HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   St. Louis Blues (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=32)
-   -   Stillman (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1390161)

HooliganX2 03-30-2013 06:46 PM

Stillman
 
Is any one else worried about our new ownership group as much as I am. It really seems like this team is in a horrible situation financially. I thought the Checketts years were bad but it seemed liek out team had more disposable money under Checketts.

PocketNines 03-30-2013 07:00 PM

The team has been in a horrible situation financially for a long time. There wasn't any change from Checketts to Stillman in this respect. Armstrong has probably also not walked into Stillman's office and said, trade for expensive Player X and we'll win the Cup. Because he knows that's not the case. And as long as it's not the case, they have to wait until this summer to see what happened in the postseason and where the RFA deals shake out.

Alklha 03-30-2013 07:08 PM

This is far too premature. Until we have dealt with our RFA's then how can we even comment on this?

The roster pieces that should have been brought in last summer wouldn't have added a massive amount of salary when you factor in the players that we'd needed to have traded to acquire them. While no major pieces have come in, none have left.

As for Checketts, he made a bad situation worse with the moronic concessions contract. We'll struggle with that for a long time.

Multimoodia 03-30-2013 07:15 PM

Couple of items have happened to further screw with the financial situation.

Stillman planned to have more money available, however things have not turned out as planned (thanks to personal issues in the ownership group, foreign markets, US economy [particularly local] still not recovering/spending in some areas, etc. etc.)...And he has learned a hard lesson about the city of St. Louis and getting everything completely in writing by every single committee before counting on things.

It has simply been an unfortunate combination of events. It may be something which corrects itself in the future, a lot of it is really out of his hands.

Steve Doan 03-30-2013 07:20 PM

I think he's a genuine Blues fan and cares about the franchise, more than the last couple owner, but ultimatley its a business, and he is trying to make money. My dad talks to Maritz everyday and said he isnt the type of person that tolerates losing money, as I'm sure Stillman is. As p9 said, we need a playoff run of some sort desperately.

mizzoublues29 03-31-2013 12:42 AM

How long has he had control and we're already worried? The ****?

Bluesman91 03-31-2013 12:51 AM

He got rid of Peoria because he was losing money. He's focusing his money towards the Blues franchise. Once the concession and parking stuff gets figured out and how well the team does in a couple of years. I don't think there is that much of a problem with the financial situation.

diehardbluesfan 03-31-2013 01:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluesman91 (Post 62837129)
He got rid of Peoria because he was losing money. He's focusing his money towards the Blues franchise. Once the concession and parking stuff gets figured out and how well the team does in a couple of years. I don't think there is that much of a problem with the financial situation.

Almost every AHL team loses money, Peoria isn't the only one.

When does that concession lease end that Checketts signed off for? That might be one of the dumbest things I've ever seen an owner do.

I'm not to familiar with the parking arrangement, so if you or anybody else could enlighten me on that I'd appreciate it.

I'm kind of skeptical on Stillman, as he seems to be a huge Blues fan that has just enough money to own the team, but not enough to spend a lot. Hopefully I'm wrong, but he doesn't strike me as a guy who will let Armstrong go out, get a guy, and pay him top money. Obviously spending to the cap doesn't guarantee that you will be a cup contender, but most teams that have won the cup recently are near the cap ($5-10 mil).

Bluesman91 03-31-2013 01:26 AM

Well obviously all AHL teams you are going to lose money, the point was there is no reason in a budget team to invest in something that takes their finances away. Which is why he sold it.

Mike Liut 03-31-2013 10:47 AM

Can somebody explain what the deal is with the concession and the parking?

Alklha 03-31-2013 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Liut (Post 62849137)
Can somebody explain what the deal is with the concession and the parking?

The city owns the parking at the Scottrade, so the Blues get none of that revenue. Other teams have different arrangements and enjoy that extra income.

The concessions contract was a moronic move made by Checketts that sold the rights to sell concessions at Blues games for 20 years. He got $10m up front and we get a payment each year that is well below what we should be earning from it.

Mike Liut 03-31-2013 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alklha (Post 62849653)
The city owns the parking at the Scottrade, so the Blues get none of that revenue. Other teams have different arrangements and enjoy that extra income.

