Honestly, he seems to be posturing. He has done this in the past. If I recall correctly he said he wasn’t going to trade Halak and then shortly after did just that.I mean, of all the names that the Blues have been connected with, it really only seems to rule out Kane and Maroon.
Maybe also guys like Nash, Neal, Perron, Grabner, etc. in the unlikely scenario that a current team with playoff aspirations decides to sell off some parts.
Him mentioning that he'd like to make a trade where you get "one or two additional playoffs" worries me slightly...mostly the part about one additional playoffs. At least he said that the Blues wouldn't be involved at the current asking prices, but that does leave a lot of room for speculation as to what an acceptable price would be from his POV.
It seems there are a couple reasons to want a trade. Either you want to improve perceived holes in the team or simply want to see change because something doesnt seem to be working. I could see making a trade this year for the sake of being better positioned next year. But, making such a move would be contingent on a vision materializing that I find absent right now. Hoffman or some other guy could be a good get, but my questions are where do they fit, what is the cost and how does it impact our cap and the players we fit within it. I also think we should start considering the next expansion draft as a tertiary concern.I don't get the lust for a trade. A trade is not going to make this team a SC contender this year and very well might risk giving up a great young top 6'er who would be cost-controlled for a long time. The window will open next year if everyone is just a tad patient.
I don't get the lust for a trade. A trade is not going to make this team a SC contender this year and very well might risk giving up a great young top 6'er who would be cost-controlled for a long time. The window will open next year if everyone is just a tad patient.
yeah. in this day and age anything any GM says is just empty words until something happens or doesn't.Honestly, he seems to be posturing. He has done this in the past. If I recall correctly he said he wasn’t going to trade Halak and then shortly after did just that.
We have also been connected to players with term as you alluded to. So he isn’t really ruling out too much. In the same vein though, he says he wouldn’t rule out a rental for the right price. So, posturing is my gut feeling, even though he probably feels like, generally speaking, rentals are not for us.
So if he's in the market to buy and not sell, what does that mean for Stastny? Is he going to sign him or just let him go after the season? If he lets him go then what's the plan after that? Schenn and Thomas as your top 2 Centers? Does he use that cap space for a James Neal? If we knew Fabbri would come back healthy and happy that would solve some answers but we can't count on that.
If Armstrong doesn't find himself a suitable deal to improve the deal, I wouldn't mind trading Stastny for futures. But again, we really don't know if Armstrong intends to make a pitch for Staz or not.
I personally hope Armstrong doesn't sacrifice Thomas, Thompson, Kyrou, or Kostin for an upgrade this season. Let's ride it out. @Cranjis McBasketball I'm with you. I don't get JR stating DA will trade for a rental. It just seems like a bad idea right now.
And this underscores the long view on proposed trades such as a Hoffman trade.
Would we rather have:
1. Kyrou at 900k'ish salary (plus potentially Stas resigned at 5ish million if one is in favor of adding decent but aging talent)?
or
2. Hoffman at his contract for two more years (at the end of which he will be 31 years old)--Kyrou gone in a trade and Stas might be gone b/c we added Hoffman's salary?
In sum, I would prefer to keep the young, cheap talent that we finally have managed to accumulate b/c:
1. it does look to be very good talent
2. it is cheap talent
3. we do not have a first round pick this year
4. potential cheap talent provides more cap flexibility to add the true impact UFA
5. adding a guy like Hoffman isn't going to put us over the top this year and probably will be a neutral to bad move when looking at the next 5 years.
6. we already are one of the older teams in the NHL and have a few contracts that don't appear that they will age well---Steen, Bergie, etc.
7. The older talent sometimes blocks young guys that simply would be a better option if given the chance (Bo--Dunn)
8. we are literally one year away from finding out how a few of our younger guys look in the NHL.
We need to be patient and commit to getting younger and faster. Put another way, trading good young talent for guys on the edge of hitting 30 or extending guys on the edge of hitting 30 BACKFIRES more often than not. Unless the guy who is on the edge of hitting 30 is in the truly elite class, it is usually a band-aid move that mortgages the future for the present. I am a bit sick of DA's repeated mistakes with older players. Let Bill Armstrong do his work.
i think stas wants to stay in stlouis and he just had his big money contract from the blues
would probably be flexible and take a bit of a discount to stay. at 5 mil or under hes a good player. Pretty much can play in any situation and with any players (not tarasenko). ideal 2C. im a big fan of having him and bergy around because it guarentees a solid middle 6 no matter who surrounds them