HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Stewart resigns (2 yrs-4.1 and 4.2 per)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-19-2013, 03:15 PM
  #26
Mike Liut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,118
vCash: 50
A 2 year deal will keep him motivated. Also, he hasn't played with a true playmaking center here in St.Louis. let's see what he does with Roy this year. I am expecting a 35g year from him. And, if the Blues make a run at Stastny, things would look pretty nice long term. I'm sure Stewart would like a long term deal by then.

Mike Liut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 03:22 PM
  #27
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,544
vCash: 500
Money is right and he will be gone in 2 years or less...Only way Army was able to get the money he wanted was to give the absolute worst years. Great contract for Stewart.

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 03:31 PM
  #28
Evgeny Oliker
Registered User
 
Evgeny Oliker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,458
vCash: 500
The deal is just ok.

What I dont get is why not give him a 1 year deal ? This way you keep his RFA rights next off-season and have more negotiating power at that point.

If he didnt want a 1-year deal, go through arbitration and that forces a 1 year deal anyway.

Now he will be UFA in 2 seasons and then you would have to overpay since you are competing with other NHL teams.

Evgeny Oliker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 03:54 PM
  #29
tfriede2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evgeny Oliker View Post
The deal is just ok.

What I dont get is why not give him a 1 year deal ? This way you keep his RFA rights next off-season and have more negotiating power at that point.

If he didnt want a 1-year deal, go through arbitration and that forces a 1 year deal anyway.

Now he will be UFA in 2 seasons and then you would have to overpay since you are competing with other NHL teams.
Stewart probably wouldn't sign a 1 way deal and said he'd go to arbitration before signing. I'm not positive, but doesn't the player determine if the arbitration deal is 1 or 2 years? If so, then Armstrong made the better decision to sign Stewart to a 2 year deal than go to arbitration (but I still agree that this isn't a "great" deal...just ok since this takes Stewart to UFA).

tfriede2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 03:58 PM
  #30
BlueDream
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,623
vCash: 500
I'm sure with this weekend being Stewart's wedding he probably wanted to just get it done and not have to worry about going to arbitration.

This deal is great for him, and pretty decent for the Blues...again, I would have liked 3-4 years, but things can change in 2 years so let's not freak out yet.

BlueDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:00 PM
  #31
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDream View Post
I'm sure with this weekend being Stewart's wedding he probably wanted to just get it done and not have to worry about going to arbitration.

This deal is great for him, and pretty decent for the Blues...again, I would have liked 3-4 years, but things can change in 2 years so let's not freak out yet.
I am not freaking out but I do think this puts us in a spot where we almost have to trade him next offseason if he produces.

Can't risk losing him for nothing.

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:05 PM
  #32
BlueDream
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,623
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jarmoismyhero View Post
I am not freaking out but I do think this puts us in a spot where we almost have to trade him next offseason if he produces.

Can't risk losing him for nothing.
I agree I don't like how this deal takes him straight to UFA. It makes me nervous.

But we need to at least let this season play out before we think of these hypothetical situations about having to trade him.

I mean for all we know, what if Tarasenko really disappoints this season? And what if Dmitrij Jaskin doesn't exactly wow us? Then all the sudden Stewart becomes a key piece we need to keep long-term.

Then you have Berglund whose contract is up in a year. The Blues will certainly be looking for more out of him.

Basically all I'm trying to say is that the Blues have a few players who could be under the spotlight. As of now, yes it will be tough re-signing Stewart after this, but if some of these other players don't live up to expectations, perhaps they will be the ones shipped out, which potentially frees up space for us to bring back Stewart. You just never know.

BlueDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:07 PM
  #33
jarmoismyhero
Registered User
 
jarmoismyhero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 2,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDream View Post
I agree I don't like how this deal takes him straight to UFA. It makes me nervous.

But we need to at least let this season play out before we think of these hypothetical situations about having to trade him.

I mean for all we know, what if Tarasenko really disappoints this season? And what if Dmitrij Jaskin doesn't exactly wow us? Then all the sudden Stewart becomes a key piece we need to keep long-term.

Then you have Berglund whose contract is up in a year. The Blues will certainly be looking for more out of him.

Basically all I'm trying to say is that the Blues have a few players who could be under the spotlight. As of now, yes it will be tough re-signing Stewart after this, but if some of these other players don't live up to expectations, perhaps they will be the ones shipped out, which potentially frees up space for us to bring back Stewart. You just never know.
I agree with this post this year will be an interesting one in seeing how the team shapes up for the future.

jarmoismyhero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:43 PM
  #34
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
It wouldn't surprise me a bit if Stewart has his best season.

stlweir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:47 PM
  #35
Meatwagon
Blues=Overrated
 
Meatwagon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Welcome Home, Paul
Country: United States
Posts: 1,401
vCash: 3041
IMO, this contract means that Chris Stewart will be a Blue for 2 more years.

