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

Handzus to St. Louis (e3)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-27-2007, 01:28 PM
  #1
Celtic Note
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,608
vCash: 500
Handzus to St. Louis (e3)

Im just posting this for kicks. I dont want to hear of Ek's credability, just your comments on Zeus. I know we kinda covered this already, but now that someone besides the fans also considers this a possible move by the Blues Id like to hear what you all think. Discuss

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 01:33 PM
  #2
BlueBleeder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Looking for others
Country: United States
Posts: 1,677
vCash: 500
I'd love to have Zus back, but not really what we need. He is an excellent 3rd line center and doesn't look out of place on the 2nd line, but we have McClement already to play that roll. I'd like to see him sign with Minnesota myself, he would be the perfect compliment to Demitra and Gaborik.

BlueBleeder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 01:37 PM
  #3
Celtic Note
Chi Town Bound
 
Celtic Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,608
vCash: 500
I dont think we need him having Weight on the 2nd line and McClemment on the 3rd. Still like how he plays though.

Celtic Note is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 05:23 PM
  #4
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
It would have been nice if Zus had never left, but, time moves on, and
as Bluebleeder said, McClement fills the role of Zus now, and he's younger and cheaper.

barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 05:31 PM
  #5
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Wooo

Hoooo

Another offensively limited, strong character player who provides defense-first from the forward position when he can stay healthy...we sure have a shortage of this


JD, as good of a job as you have done so far, I want you to think IMPACT players now through free agency. Get just one and we're set with a young kid or a forward we get through trade filling in the last hole. That's a much better policy than signing a bunch of mediocre players to contracts that we can't wait to expire (Rucinsky, Cajanek, Drake)



BTW: If you insist upon signing Handzus...maybe you could do us a big favor and not give him a no trade clause mmmmmmmmkay.

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 07:04 PM
  #6
Gman7191
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 164
vCash: 500
also remember that KT will most likely be back and playing center and weight will move to the wing.

Gman7191 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-27-2007, 10:22 PM
  #7
On Axis
Mad Vlad
 
On Axis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,122
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to On Axis
I like Handzus a lot, but I don't see where there's room for him. Our goal this offseason is pretty simple: get a first line winger, whether through trade or free agency. Handzus doesn't fill that bill. He's a great second or third line player, but McClement is younger and cheaper.

On Axis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 01:49 AM
  #8
Robb_K
Registered User
 
Robb_K's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NordHolandNethrlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,584
vCash: 500
As stated above, I think The Blues need to add two impact scorers at forward, leaving no salary room for him, and likely, no line to centre.

Robb_K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 07:14 AM
  #9
Bluester
Registered User
 
Bluester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
We don't need him and hope we don't go after him.

Bluester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 07:43 AM
  #10
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,148
vCash: 500
I have no issues with signing Handzus. As much as I would like to get a #1 center, the only one available is via a trade (Marleau). None of the free agents in my opinion are true #1 centers. With that in mind, Handzus is 60 point guy (20 goals 40 assist), an excellent two way player (fits with Murray's system), and less expensive than the overhyped free agents. If the Blues were to sign Tkachuk as well, then could you imagine a line of Handzus, Boyes, and Tkachuk (preferably Hartnell$$); followed by McClement, Backes, and Stempy; Weight, Cajanek, and Rucinsky; and then Mayers, Drake, Hinote, Johnson, and King? I don't have a big issue with that.

1.) I don't see the upper tier of free agents wanting to come here, unless we drastically overpay. If Zeus and Keith can be signed to reasonable deals, then I think this may be the way to go.
2.) The wild card is which defenseman gets traded (and for what) and whether or not we can dump a salary with them (Hinote, Drake)
3.) We need to free up some roster space for some of our youngsters to play. In other words letting some of our contract deals with existing players run out. If we fill out our roster with more third and fourth line players we have to pay, then the youngsters are going to have to sit in the AHL. I wouldn't come over from Sweden either, if there was no chance of me being on the roster at all.
4.) McClement has to prove himself this year. He's going to have to sink or swim in the #2 role. With Soderburg, Berglund, and our #9 pick (one will probably move to the wing or flop) coming in the next 1 to 3 years, Zeus could slide into either role #2a or #2 or #3 and not hurt you. If McClement is actually a young Ryan Johnson, then we have a backup plan. If Zeus is only good enough to be your #3 center, then you have a good problem. I'll take a 50-60 point #3 center anytime. The other free agent centers listed do not seem to have that flexibility.