The concessions contract was a moronic move made by Checketts that sold the rights to sell concessions at Blues games for 20 years. He got $10m up front and we get a payment each year that is well below what we should be earning from it.


Wow, that really sucks. Stillman seems to be fighting a losing battle. I think I read somewhere that the Cardinals also get a better tax deal than the Blues too.

BadgersandBlues 03-31-2013 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Liut (Post 62869283)
Wow, that really sucks. Stillman seems to be fighting a losing battle. I think I read somewhere that the Cardinals also get a better tax deal than the Blues too.

Yea, there's an entertainment tax of like 12.3% or some such. Both the Cards and the Rams negotiated much lower (if they even pay anything at all) rates with the city, but the Blues pay full freight.

Meatwagon 03-31-2013 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadgersandBlues (Post 62870329)
Yea, there's an entertainment tax of like 12.3% or some such. Both the Cards and the Rams negotiated much lower (if they even pay anything at all) rates with the city, but the Blues pay full freight.

People seems to forget that the Blues pay that tax to pay for the bonds that were issued to build the Scottrade(Kiel, SAVVIS, etc.). Yes it sucks, but thems the bricks

JustOneB4IDie 04-01-2013 05:45 AM

I'm very concerned over the long term state of the Blues staying put here with all the moronic deals by previous regimes myself. It isn't a pretty picture.

diehardbluesfan 04-01-2013 05:55 PM

How do the Blues pay more taxes than the Cardinals and Rams? Why would the Blues move to downtown if they would have to pay taxes much lower than the Cardinals and lower than the Rams (or at all) if this is all true? Scottrade is in a pretty bad spot. There aren't many bars/restaurants that are a block or two away. The Predators location is perfect, right there on broadway with bars/restaurants out the wazoo to go to before and after the game.

Brez50 04-02-2013 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by diehardbluesfan (Post 62945659)
Scottrade is in a pretty bad spot. There aren't many bars/restaurants that are a block or two away. The Predators location is perfect, right there on broadway with bars/restaurants out the wazoo to go to before and after the game.

Having not been down to the Scottrade area for many years, we went to last week's game against the Kings and stayed at the Hyatt in Union Station and couldn't believe how much of a ghost town that is now. Gone are Houlihans, Hooters, and whatever else used to be there leaving Hard Rock as the only hangout. Sad...

HooliganX2 04-02-2013 12:41 PM

Well since we traded for Bouwmeester I'm not nearly as worried about Stillman's finances as I was. If the trade costs us UFAs though i will be pissed off.

PocketNines 04-02-2013 12:56 PM

I don't see the Blues doing anything in the UFA market this year. It's all about the RFAs. Once #27 and #22 are extended, you've got a top 5 of Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, Bouwmeester, Jackman, Polak under contract. Then you have two of Leopold, Russell and Cole likely to return. I could see any one of those guys being the odd man out. That decision could be effectively made in the next 24 hours if we see Russell or Cole moved but I also wouldn't be surprised to see no movement and then a trade at the draft (Russell or Cole for a 2d, something like that).

In goal, they're not likely to trade an injured Halak and they can't trade Elliott right now. Would be surprised to see the Blues in the UFA market in goal unless there's a trade near the draft, a HUGE if.

Forward is really the only place they could potentially add a UFA. They might replace Nichol with someone similarly priced but I don't see much 4th line need. They should keep Porter and Cracknell and let them take two of the 11th-14th forward spots.

It would have to be a scoring line UFA center if they don't think Berglund is a true top-two center. Remember that Lehtera might get a shot, that's still unclear. That scoring line #1/#2 center tends to be a bidding war player if any are available on the market. It's much more likely if they want a playmaking center they make a hockey trade near the draft than going the UFA route.

Thus, Bouwmeester basically takes the Blues out of the UFA market, and the Blues may just have to escalate RFA contracts a bit more to absorb the 13-14 Bouwmeester hit. Berglund and Stewart's salary numbers are coming back to earth with their major cooling off in the past few games.

Bluesman91 04-02-2013 01:04 PM

Not really intrigued by any UFAs this year unless they are a #1C.