If he succeeds like some of us believes he can, he will be too expensive to re-sign. Can anyone imagine the silly number Holmgren already has ready for Chris Stewart the second he hits UFA status!?! I wouldn't be surprised to see him sign a 7yr-49 mil contract. Is he worth that much to the Blues? No he is not. Will he be worth that much to some of these stupid *** GM's like Holmgren if he pots 30+ goals for the next 2 years? He most certainly will be. I say let another GM sign him to that kind of deal and cripple their payroll. Because I don't wont the Blues to make that kind of crazy commitment and for selfish reasons, I don't want to listen to the fanboys destroy him for the next decade.

I do think this deal assures us that Army believes that one of Jaskin/Rattie will be good enough to replace Stewarts points. Also it puts us in a great spot to sign Petro long term for market value. Within a few weeks hopefully Petro will have signed a 8yr-52 mil deal(6.5 per) and everyone can focus on the upcoming season and not about contracts anymore.

I also think the message is clear from the Blues to Stewart, we like you, just not nearly as much as you like yourself.

Meatwagon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 04:50 PM
  #36
allen wrench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
This is a fair deal for both sides. If stewart shows consistency the blues will probably resign him to a longer term, if not, then after a year the blues can trade him to another team with a year left on his contract. The main problem with Stewart is consistency, imo. This contract addresses that issue, so overall I commend Armstrong and Stewart getting a deal done before arbitration.

allen wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:06 PM
  #37
HooliganX2
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allen wrench View Post
This is a fair deal for both sides. If stewart shows consistency the blues will probably resign him to a longer term, if not, then after a year the blues can trade him to another team with a year left on his contract. The main problem with Stewart is consistency, imo. This contract addresses that issue, so overall I commend Armstrong and Stewart getting a deal done before arbitration.
Stewart has had one down season. Other then that he has consistently produced points through an NHL season even with his down season he averages 57 points the last 4 seasons.

HooliganX2 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:19 PM
  #38
allen wrench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HooliganX2 View Post
Stewart has had one down season. Other then that he has consistently produced points through an NHL season even with his down season he averages 57 points the last 4 seasons.
I should have been more specific. I'm not refering to his season totals, but rather his in-game consistency. Watching him take shifts off and vanishing during a game is very frustrating. That is the consistency I was referencing. He just has this tendency to disappear during a game. If he wants a long term $6-$6+ million contract from the blues, then he will have to show up every shift.

I understand goal scorers go through streaks, but if you watch him sometimes the effort just isn't there on a shift by shift basis. I thought it was especially apparent during the playoffs. He was a ghost. That's the main knock on Stewart, imo.

I like Stewart, and I believe he'll take that next step this year. Just throwing that out there so you don't think I'm a Stewart hater.

allen wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:22 PM
  #39
JustOneB4IDie
Everyone Overpayment
 
JustOneB4IDie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: St. Louis MO
Country: United States
Posts: 3,425
vCash: 500
The Money is right around where it should be, but the 2 years leading right to UFA, not so much. Now I wonder what Stewart the Blues get this upcoming season, a streaky player.

JustOneB4IDie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:27 PM
  #40
CarvinSigX
Meh
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Ill Side
Country: United States
Posts: 8,884
vCash: 500
Stewart was on a line with McDonald in the playoffs, wasn't he? May have affected his performance a bit.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:41 PM
  #41
allen wrench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarvinSigX View Post
Stewart was on a line with McDonald in the playoffs, wasn't he? May have affected his performance a bit.
Very true. But a big money ($6+million) player should and would have contributed more than what Stewart did in the playoffs. Well a player actually deserving of $6+million.

allen wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:44 PM
  #42
CarvinSigX
Meh
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Ill Side
Country: United States
Posts: 8,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allen wrench View Post
Very true. But a big money ($6+million) player should and would have contributed more than what Stewart did in the playoffs. Well a player actually deserving of $6+million.
And Stewart isn't that guy, so how can we fault him for it? He's not getting paid that much, so it's useless to talk about.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 05:54 PM
  #43
OCTA8ON*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 954
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by allen wrench View Post
Very true. But a big money ($6+million) player should and would have contributed more than what Stewart did in the playoffs. Well a player actually deserving of $6+million.
Obviously…which is why Stewart isn't getting paid 6 million. He is getting paid about 2/3s of that.

