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

The sad reality

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-05-2013, 02:54 PM
  #76
Bluesman91
Registered User
 
Bluesman91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 9,060
vCash: 500
As soon as Grabo hit the market, I thought he was the best option for this team to sign. Would love to see a 3 year $3mil AAV for him.

Bluesman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 02:56 PM
  #77
Novacain
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluesman91 View Post
As soon as Grabo hit the market, I thought he was the best option for this team to sign. Would love to see a 3 year $3mil AAV for him.

I'd be up to go for 4 for 4 if it means he gets here. anything above those 2 numbers... more iffy. 5 years I don't like unless it's at 3.5 or less.

Novacain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 02:57 PM
  #78
underslept
"well-informed"
 
underslept's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Poland
Posts: 2,669
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Blues fan since birth. I guess I am not allowed to criticize their lack of improvement though without some posters wanting me off the bandwagon.
Your criticisms are not very good.

The Blues are in very good shape already, you don't seem to acknowledge it.

Read these forums instead of just reacting because the Blues aren't throwing money or players around.

underslept is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:00 PM
  #79
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
and now all of the centers that would have been upgrades are gone. There is still plenty of time in free agency; the problem is the talent is starting to disappear. Oh well, maybe the Blues can sign a Langenbrunner and Arnott again to babysit our roster.

The only thing today is missing is a offer sheet of 7.5 M for Pietrangelo so the Blues would have to decide to either let him walk or be stuck paying him 2.5M more than he has earned.
I'd be happy with a third line center who puts up ~35 points, including 17 goals, while bringing Cup winning vetern leadership to the lockerroom on a one-year deal worth $2.875 after bonuses.

And it is laughable that you think that Pietrangelo hasn't earned himself a contract comparable to OEL's.

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:03 PM
  #80
frostyflo
#peskyblues
 
frostyflo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Austria
Country: Austria
Posts: 3,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Blues fan since birth. I guess I am not allowed to criticize their lack of improvement though without some posters wanting me off the bandwagon.
missing out on facts is not the best start for critics. you can't ignore our financial situation.

and is it in your your eyes really an improvement to mess up the finances for years with a guy who doesn't really fit with your team?

frostyflo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:05 PM
  #81
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemandan View Post
I'd be happy with a third line center who puts up ~35 points, including 17 goals, while bringing Cup winning vetern leadership to the lockerroom on a one-year deal worth $2.875 after bonuses.

And it is laughable that you think that Pietrangelo hasn't earned himself a contract comparable to OEL's.
Actually, my point is that Pietrangelo doesn't deserve a contract any better than OEL. That should be the one the Blues use as a point of comparison. That said, I'm not sold on Pietrangelo being the better player of the two. Pietrangelo for 5 M to 5.5M is right. Paying him anything over 7 overpayment in a big way.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:10 PM
  #82
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by frostyflo View Post
missing out on facts is not the best start for critics. you can't ignore our financial situation.

and is it in your your eyes really an improvement to mess up the finances for years with a guy who doesn't really fit with your team?

Not missing any facts and not interested in critics or what others think of me for stating things as I see them. The Blues have done nothing this offseason to become a better team from last season. That is a fact that should be indisputable. What you and others are listing are reasons (and some are legitimate) as to why that is. Still, I don't know how we are supposed to feel better about next year's team at this point.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:11 PM
  #83
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Blues fan since birth. I guess I am not allowed to criticize their lack of improvement though without some posters wanting me off the bandwagon.
You showed up on the forum in February. You don't seem to have any appreciation of where the Blues were as little as five years ago. You are incredibly impatient, as evidenced by your complaining about a lack of movement in free-agency as little as two hours after it opened. We simply want you to stop having knee-jerk reactions. If you can't see that the Blues are on better financial footing with vastly improved prospect pool AND a similar roster to right before the Laurie's traded Pronger and sold the team, then you need to pay better attention.

Feel free to criticize their lack of improvement if you want, but those of us that are paying attention know this is a vastly improved franchise from two years ago, from four years ago, from six years ago, from eight years ago, and even from ten years ago.

Please, just stop being so short-sighted. Are the Blues an improved team from this time yesterday? Actually yes, we traded dead-weight on the roster for a draft pick after being willing to lose Russell for free, and we signed a bench player so our prospects can spend time developing in the minors instead of riding the pine in the NHL. Are those dramatic improvements? No. But the roster is in better shape than it was yesterday.

Quote:
Originally Posted by underslept View Post
Your criticisms are not very good.

The Blues are in very good shape already, you don't seem to acknowledge it.