Just worth thinking about.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 09:37 AM
  #11
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
I have no issues with signing Handzus. As much as I would like to get a #1 center, the only one available is via a trade (Marleau). None of the free agents in my opinion are true #1 centers. With that in mind, Handzus is 60 point guy (20 goals 40 assist), an excellent two way player (fits with Murray's system), and less expensive than the overhyped free agents. If the Blues were to sign Tkachuk as well, then could you imagine a line of Handzus, Boyes, and Tkachuk (preferably Hartnell$$); followed by McClement, Backes, and Stempy; Weight, Cajanek, and Rucinsky; and then Mayers, Drake, Hinote, Johnson, and King? I don't have a big issue with that.

1.) I don't see the upper tier of free agents wanting to come here, unless we drastically overpay. If Zeus and Keith can be signed to reasonable deals, then I think this may be the way to go.
2.) The wild card is which defenseman gets traded (and for what) and whether or not we can dump a salary with them (Hinote, Drake)
3.) We need to free up some roster space for some of our youngsters to play. In other words letting some of our contract deals with existing players run out. If we fill out our roster with more third and fourth line players we have to pay, then the youngsters are going to have to sit in the AHL. I wouldn't come over from Sweden either, if there was no chance of me being on the roster at all.
4.) McClement has to prove himself this year. He's going to have to sink or swim in the #2 role. With Soderburg, Berglund, and our #9 pick (one will probably move to the wing or flop) coming in the next 1 to 3 years, Zeus could slide into either role #2a or #2 or #3 and not hurt you. If McClement is actually a young Ryan Johnson, then we have a backup plan. If Zeus is only good enough to be your #3 center, then you have a good problem. I'll take a 50-60 point #3 center anytime. The other free agent centers listed do not seem to have that flexibility.

Just worth thinking about.
Disaree on McClement - he will be a good #3 center. Not a #2 but better than Ryan Johnson (#4)

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 10:52 AM
  #12
Helli
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Germany
Posts: 55
vCash: 500
I would love to have Zus back in the note. He`s a great guy but i think we need other types of players

Helli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 01:02 PM
  #13
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
I have no issues with signing Handzus. As much as I would like to get a #1 center, the only one available is via a trade (Marleau). None of the free agents in my opinion are true #1 centers. With that in mind, Handzus is 60 point guy (20 goals 40 assist), an excellent two way player (fits with Murray's system), and less expensive than the overhyped free agents. If the Blues were to sign Tkachuk as well, then could you imagine a line of Handzus, Boyes, and Tkachuk (preferably Hartnell$$); followed by McClement, Backes, and Stempy; Weight, Cajanek, and Rucinsky; and then Mayers, Drake, Hinote, Johnson, and King? I don't have a big issue with that.

1.) I don't see the upper tier of free agents wanting to come here, unless we drastically overpay. If Zeus and Keith can be signed to reasonable deals, then I think this may be the way to go.
2.) The wild card is which defenseman gets traded (and for what) and whether or not we can dump a salary with them (Hinote, Drake)
3.) We need to free up some roster space for some of our youngsters to play. In other words letting some of our contract deals with existing players run out. If we fill out our roster with more third and fourth line players we have to pay, then the youngsters are going to have to sit in the AHL. I wouldn't come over from Sweden either, if there was no chance of me being on the roster at all.
4.) McClement has to prove himself this year. He's going to have to sink or swim in the #2 role. With Soderburg, Berglund, and our #9 pick (one will probably move to the wing or flop) coming in the next 1 to 3 years, Zeus could slide into either role #2a or #2 or #3 and not hurt you. If McClement is actually a young Ryan Johnson, then we have a backup plan. If Zeus is only good enough to be your #3 center, then you have a good problem. I'll take a 50-60 point #3 center anytime. The other free agent centers listed do not seem to have that flexibility.

Just worth thinking about.

When exactly has Handzus EVER been a 60 point scorer? He's never once had a 60 point season and the only time he's ever scored over 55 was 7 years ago. I'd much rather overpay for Hartnell as you suggested because at least Hartnell is young and still improving.