OCTA8ON* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:00 PM
  #44
allen wrench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarvinSigX View Post
And Stewart isn't that guy, so how can we fault him for it? He's not getting paid that much, so it's useless to talk about.
We can definitely fault him for his effort in the playoffs. He didn't play up to his talent level. Amac certainly played a part in that, but he is better than what he showed.

I'm coming from the viewpoint that Stewart has the chance to be a major component in a Blues run for the cup. He has big money talent, but I question his effort at times. If he showed up every shift, then he would have a bigger contract.

allen wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:01 PM
  #45
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,912
vCash: 500
The money is fine, and actually a bit below what I predicted at the beginning of the offseason (4.25). At that money, Stewart is a good deal.

If Stewart was insisting on the Blues paying UFA prices to buy out UFA years, then I don't blame them one bit for avoiding that at this time. He's simply not yet worth what the market would command for a player with his size/speed/skill package. Hoping that he might be in a few years is too big of a financial risk for a franchise like this one to take. They opted to take a risk with the term instead, which I would prefer myself.

Possible scenarios:

Stewart regresses/proves to be a poor fit in this system and the decision to avoid paying big money to buy out UFA years pays dividends. He re-signs for less or he leaves the team in some fashion because he's become expendable.

Stewart stays about the same, and the Blues revisit the decision to pay UFA prices for UFA years with two additional years of information (about Stewart and the team around him) to work with.

Stewart builds on this past year and takes another significant step forward in his development to become a borderline franchise player. The Blues attempt to sign him to an extension that works for them financially. They either succeed or fail. If they fail, there's a good chance they try to trade him. If they fail there as well, they might lose him for nothing.

To me, it seems like there's little to no downside for the Blues in the two most likely scenarios listed above (the first two). The worst case possibility in the third scenario is that they receive two years of good to great production from Stewart at a significant bargain and then lose him for nothing. Hardly an end of days scenario, all things considered, and it's a fairly remote one to boot.

EastonBlues22 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:04 PM
  #46
CarvinSigX
Meh
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Ill Side
Country: United States
Posts: 8,884
vCash: 500
@allen

It's not just Stewart though. The Blues don't have enough talent to score when the other team is firing on all cylinders. They don't have or haven't developed the killer instinct yet. Schwartz showed me the most glimpses of it, aside from Steen.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:13 PM
  #47
allen wrench
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarvinSigX View Post
@allen

It's not just Stewart though. The Blues don't have enough talent to score when the other team is firing on all cylinders. They don't have or haven't developed the killer instinct yet. Schwartz showed me the most glimpses of it, aside from Steen.
Agree. I was picking Stewart only because of the thread title. The blues are still learning how to finish. How many open nets did they miss against LA?

I'm very excited to see what Schwartz accomplishes this upcoming season. Also Steen is our most consistent forward. The guy brings it every night. Can we put Steen's brain in Stewart's body? That would be one heck of a hockey player.

allen wrench is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:15 PM
  #48
Evgeny Oliker
Registered User
 
Evgeny Oliker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 3,458
vCash: 500
This is a good read:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=6...d=nhl:topheads

Armstrong is being very open here, I'm surprised. He talks about what everyone on here has complained about, Stewart's lack of consistency.

I do finally get his point about 2 years over 1 year. With 1 year, after that 1 year you are still looking at almost a UFA deal. Lets say it was a 1 year deal...then next summer if say you want to sign him to a 5 year deal, 4 of the 5 years are UFA years so Stewart is likely to ask for UFA money anyway.

With the 2 years they do get more time to evaluate him. They also can just give him an extension next summer...so way before he hits UFA.

I'm also thinking 2 years at $4.15 is cheaper than doing 1 year at $4.15 and then another 1 year which would probably go up to $4.5 or more(if he has another good or better season).

After reading the reasoning behind it, I'm fine with the deal.

Evgeny Oliker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:40 PM
  #49
BlueDream
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,623
vCash: 500
Yeah the more I think about it the more I'm okay with it. Like I said 3 years would have been good to eat one year of UFA, but Stewart is a player that still needs to prove himself a little more consistently and then maybe we can talk 4 years.

It is what it is. I think we're in a solid position to get him for a good cap hit.

BlueDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2013, 06:48 PM
  #50
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,410
vCash: 500
Hopefully he can prove me wrong, but I just don't see Stewart ever being a consistent player. I just don't think he has the hockey IQ to avoid getting into these hot and cold runs. We just have to hope he gets hot at the right time.

I really don't believe he is lazy. I think people say he is lazy because of his size and the fact he isn't a very physical player at the best of times. When things are going well he doesn't think, the rest of the time you can see him thinking about every little thing he does and any instincts he had disappear.

If he just added physicality to his game consistently I don't think people would complain about his streaky scoring or below average overall play nearly as much.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:25 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.