Read these forums instead of just reacting because the Blues aren't throwing money or players around.
That is some great advice.

I'm still waiting to hear which contract signed so far he thinks would have been a good fit for the Blues.

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:18 PM
  #84
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemandan View Post
You showed up on the forum in February. You don't seem to have any appreciation of where the Blues were as little as five years ago. You are incredibly impatient, as evidenced by your complaining about a lack of movement in free-agency as little as two hours after it opened. We simply want you to stop having knee-jerk reactions. If you can't see that the Blues are on better financial footing with vastly improved prospect pool AND a similar roster to right before the Laurie's traded Pronger and sold the team, then you need to pay better attention.

Feel free to criticize their lack of improvement if you want, but those of us that are paying attention know this is a vastly improved franchise from two years ago, from four years ago, from six years ago, from eight years ago, and even from ten years ago.

Please, just stop being so short-sighted. Are the Blues an improved team from this time yesterday? Actually yes, we traded dead-weight on the roster for a draft pick after being willing to lose Russell for free, and we signed a bench player so our prospects can spend time developing in the minors instead of riding the pine in the NHL. Are those dramatic improvements? No. But the roster is in better shape than it was yesterday.



That is some great advice.

I'm still waiting to hear which contract signed so far he thinks would have been a good fit for the Blues.

The Pronger trade was the rock bottom moment of the franchise. Look at the years before that when the Blues had 2 great defensemen, a solid cast of forwards, but couldn't get over the hump from contender to winner due in large part to the same kinds of problems that the franchise still hasn't figured out (ie. goaltending). Are the Blues a younger team than the teams that made it to the playoffs for two decades with nothing to show for it, of course. However, the league as a whole has trended younger. What I see when I look at this team is a team set up to compete for years to come, but not to win.


Last edited by EastonBlues22: 07-06-2013 at 04:19 AM. Reason: We are not starting that "debate"
GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:20 PM
  #85
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Actually, my point is that Pietrangelo doesn't deserve a contract any better than OEL. That should be the one the Blues use as a point of comparison. That said, I'm not sold on Pietrangelo being the better player of the two. Pietrangelo for 5 M to 5.5M is right. Paying him anything over 7 overpayment in a big way.
Pietrangelo - 75 points over the past two seasons, 404 points in Norris trophy voting over the past two season, elite defensively.

OEL - 56 points over the past two seasons, 79 points in Norris trophy voting over the past two seasons, elite defensively, more physical than Pietrangelo

How exactly does Pietrangelo not deserve everything that OEL got and then some?

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:31 PM
  #86
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemandan View Post
Pietrangelo - 75 points over the past two seasons, 404 points in Norris trophy voting over the past two season, elite defensively.

OEL - 56 points over the past two seasons, 79 points in Norris trophy voting over the past two seasons, elite defensively, more physical than Pietrangelo

How exactly does Pietrangelo not deserve everything that OEL got and then some?
Because last season was a major step forward for OEL and a step backward for Pietrangelo. Given their ages, OEL had his breakout season around the same time developmentally as Pietrangelo did. He was able to negotiate his contract while trending up whereas last season wasn't Pietrangelo's best body of work, and that should absolutely matter. 5 to 5.5 million is a lot more reasonable than anything over 7. Not paying attention to the Norris votes as they have less to do with overall play than how much voters are paying attention.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:33 PM
  #87
Bluesman91
Registered User
 
Bluesman91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 9,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Because last season was a major step forward for OEL and a step backward for Pietrangelo. Given their ages, OEL had his breakout season around the same time developmentally as Pietrangelo did. He was able to negotiate his contract while trending up whereas last season wasn't Pietrangelo's best body of work, and that should absolutely matter. 5 to 5.5 million is a lot more reasonable than anything over 7. Not paying attention to the Norris votes as they have less to do with overall play than how much voters are paying attention.

Step backwards? You mean when Petro was playing terrible, the Blues were playing terrible and when he started coming back to form the Blues started playing better as well? Get real.

Bluesman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:34 PM
  #88
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
The Pronger trade was the rock bottom moment of the franchise. Look at the years before that when the Blues had 2 great defensemen, a solid cast of forwards, but couldn't get over the hump from contender to winner due in large part to the same kinds of problems that the franchise still hasn't figured out (ie. goaltending). Are the Blues a younger team than the teams that made it to the playoffs for two decades with nothing to show for it, of course. However, the league as a whole has trended younger. What I see when I look at this team is a team set up to compete for years to come, but not to win.


