Bishop for Ottawa's 3rd and a decent prospect or another pick would work for me.
A single third-round pick is not enough return for a player like Bishop who would step into the #1 goaltending job in Ottawa as soon as he stepped off the plane. I have no doubt whatsoever that Ottawa would get Bishop into however many games he needs to play in order to retain his RFA status.
I'm concerned about Jake The Snake taking the reins in Peoria without Bishop there for the Rivs to fall back on, but if the Blues can make a minor deal or two for some defense and foward depth in Peoria -- and if they go ahead and sign Paul Karpowich during postgame interviews in the locker room after Clarkson plays their last game of the season -- then Peoria would be OK for the stretch run.
Of course he is...Blues lack ownership when a good, relatively cheap forward comes into play. AND they can't take on salary, so it would have to be for picks and prospects. IF this is all true, I truly hope Armstrong is given the go ahead. This deadline just got serious.
One nice part about this trade is that if Parise becomes a free agent that is one less team with interest. If Parise is not signed by the draft what would you offer for his rights?
Just had a look at their cap situation and both Penner and Stoll are off the books at the end of the season, which deals with the cap issues. I really don't see the point in moving Brown unless they have targeted a player.
They must just be testing the waters to see if someone offers something crazy. Some ELC's would be nice, but they aren't really in a bad cap situation.
That and the whole bigillion years brings down the cap hit. But, do you remember some of the pre-lockout teams, more specifically the Red Wings when they had Hull, now those teams were stacked.
Thats one thing that I don't quite get. Everyone is saying that we need a LH Defenseman. Why?
We are currently 1st in GAA but 22nd in GF It seems to me that we could use more help in the GF category than we could in the GAA category. So logically speaking, wouldnt we be able to get more for our money by going after a forward as opposed to a defenseman?
Once again: nobody goes anywhere in the playoffs with an inexperienced D.
Up front they added playoff experience. Now, in addition to McDonald, they have Arnott, Langenbrunner and Nichol who all have lots of playoff experience. In net, Halak has faced the pressure recently and Elliott has seen some time.
On defense: Polak, Russell and Colaiacovo have one sweep each in their playoff history. Jackman has the sweep and a 7 gamer from 02-03. Pietrangelo and Shattenkirk have zero.
They added Huskins who has playoff experience but it's nowhere near enough when an opponents' game plan over a seven game series is to relentlessly forecheck and pressure your D. Any coach with half a brain will know to go after Pietrangelo and Shattenkirk all series, because those are the guys on which the Blues' transition engine depends. Take away their ability to have time to operate, beat the Blues. Easy.
They are looking at defensemen specifically with playoff experience who can stabilize the D. It's been so long since we've visited the postseason regularly we forget how different it is than the regular season. Did you see the Predators' forecheck last night? Every game in the playoffs is like that. It's just a whole different game in the playoffs. Goals are created off of mistakes coughed up by the other team and by the power play. So you need someone with poise who has been through the playoff wars and knows what to expect.
I don't know if they'll find someone like that but it's exactly the reason JR reported they were looking at Hamrlik. 114 playoff games. Whatever else his flaws are, they covet playoff experience on the blueline and they are correctly worried about it with their current group.
Thats one thing that I don't quite get. Everyone is saying that we need a LH Defenseman. Why?
We are currently 1st in GAA but 22nd in GF It seems to me that we could use more help in the GF category than we could in the GAA category. So logically speaking, wouldnt we be able to get more for our money by going after a forward as opposed to a defenseman?
The GAA/GF stat isn't bad over the course of a long season but it loses it's effect because of the smaller sample size in the playoffs. The playoffs are all about exploiting whatever matchup advantage you can get. Cola next to Pietrangelo is one of those spots that other teams will go right at come playoff time, as well as trying to get as physical with Pie and Shatty as much as possible to rattle them. That's where a vet with loads of playoff experience can really come in handy. They may not have the individual skill of Pie or Shatty but they can keep their composure and make a simple plays to take pressure off of those two.
thanks for the replys. I just remember reading somewhere that due to the current market, a guy like Hamrlik is incredibly overpriced. I just was curious if at inflated prices, a guy like that is still our primary target. or if we would be better off going after someone with less market demand. That way we can avoid the overpayment.
thanks for the replys. I just remember reading somewhere that due to the current market, a guy like Hamrlik is incredibly overpriced. I just was curious if at inflated prices, a guy like that is still our primary target. or if we would be better off going after someone with less market demand. That way we can avoid the overpayment.
Based on the recent trades for defensemen I would think Hamrlik's price would be something in the range of a 2nd round pick + a decent prospect and maybe a later round pick. I don't think that's too much of a price to pay by any means; the Blues wouldn't have to sacrifice a high-end prospect like Tarasenko, Schwartz or Rattie.
ok, so even if we do get our experienced defenseman, I guess we'd have to run with pie, jax, shatty, polak, huskins, and our new guy? so russel and cola are both out?
I say that because it makes no sense to trade for experience and meanwhile sit the only experienced guy in huskins for russel or cola. But lately its seemed like russel is currently ahead of huskins in the depth chart.
I'm not really questioning, just trying to understand.
I'm not sure we know where Huskins belongs on the depth chart.
He got tired on the 2nd of back-to-back games in his return. It will take a few games to get up to speed. I don't think his conditioning has allowed him to assume his rightful place (wherever that is) on the depth chart, but his experience is going to count for something here at the end of the season.
Now with Russell out for a while, Huskins is going to get regular play and we'll see.
ok, so even if we do get our experienced defenseman, I guess we'd have to run with pie, jax, shatty, polak, huskins, and our new guy? so russel and cola are both out?
I say that because it makes no sense to trade for experience and meanwhile sit the only experienced guy in huskins for russel or cola. But lately its seemed like russel is currently ahead of huskins in the depth chart.
I'm not really questioning, just trying to understand.
Assuming they play the new guy regularly (why wouldn't they), I would guess they would rotate those three into the sixth spot based on who is playing well and injuries. Russell is out for who knows how long with a concussion. Huskins needs to get back up to speed from his injury, so Colaiacovo will get some time, at least in the short term. With Huskins' playoff experience they'll want to get him some playing time in the playoffs so that will give him 20-ish games to get up to speed. If Russell comes back at 100% I imagine he'll get some time as well since Hitch seems to like him.
I guess that doesn't really answer the question definitively but it's not really a question we can answer at this point in time. It'll just depend on
A) Who, if anyone, do the Blues acquire
B) Who's injured at the time
C) Who's playing well at the time.
I think if they make such a trade, particularly for Hamrlik who still has a contract year left, Colaiacovo is likely gone as a salary balancer that the sending team can't complain about. So you would have New Guy and Huskins and Jackman as your main three with Russell out indefinitely, and Cole as the 7th. When Russell comes back, then it depends on New Guy, Huskins and Russell who's playing the best. But injuries are bound to happen to the D the more physical rounds they play. Just because someone isn't automatically plugged into a lineup when they're all healthy isn't how management approaches the choice to acquire someone.
If Dustin Brown is available, would there be interest in him? I know that Armstrong has said he would rather address the d than the forwards. But Brown seems like he would be an ideal fit for the type of team we are constructing. Although, we have a couple of similar players in Oshie and Backes, so maybe he is redundant?
