HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Blues Trade Proposals Part 3

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-16-2013, 06:28 PM
  #276
Mike Liut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 5,419
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarvinSigX View Post
I'd give Berglund an 8 year contract if the cap hit could be kept around 3.5 or so...But he'll likely want around 4 for quite a few years.

8 x 3.5 would be awesome. Even 8 x 3.75 would be too. Love his game and he is just entering his prime.

Mike Liut is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 06:41 PM
  #277
Dolph Ziggler
Push ME
 
Dolph Ziggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 8,337
vCash: 50
He'd be insane to agree to a contract that locks him in at 3.75 for the next 8 years.

Dolph Ziggler is offline  
Old
01-16-2013, 11:08 PM
  #278
BlueDream
Registered User
 
BlueDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 6,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPaste View Post
True, if Stewart doesnt bounce back(which I think he will) I doubt he will even be here though.
I think he definitely will.

And sorry but Berglund getting 8 years is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard and thankfully the chances of it happening are probably in the negatives. Let's not overrate him and give him the amount of years that Pietrangelo and nobody else on the team will get. Berglund has a lot to prove still.

BlueDream is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 10:29 AM
  #279
SirPaste
Registered User
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 6,603
vCash: 50
With all the value of Jamie Benn threads on the trade boards got me to thinking, what would you guys give up for him? He would be a perfect 1C, move Backes either back to RW or 2C, Bergy to 3C.

SirPaste is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 10:40 AM
  #280
Celtic Note
Moderator
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,592
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPaste View Post
With all the value of Jamie Benn threads on the trade boards got me to thinking, what would you guys give up for him? He would be a perfect 1C, move Backes either back to RW or 2C, Bergy to 3C.
They would want a center coming back.

Celtic Note is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 10:45 AM
  #281
BlueBeard
Registered User
 
BlueBeard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 2,769
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDream View Post
I think he definitely will.

And sorry but Berglund getting 8 years is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard and thankfully the chances of it happening are probably in the negatives. Let's not overrate him and give him the amount of years that Pietrangelo and nobody else on the team will get. Berglund has a lot to prove still.
Locking a guy like Berglund at a lower cap hit but longer term might not be a bad idea for this team. The ship may have sailed on him being a #1 center but he's a pretty good #2 C and unless he gets hit by some serious injuries he should stay at at least the level he's at now for a while. If you end up getting him signed to a deal in the range of 6 years at 3.5mil a season average there is some real value in that contract. Plus with a deal like that it's not like you can't play him in a #3 role because he costs too much.

Besides, there are no prospects in the pipeline that can replace him and even if we draft a couple center prospects in the next couple drafts it could be 3+ years before they ever challenge Berglund for a roster spot, and it may be another couple years of ups and downs in the NHL before they truly replace Berglund.

Getting the meat and potatoes of our lineup(Berglund, Shatty, and a couple wingers) locked up as cheap and as long as possible will give Armstrong more wiggle room to pay the top players like Petro more money.

BlueBeard is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 10:51 AM
  #282
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
If Stewart has a bounceback year, he will become very expensive for a guy whose all-encompassing contributions will be lower than Backes, Oshie, Perron, etc. If he doesn't bounce back, he'll hold very low value. We knew this last year, which is why we should've traded him. Because both options suck. We're all focused on the reality that he IS still on the team and we want him to rebound because it helps the team, but let's not kid ourselves. The first two sentences remain true and we should've traded him.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:36 AM
  #283
Dolph Ziggler
Push ME
 
Dolph Ziggler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 8,337
vCash: 50
If he bounces back and prices himself out, he'll still be an RFA and we'll be able to trade him for more than we could have prior.

Dolph Ziggler is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 11:56 AM
  #284
CarvinSigX
Registered User
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 7,757
vCash: 2616
True...And loading up on picks from an offer sheet could help us snag a good player.

CarvinSigX is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 12:02 PM
  #285
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,056
vCash: 714
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
If Stewart has a bounceback year, he will become very expensive for a guy whose all-encompassing contributions will be lower than Backes, Oshie, Perron, etc. If he doesn't bounce back, he'll hold very low value. We knew this last year, which is why we should've traded him. Because both options suck. We're all focused on the reality that he IS still on the team and we want him to rebound because it helps the team, but let's not kid ourselves. The first two sentences remain true and we should've traded him.
Eh. What kind of return do you think he would have inspired last season?

I counter that not every single guy on the team is going to have an ideal contract. I'd rather overpay (relative to the team) a productive Stewart than trade him just to try and maximize value overall. Also, if he's productive it probably reflects chemistry with Berglund and Schwartz....which can be hard to quantify as an intangible.

I guess I'm looking at it from the perspective of trying to get the best odds during the Cup run window (which legitimately opens this year and looks good for at least the next 2-3 years). Armstrong could keep it open longer than that, and I fully expect him to. But dammit, I want the Blues to win a Cup and I think Stewart on a secondary line could be a key element.

That said, I still think his biggest handicap wasn't fitness level but his mental game. It remains to be seen whether that can truly rebound. I'm skeptical, but hopeful. If he DOESN'T rebound, then he's worth little then and now and later so the issue becomes pretty moot.