You don't seem to get that the FRANCHISE has some short-comings as well, such as existing in a smaller market. The Blues can't afford some of the money that was already thrown around today, a fact that you don't acknowledge.

Again, you talk about the team being in the same place as before the Pronger trade (two great defensemen, solid cast of forwards, no go-to goaltender, etc.) Yet, you have failed to acknowlegde that the franchise actually has talent in its prospect pool that will likely make an impact at the NHL level. There was no Rattie or Jaskin on the horizon. There was no Tarasenko or Schwartz coming off their rookie year. You have failed to acknowlegde that the franchise is on stable financial footing instead of being proped-up by an heir to the Walmart forture looking to buy a championship.

Quote:
What I see when I look at this team is a team set up to compete for years to come, but not to win.
So your upset that we look like a contender for years to come because we don't have the ideal roster to WIN? I hate to tell you, but there is some amount of luck involved with winning the Stanley Cup.

I have no problem with the fact that you bring up what you perceive as short-comings on the roster. I'm not 'throwing rocks' at you for bringing up what you see as issues, its how you do it. The issue is that you fail to ever acknowledge the things that go well, the things that the franchise does right. And again, your reactions are very swift, and usually a bit overboard for the situation. Like today. Two hours into free-agency you were decrying the same old Blues that do nothing in free-agency. Perhaps you remember the last two splashes the Blues made in free-agency? Paul Kariya and Jay McKee? How did they work out for us?


Last edited by EastonBlues22: 07-06-2013 at 04:20 AM. Reason: qep
bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:36 PM
  #89
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluesman91 View Post
Step backwards? You mean when Petro was playing terrible, the Blues were playing terrible and when he started coming back to form the Blues started playing better as well? Get real.
Pietrangelo was off his game for the better part of the shortened season. Look through posts and threads from the season as proof that people were noticing this. You have no right to throw around the "get real" crap just because we don't agree. Just more of the kind of bullying that some try when someone dares to challenge the thinking of the majority.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:38 PM
  #90
bleedblue1223
Fire Army
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 29,673
vCash: 130
Guys, just avoid this thread.

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:39 PM
  #91
Bluesman91
Registered User
 
Bluesman91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 9,060
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Pietrangelo was off his game for the better part of the shortened season. Look through posts and threads from the season as proof that people were noticing this. You have no right to throw around the "get real" crap just because we don't agree. Just more of the kind of bullying that some try when someone dares to challenge the thinking of the majority.
My post states that he was off his game, just because a player comes off his game for a short stretch doesn't mean it is a step backwards. It seemed like a much longer stretch because of the shortened season but in reality it was maybe 10 games.

Bluesman91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:42 PM
  #92
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Because last season was a major step forward for OEL and a step backward for Pietrangelo. Given their ages, OEL had his breakout season around the same time developmentally as Pietrangelo did. He was able to negotiate his contract while trending up whereas last season wasn't Pietrangelo's best body of work, and that should absolutely matter. 5 to 5.5 million is a lot more reasonable than anything over 7. Not paying attention to the Norris votes as they have less to do with overall play than how much voters are paying attention.
So what you are saying is that only the final year before contract negotiation should matter?


They both scored 24 points last season, Pietrangelo in one fewer games, with two more goals than OEL without the benefit of playing during the lock-out to be at game-speed when the season started.

And I completely ignored the extra season of proven NHL play that Pietrangelo has over OEL.

And that matters. The whole body of work matters. OEL and Pietrangelo had similar years last season, yet Pietrangelo doesn't deserve as much as OEL because it was OEL's best season ever in a contract year and it wasn't Pietrangelo's best season ever?

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:44 PM
  #93
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Pietrangelo was off his game for the better part of the shortened season. Look through posts and threads from the season as proof that people were noticing this. You have no right to throw around the "get real" crap just because we don't agree. Just more of the kind of bullying that some try when someone dares to challenge the thinking of the majority.
I disagree with the "better part" comment. No doubt that Pietrangelo struggled early in the season. Do you think his lack of playing overseas during the lock-out, combined with a lack of training camp, played any part in that?

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:44 PM
  #94
nicholas89alex
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 914
vCash: 500
in what world is a franchise defenseman worth only 5 million? 2nd pairing defenseman get paid 4 million. considering petro could be argued as almost as good as Ryan Sutter a contract almost as rich as sutters 7.5 million a year isn't a bad deal. the fact that you so undervalue petro shows your lack of knowledge. and im gonna add to everyone else and ask you to answer what player do you think the blues should have signed to an identical contract?

nicholas89alex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 03:45 PM
  #95
Daley Tarasenkshow
The Notorious
 
Daley Tarasenkshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St. Louis MO
Country: United States
Posts: 5,274
vCash: 500
How many times did you watch OEL?? Please, answer that question and do not lie. OEL was sometimes horrid on defense, unlike Petro was usuall solid except for a few negative bounces.

