help bridge that gap for him. I think the addition of veteran players who are impactful players is often overlooked on complete teardown teams. I actually like (Well like is a strong word for the Hawks) that they brought in guys like Foligno, and Hall to play important roles on the team. I think we often and sometimes teams (Buffalo, etc) get too focused on one of these guys with a high pedigree will hit and transcend this team. But when you get stuck in a rut of losing over and over again it's very easy to become complacent and not necessarily lose that edge that got you there, but be numb to losing almost. One good thing about Krug is he's always had a fire about him, but that fire can't overlook his physical deficiencies. They almost would be best suited bringing in a guy like Alec Martinez to jump up and down the lineup. Leddy would be another good option. Guys that have consistently been around winning but if you limit their ice time knowing where you're at it's not going to have a large hamper on the team.
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 5 heures
Sujet: Crazy idea that will never happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>The hard part about bridge is that takes away the ice time for KK. They're tossing him in the deep end and he did well last year. Much better the 2nd half than the 1st. We want to continue to keep him with Murphy because KK isn't over his head. He's a rookie learning.</div></div>

I mean what do you quantify as did well? I know I haven't watched many Hawks games at all. But personally if we had a guy like that I wouldn't want to put him in a situation long-term or repeatedly where you're searching for morale victories and not good results. Teaching moments are great, but how long are teaching moments going to be a thing, and how big of teaching moments are they if there aren't repercussions that come with the mistakes.

I'm not saying you're wrong, just trying to give a different side and where having a buffer is a beneficial thing
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 5 heures
Sujet: Crazy idea that will never happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>exo2769</b></div><div>We have larger issues and create even more problems if we take on Krug. We have Vlasic and Korchinksi as our #1 and #2 LD. So do I want to have Krug as our #3LD or do I want to bring up Ethan Del Mastro who was an AHL all-star last year and actually develop my prospects. We just can't take Krug. He's not making our team. That's my biggest issue. We'd just waive him and send him to Rockford. Even if it's not Ethan Del Mastro, we have Wyatt Kaiser that's ready for the NHL...and if it's not Kaiser it's Nolan Allan. We just can't have $6.5M in Rockford even if it's with the 10th OA pick.

***EDIT*** Well...ok I need to take that back if it was just Krug and the 10th OA absolutely because it'll just be 1 year of cap problems for us, but that's not happening.</div></div>

Not that it's terribly relevant. But I would feel Krug would be a pretty good bridge for Korchinski to jump into a bigger role while not putting him in way over his head.

Can you do it a different way? Sure, but you're still putting the weight of the PP on him without any buffer. As frustrating as Krug has been to us, that doesn't mean he's not an NHL player. He's frustrating to us because we also have 3-4 other guys who aren't capable of handling defensive minutes. He's ideally suited for the 3rd pair LD spot at 5v5, but he also needs to run a PP to be a positive influence on the team
Forum: Armchair-GMil y a 22 heures
Sujet: Could this actually happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>Well, with retention, he's exactly the same amount. For a less useful player/minor trade chip. There's no need to rashly offload anyone right now. That was made eminently clear today.</div></div>

I can get behind that if the argument is there’s no reason to make a move now. I just don’t see any feasible timeline when you get a 1st out of a transaction when Hayes is the main piece. He’s notably a place holder. He isn’t having a large positive contribution towards the team. His redeeming quality is how great he is in the locker room which isn’t nothing. He’s still serviceable, but he’s not really a positive impact on the game. It may be a better option to wait a year and not rush into anything with a prospect. But I don’t necessarily see Hayes having too much success with us with Bannister under the helm when his production dropped off a cliff in my memory when Bannister took over. He wasn’t put in the best situation being saddled with Kapanen, but he doesn’t necessarily make alot of players better with his play style.
Forum: Armchair-GMHier à 14 h 28
Sujet: Could this actually happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>Well, first of all, obviously a new C will be brought in. So you can add that to the tab on the deal. I get all your ideas, I just think there's a more suitable Hayes deal out there that doesn't cost so much for a three drafts from now hit and hope. It's time to be surgical. If Army is still up for it.</div></div>

I get looking for a better deal. But I can't imagine too many teams would line up to fork over a first for Hayes. I also don't necessarily care where the first lands. That would fit in the perceived time frame where it would give us more ammo to go out and bring in a core guy to supplement our core or it would give us an option to bring in an ELC as these guys start to get paid. Not necessarily looking at it as an impact to build to what we're building but more of a supplement as Hayes isn't really too important of a piece.
Forum: Armchair-GMHier à 11 h 44
Sujet: Could this actually happen
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>mokumboi</b></div><div>No, it's basically two years of paying Sheary 3.75M plus Hayes for free. I'd rather get less to not take Sheary.</div></div>

I'm confused. It's virtually a keep the contract but swap players between Hayes and Sheary. Hayes is making like 3.6m, Sheary 2m. The 1.75 of retention pretty even. Yes, that retention slot is occupied, and no you cannot move that money. But you are acquiring a 1st probably at a better time frame anyways to have a Tampa 1st.

Hayes isn't an integral part of turning the team around. And losing 3.75m for 2 years when you admittedly are looking for solutions from within or internal growth as it was phrased isn't the worst thing in the world. The only issue that arises is we are already weak at center. This would pretty much mean 2 of Buch, Schenn, Dvorsky are going to have to be in your lineup next season unless you sign a vet to a PTO or a smaller scale UFA.
Forum: Armchair-GMHier à 9 h 28
Sujet: Par for the course
<div class="quote"><div class="quote_t">Quoting: <b>Blues4Life</b></div><div>The way I envision it in this scenario (doesn't have to be Sanheim but Army clearly wanted him last year, but a similar LHD contract), is we pay the higher AAV for 3 years with retention on Krug plus Sanheim's contract to get a better 2 way defenseman that can play top 4 minutes. Krug at this point needs to be very sheltered on defense and load up on PP time. Within 2-3 years, I'd hope that one of Lindstein/Loof/Buchinger can develop into the other top 4 LHD to replace Leddy - otherwise likely need to sign another UFA.</div></div>

It’s not an awful plan for what they’re trying to do. I just wouldn’t attach the 1st without a significantly better player/contract coming back or Krug going the other way and another piece coming back.

I would understand something like Sanheim + Laughton for Krug + 16. I’d imagine that was the basis of a deal last season when the reports came out about Laughton and a first. I think they had said we had a prospect attached there as well. Would have to guess that would’ve been like a Kaskimaki or Robertsson.