2 Minute Minor is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 12:09 PM
  #286
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 Minute Minor View Post
Eh. What kind of return do you think he would have inspired last season?

I counter that not every single guy on the team is going to have an ideal contract. I'd rather overpay (relative to the team) a productive Stewart than trade him just to try and maximize value overall. Also, if he's productive it probably reflects chemistry with Berglund and Schwartz....which can be hard to quantify as an intangible.

I guess I'm looking at it from the perspective of trying to get the best odds during the Cup run window (which legitimately opens this year and looks good for at least the next 2-3 years). Armstrong could keep it open longer than that, and I fully expect him to. But dammit, I want the Blues to win a Cup and I think Stewart on a secondary line could be a key element.

That said, I still think his biggest handicap wasn't fitness level but his mental game. It remains to be seen whether that can truly rebound. I'm skeptical, but hopeful. If he DOESN'T rebound, then he's worth little then and now and later so the issue becomes pretty moot.
Granted, not a huge return, but certainly more than if it turns out he continues to struggle in a system that goes completely against the grain of his skillset because that's far more important than being a bit fitter. It wasn't a good situation that he regressed, regardless. I understand your point, and yes I, too, would rather be overpaying someone productive.

I guess the thing to do now is just wait and see what happens with him. There probably is still a sweet spot of production where he's valuable and still affordable. Maybe he'll show great advances on the defensive side of the puck. THEN I'll get excited because he'll be more than one-dimensional and thus fit in better with the team.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 01:26 PM
  #287
Alklha
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 7,164
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
If Stewart has a bounceback year, he will become very expensive for a guy whose all-encompassing contributions will be lower than Backes, Oshie, Perron, etc. If he doesn't bounce back, he'll hold very low value. We knew this last year, which is why we should've traded him. Because both options suck. We're all focused on the reality that he IS still on the team and we want him to rebound because it helps the team, but let's not kid ourselves. The first two sentences remain true and we should've traded him.
The issue is what should we have traded him for then? We have forward depth and we aren't going to get a defenseman much better than Cole. I wouldn't have been against trading him at the deadline last season, but we would probably have got a terrible return. I wanted us to move him at the draft to be able to pick Grigorenko or Hertl, but other than futures we wouldn't have got anything that would really have helped us in the summer either.

Considering the position of the team, it is probably the best decision to roll the dice and see if he can regain his form this season... then trade him for something of value to us.

I completely agree that if he does regain his form, he becomes too expensive for us to keep.

Alklha is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 01:42 PM
  #288
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
I was a strong advocate for trading Stewart at the draft for a 1st round pick if that could've been done. We won't probably ever know what the trade market was like for the guy if Armstrong even entertained trades, so it's all guesswork. But I did and do think we could've gotten more for him last season than if he doesn't produce out of the gate this year.

Now watch him pump in like 5 goals in the first 3 games.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 02:17 PM
  #289
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,056
vCash: 714
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
I was a strong advocate for trading Stewart at the draft for a 1st round pick if that could've been done. We won't probably ever know what the trade market was like for the guy if Armstrong even entertained trades, so it's all guesswork. But I did and do think we could've gotten more for him last season than if he doesn't produce out of the gate this year.

Now watch him pump in like 5 goals in the first 3 games.
I'm not a big Stewart fan, but I think you're down on him more than he deserves. He'll be better than he was last year when he started on a team 2pt shy of the Presidents Cup. The team could have and would have moved him by now if they didn't think he could fill a productive role on this (Hitchcock) team.

Its so nice that we can start analyzing game performance in 2 days instead of just splitting hairs with each other over stuff like this. I want a decisive win over the Redwings! (I think we'll get a spotty game with some out of shape guys and a couple miscommunication gaffes, but hopefully that happens to both teams and we still win.)

2 Minute Minor is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 03:13 PM
  #290
BlueDream
Registered User
 
BlueDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 6,642
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
If Stewart has a bounceback year, he will become very expensive for a guy whose all-encompassing contributions will be lower than Backes, Oshie, Perron, etc. If he doesn't bounce back, he'll hold very low value. We knew this last year, which is why we should've traded him. Because both options suck. We're all focused on the reality that he IS still on the team and we want him to rebound because it helps the team, but let's not kid ourselves. The first two sentences remain true and we should've traded him.
That's your opinion, not everybody's. If Stewart bounces back he could fill a very key role on this team. And trading him last year would have made zero sense since his value was so low (and we did not need another 1st-rounder really), and if you mean after the 2011 season then that makes even less sense.

BlueDream is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 03:20 PM
  #291
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueDream View Post
That's your opinion, not everybody's. If Stewart bounces back he could fill a very key role on this team. And trading him last year would have made zero sense since his value was so low (and we did not need another 1st-rounder really), and if you mean after the 2011 season then that makes even less sense.
Did I say it was everybody's opinion?

We could have used a first rounder to draft a skilled natural center, which we did and do need, really.

"If he bounces back he could fill a key role on this team" is relatively vague and meaningless. If he bounces back he'll be a one-dimensional scorer and will cost more than other forwards who bring more elements to the table. (If you're really going to engage from the reflexive Stewart defender standpoint then you have to address this central premise to my post.)