OEL doesn't deserve anything more than Petro, and Petro has a right to be paid more.

Daley Tarasenkshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 05:02 PM
  #96
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by your jaskin too much View Post
How many times did you watch OEL?? Please, answer that question and do not lie. OEL was sometimes horrid on defense, unlike Petro was usuall solid except for a few negative bounces.

OEL doesn't deserve anything more than Petro, and Petro has a right to be paid more.

Considering I had him on my fantasy team, I watched OEL somewhere between 15-20 games...closer to the 15 admittedly. My point is this. If you have your choice of having OEL at 5.5M or Pietrangelo at 7M, I take OEL any day of the week. I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that Petro will be the better of the two in the end.

I would have paid Weiss. 30 years old, not a lot of help around him in Florida, and still was reasonably healthy in his last 4, 82 game seasons while putting up solid numbers. I realize to a degree that this makes me a hypocrite to some degree because matching that contract would be overpaying him 500k a year while I am talking about not wanting to overpay Petro.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 05:04 PM
  #97
Daley Tarasenkshow
The Notorious
 
Daley Tarasenkshow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: St. Louis MO
Country: United States
Posts: 5,274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Considering I had him on my fantasy team, I watched OEL somewhere between 15-20 games...closer to the 15 admittedly. My point is this. If you have your choice of having OEL at 5.5M or Pietrangelo at 7M, I take OEL any day of the week. I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that Petro will be the better of the two in the end.

I would have paid Weiss. 30 years old, not a lot of help around him in Florida, and still was reasonably healthy in his last 4, 82 game seasons while putting up solid numbers. I realize to a degree that this makes me a hypocrite to some degree because matching that contract would be overpaying him 500k a year while I am talking about not wanting to overpay Petro.
How is that point relevant? Petro will sign for whatever he's worth.

Daley Tarasenkshow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 05:05 PM
  #98
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,377
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by GrandPapillon View Post
Considering I had him on my fantasy team, I watched OEL somewhere between 15-20 games...closer to the 15 admittedly. My point is this. If you have your choice of having OEL at 5.5M or Pietrangelo at 7M, I take OEL any day of the week. I don't think it is a forgone conclusion that Petro will be the better of the two in the end.

I would have paid Weiss. 30 years old, not a lot of help around him in Florida, and still was reasonably healthy in his last 4, 82 game seasons while putting up solid numbers. I realize to a degree that this makes me a hypocrite to some degree because matching that contract would be overpaying him 500k a year while I am talking about not wanting to overpay Petro.
The OEL I saw last season was not comparable to Pietro on the defensive side of the puck. I think you undervalue Pietrangelo.

2 Minute Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 05:09 PM
  #99
GrandPapillon*
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Southern IL
Country: United States
Posts: 920
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluemandan View Post
I disagree with the "better part" comment. No doubt that Pietrangelo struggled early in the season. Do you think his lack of playing overseas during the lock-out, combined with a lack of training camp, played any part in that?
I think the long layoff, the pace of the schedule, and the lack of time for the players to gel together (esecially Petro considering how many D partners he had) before being thrust into action are all very likely to have affected the games of several players.

Also, forgot to add that Grabovski or Roy in free agency would more than satisfy me.

GrandPapillon* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-05-2013, 06:59 PM
  #100
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,377
vCash: 50
The sad reality is that the Blues are spending like a Cap team now (if you assume Pietro/Stewart deals, which I do). Does that not excite anyone? The new ownership group sent a clear signal when they approved the trade for Bouwmeester, and moves since then continue to point to the team spending close to the Cap.

You can argue about HOW to spend the money, what deals to make, etc. But I for one am pretty pumped that the Blues are into their window as a competitor with a supportive ownership group, rising young players, a coach with a Cup win on his resume and a Jack Adams award recently, and a GM who has shown his chops and his intelligence over the past couple years.

No bad salaries on the club. NONE. You can argue Halak is overpaid, but he's also signed for one more year on a fairly reasonable salary if you look around the league at what his peers are getting. And if he turns around and plays at a .910 save percentage this year and starts 55 games, I think that's not an unreasonable contract at all.

2 Minute Minor 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 03:10 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.