BTW: I know it's pure fantasy but in my mock draft, I took Backman, the 9th, our second third rounder from Atlanta, and the 26th pick and picked up Lombardi and Derek Roy and the 31st pick (moved down 5 spots from 26). This is the kind of stuff I hope the Blues look into doing.

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 02:00 PM
  #14
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,148
vCash: 500
You are correct in saying he has never been a 60 point guy. Four years ago, he had 58 points. He is 30 years old. Has scored 20 or more 3 times and has had 30 or more assist twice. My point was that you could expect 60 points from him in that role. He has always been pigeon holed as a checking center. He played well for Chicago last year (briefly) in a more offensive role. (Point a game pace very small sample 8 games) I think he would be a lower cost alternative to the 6-7 million dollar pseudo #1 centers that are out there. I agree with you on Hartnell. I would rather have a goal scorer, but a 50 point guy would be our 3rd leading scorer. 60 points would top our current roster. Handzus and Havlat were everywhere when I watched them play the Blues earlier this year. I don't believe that Zeus would break us, and he may come back to St. Louis. I'm not so sure that some of the other free agents will come here, unless we break the bank for them.

Also, I like your moves in the mock draft. That would solve some big issues that we have right now. There is such a crap shoot after selection #8, it wouldn't matter much moving down 5 spots. Picking up two top six forwards....Excellent.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 02:18 PM
  #15
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
BTW: I know it's pure fantasy but in my mock draft, I took Backman, the 9th, our second third rounder from Atlanta, and the 26th pick and picked up Lombardi and Derek Roy and the 31st pick (moved down 5 spots from 26). This is the kind of stuff I hope the Blues look into doing.
OK, I saw your trades over on the mock boards. I am curious as to what you were thinking when you did:

Calgary Gets: Christian Backman, 9th Overall
St. Louis Gets: Matt Lombardi, 18th Overall

I personally do not see what you see in Lombardi. He is a #2/#3 centerman at best. We already have Weight/Jay Mac/Johnson. Why on earth would we need another centerman who can not make his line mates better? Maybe it is me, but giving up Backman and the 9th overall to move back to the 18th and get Lombardi. This is horrible deal, for the Blues. They can get much better for the 9th + Backman.

Then you do this:
Ottawa Gets: 18th Overall
St. Louis Gets: Josh Hennesey, 08 2nd round pick

Ok this one is a head scratcher for me again, but from what I have read on Hennesey. Maybe he is worth it, but just not sure. But I understand that you did this one to get to the next trade.

The next trade:
St. Louis Gets: Derek Roy and 31st overall
Buffalo Gets: Josh Hennessey, 26th Overall, 82nd Overall and Conditional Draft Pick in 08

I like the acquisition of Roy, but you took the long way around to get Roy. You should started dealing with Buffalo directly.

Overall you traded:
Backman, 9th overall, 26th overall, 82nd overall (3rd rounder), and a conditional pick in 08

And you got us:
Roy, 31st overall, 08 2nd rounder (from Ottawa), Lombardi

Overall I think you gave up too much to get he player you wanted, Roy. I am assuming that is the player that you wanted, correct? But I would just started with Buffalo and try to strike a deal with them. But just 2 cents worth, take it for what it is worth.

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 03:18 PM
  #16
Checker*
 
Checker*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 3,077
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trublu16 View Post
OK, I saw your trades over on the mock boards. I am curious as to what you were thinking when you did:

Calgary Gets: Christian Backman, 9th Overall
St. Louis Gets: Matt Lombardi, 18th Overall

I personally do not see what you see in Lombardi. He is a #2/#3 centerman at best. We already have Weight/Jay Mac/Johnson. Why on earth would we need another centerman who can not make his line mates better? Maybe it is me, but giving up Backman and the 9th overall to move back to the 18th and get Lombardi. This is horrible deal, for the Blues. They can get much better for the 9th + Backman.

Then you do this:
Ottawa Gets: 18th Overall
St. Louis Gets: Josh Hennesey, 08 2nd round pick

Ok this one is a head scratcher for me again, but from what I have read on Hennesey. Maybe he is worth it, but just not sure. But I understand that you did this one to get to the next trade.