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 03:34 PM
  #292
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
Did I say it was everybody's opinion?

We could have used a first rounder to draft a skilled natural center, which we did and do need, really.

"If he bounces back he could fill a key role on this team" is relatively vague and meaningless. If he bounces back he'll be a one-dimensional scorer and will cost more than other forwards who bring more elements to the table. (If you're really going to engage from the reflexive Stewart defender standpoint then you have to address this central premise to my post.)
I'll take a one dimensional tough power forward. You need someone who can keep Schwartz alive on the ice that won't hurt you and provide offense. He's a season off of a 28 goal performance. I'll take that any day of the week. He provides more than you are giving him credit for.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 03:37 PM
  #293
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
I'll take a one dimensional tough power forward. You need someone who can keep Schwartz alive on the ice that won't hurt you and provide offense. He's a season off of a 28 goal performance. I'll take that any day of the week. He provides more than you are giving him credit for.
Except he's not a power forward. He fights but is a well-below-average forechecker on this Blues team.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 04:37 PM
  #294
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 7,056
vCash: 714
I'm more sympathetic to your assessment PN, but I check myself from getting to derisive of Stewart based on the talent assessment and quotes from both Hitchcock and Armstrong....as well as the fact that they moved EJ for him (and Shattenkirk).

Or maybe I should take that as proof they were even lower on EJ than it appeared.

Anyway, I agree that he needs to develop his game more, but his raw talent and already proven goal-scoring skill is something you can't teach a player. The Blues front office seems to think Stewart has a good chance to reach a higher ceiling, so I tend to give him the benefit of the doubt. There's no question this year is his make or break year....not just for his contract, but I'd say for his whole career. If he peters out this season, I think he'll fade into obscurity and have a short career.

2 Minute Minor is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 04:59 PM
  #295
BadgersandBlues
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 602
vCash: 500
I come back to these boards after 4 months of being in hibernation, and I see we are already back to discussing Chris Stewart lol.

My thoughts: I think many of us are glossing over his improved fitness. It has been discussed, and mainly agreed on, that Stewart is at his most dangerous either parked on the back post, or off the rush. With 20 less pounds, that -should- translate into a much quicker, more agile player. One could then hypothesize that this will make him more dangerous in his element (the rush), which -should- translate to increased production.

I agree with PN's that Stewart is not a traditional power forward who crashes to the front of the net and hounds Dmen in the corners. However, he does an -excellent- job of finding space and separation in quiet areas of the ice, especially in front of the net. I think Schwartz and Stewart will mesh very well together in that Stewart will back up Schwartz if anyone takes liberties, and Schwartz will feed Chris the puck when he finds those open areas.

I personally think Stewart is going to have a great season for us, and if that means we have to pay market value for a one dimensional scorer, then so be it. I think it's OK for each team to have -one- guy they pay to mainly score goals. Not every contract has to be team friendly, but it DOES have to address value for production, which is something Armstrong has shown time and again to get done right. I don't think we should give Stewart a pass on being lax defensively, nor do I think Hitch will ever let that happen, but we have structured our team's payroll to handle paying for that one guy who lights the lamp again and again. In-fact, he could easily play the role Brett Hull played on Hitch's Dallas Stars Cup winner, the trigger man who wasn't lax defensively, but was surrounded by a team of very defense conscious 2 way players.

BadgersandBlues is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 05:25 PM
  #296
SirPaste
Registered User
 
SirPaste's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: STL
Posts: 6,603
vCash: 50
Well McKenzie just tweeted that we are one of the teams "kicking the tires" on Wade Redden, I guess it wouldnt be too bad as long as he comes real cheap

SirPaste is online now  
Old
01-17-2013, 05:58 PM
  #297
Superscout
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SirPaste View Post
Well McKenzie just tweeted that we are one of the teams "kicking the tires" on Wade Redden, I guess it wouldnt be too bad as long as he comes real cheap
If Redden is prepared to eat some humble pie, sign him to a one year at the league minimum to get himself "back" into the NHL. He'll still get a fat paycheque with the buyout from NYR.

Superscout is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 07:27 PM
  #298
Chojin
Tiny Panger...
 
Chojin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,176
vCash: 645
Andy Mac isn't in the scrimmage. Trade incoming? Maybe the reason we didn't send down Porter is that Schwartz is staying with the Blues and Andy Mac is going to be traded?

Chojin is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 07:35 PM
  #299
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
To reiterate, just because I hold this opinion about how the Stewart situation will play out this year doesn't mean I want to be right. I'd truly prefer to be wrong and the guy rebounds, performs consistently throughout his career, and it's with the Blues for a good price.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
01-17-2013, 07:36 PM
  #300
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chojin View Post
Andy Mac isn't in the scrimmage. Trade incoming? Maybe the reason we didn't send down Porter is that Schwartz is staying with the Blues and Andy Mac is going to be traded?
Much more likely that he tweaked a groin or some minor injury.

PocketNines is offline  
Closed Thread

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 10:28 AM.

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.