HooliganX2 04-02-2013 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketNines (Post 63030163)
I don't see the Blues doing anything in the UFA market this year. It's all about the RFAs. Once #27 and #22 are extended, you've got a top 5 of Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk, Bouwmeester, Jackman, Polak under contract. Then you have two of Leopold, Russell and Cole likely to return. I could see any one of those guys being the odd man out. That decision could be effectively made in the next 24 hours if we see Russell or Cole moved but I also wouldn't be surprised to see no movement and then a trade at the draft (Russell or Cole for a 2d, something like that).

In goal, they're not likely to trade an injured Halak and they can't trade Elliott right now. Would be surprised to see the Blues in the UFA market in goal unless there's a trade near the draft, a HUGE if.

Forward is really the only place they could potentially add a UFA. They might replace Nichol with someone similarly priced but I don't see much 4th line need. They should keep Porter and Cracknell and let them take two of the 11th-14th forward spots.

It would have to be a scoring line UFA center if they don't think Berglund is a true top-two center. Remember that Lehtera might get a shot, that's still unclear. That scoring line #1/#2 center tends to be a bidding war player if any are available on the market. It's much more likely if they want a playmaking center they make a hockey trade near the draft than going the UFA route.

Thus, Bouwmeester basically takes the Blues out of the UFA market, and the Blues may just have to escalate RFA contracts a bit more to absorb the 13-14 Bouwmeester hit. Berglund and Stewart's salary numbers are coming back to earth with their major cooling off in the past few games.

I meant RFAs not UFA. Sorry to totally spaced and typed the wrong thing.

PocketNines 04-02-2013 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HooliganX2 (Post 63032005)
I meant RFAs not UFA. Sorry to totally spaced and typed the wrong thing.

I don't think Armstrong wants to invest too heavily in Patrik Berglund. Barring a strong finish to the season and playoffs, I see Berglund being a piece to upgrade at center. Otherwise I think Berglund gets treated in negotiations like a #3C and if he accepts that status (he might) then it's a minimal increase to pay him. Less than a million raise.

Stewart is coming back down to earth a bit, which is good for Blues budgeting. Again, playoffs will be a factor here too.

Shattenkirk and Pietrangelo are going to get their money, but they might need to have their deals structured to escalate so the first year isn't such a sticker shock. This is where all the talk of offer sheets will center teams who could structure a big salary year or two right up front that would screw the Blues. Note I said "talk of," but I don't think Armstrong will let these guys get to July 1 without extensions.

TheOrganist 04-02-2013 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PocketNines (Post 63032895)
I don't think Armstrong wants to invest too heavily in Patrik Berglund. Barring a strong finish to the season and playoffs, I see Berglund being a piece to upgrade at center. Otherwise I think Berglund gets treated in negotiations like a #3C and if he accepts that status (he might) then it's a minimal increase to pay him. Less than a million raise.

Stewart is coming back down to earth a bit, which is good for Blues budgeting. Again, playoffs will be a factor here too.

Shattenkirk and Pietrangelo are going to get their money, but they might need to have their deals structured to escalate so the first year isn't such a sticker shock. This is where all the talk of offer sheets will center teams who could structure a big salary year or two right up front that would screw the Blues. Note I said "talk of," but I don't think Armstrong will let these guys get to July 1 without extensions.

That's typically how it works. Look at OEL. He'll make $3 mil next season before rising all the way to $7 mil in 2018-19. The fact that the Blues ownership actually stepped up and spent to make the team better will hopefully encourage these guys to work with the Blues in the first handful of years as the ownership continues to get their financial house in order.

Alklha 04-02-2013 02:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOrganist (Post 63033451)
That's typically how it works. Look at OEL. He'll make $3 mil next season before rising all the way to $7 mil in 2018-19. The fact that the Blues ownership actually stepped up and spent to make the team better will hopefully encourage these guys to work with the Blues in the first handful of years as the ownership continues to get their financial house in order.

Depends on the player. I think there should be a preference to keep the Pietrangelo and Shattenkirk contracts as balanced as possible. Backload Berglund and Stewart. Having all the players salary increasing at the same time can handcuff us going forward.

JustOneB4IDie 04-02-2013 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HooliganX2 (Post 63027679)
Well since we traded for Bouwmeester I'm not nearly as worried about Stillman's finances as I was. If the trade costs us UFAs though i will be pissed off.

Yep, except the UFA comment. Blues have too many RFA to deal with, Stewie, Shatty, Pie. However Beglund gets moved.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:35 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.