The next trade:
St. Louis Gets: Derek Roy and 31st overall
Buffalo Gets: Josh Hennessey, 26th Overall, 82nd Overall and Conditional Draft Pick in 08

I like the acquisition of Roy, but you took the long way around to get Roy. You should started dealing with Buffalo directly.

Overall you traded:
Backman, 9th overall, 26th overall, 82nd overall (3rd rounder), and a conditional pick in 08

And you got us:
Roy, 31st overall, 08 2nd rounder (from Ottawa), Lombardi

Overall I think you gave up too much to get he player you wanted, Roy. I am assuming that is the player that you wanted, correct? But I would just started with Buffalo and try to strike a deal with them. But just 2 cents worth, take it for what it is worth.
I'll answer as best as I can without giving away too much information as to how the other GMs and I had discussions. After all they're still making deals. Firstly, Lombardi is absolutly a player I coveted as was/is Roy. I got my two guys. Lombardi is less than a year older than Lee Stempniak and Stempniak out-pointed him by a not-so great margin (6pts). To say that Lombardi is nothing more than a 2nd/3rd center and to gush as this board does over Stempniak is a bit short-sighted. Not to mention, Lombardi had a fantastic performance under Murray at the World Championships. I think in this system, surrounded by the right players, (Boyes, Stempniak) he's a 60-70 pt. player. In other words probably not a 1st line center, but better than what we currently have. If you think I overpayed, you're probably right. But the thing is, if someone wanted Stempniak, would you let him go for less than an overpayment. Plus, I think the overpayment was minimal and involved trading assets we could afford to move.

You're absolutly right, the 2nd deal was made with the 3rd one in mind.

Roy another player I coveted and discussed getting through any means necessary (RFA cost would be a 1st and a 3rd and they could still match) for what I basically payed for him (18th overall, a third rounder, trading down 5 spots) is well worth it. He can either line up at C or left wing...two positions where we have some openings.



As far as moving 1st round picks go, none of the "top players" in this draft fell to 9th so that didn't hurt. The only player I really like at 9 is Esposito (who many will disagree with) and I didn't like him enough to stop me from filling two needs (young top 6 talent) from two surplusses (defesemen and draft picks). Moving on, I'm still open to trading some of our 3rd/4th line talent and I assure you that outside of Esposito, alot of the players I truly like alot in the draft should be there from 20-40 where I still have 3 picks.

Checker* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 03:37 PM
  #17
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,148
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
I'll answer as best as I can without giving away too much information as to how the other GMs and I had discussions. After all they're still making deals. Firstly, Lombardi is absolutly a player I coveted as was/is Roy. I got my two guys. Lombardi is less than a year older than Lee Stempniak and Stempniak out-pointed him by a not-so great margin (6pts). To say that Lombardi is nothing more than a 2nd/3rd center and to gush as this board does over Stempniak is a bit short-sighted. Not to mention, Lombardi had a fantastic performance under Murray at the World Championships. I think in this system, surrounded by the right players, (Boyes, Stempniak) he's a 60-70 pt. player. In other words probably not a 1st line center, but better than what we currently have. If you think I overpayed, you're probably right. But the thing is, if someone wanted Stempniak, would you let him go for less than an overpayment. Plus, I think the overpayment was minimal and involved trading assets we could afford to move.

You're absolutly right, the 2nd deal was made with the 3rd one in mind.

Roy another player I coveted and discussed getting through any means necessary (RFA cost would be a 1st and a 3rd and they could still match) for what I basically payed for him (18th overall, a third rounder, trading down 5 spots) is well worth it. He can either line up at C or left wing...two positions where we have some openings.



As far as moving 1st round picks go, none of the "top players" in this draft fell to 9th so that didn't hurt. The only player I really like at 9 is Esposito (who many will disagree with) and I didn't like him enough to stop me from filling two needs (young top 6 talent) from two surplusses (defesemen and draft picks). Moving on, I'm still open to trading some of our 3rd/4th line talent and I assure you that outside of Esposito, alot of the players I truly like alot in the draft should be there from 20-40 where I still have 3 picks.

I could see where you were going on the Lombardi deal. Maybe a bit more than I would like to have given, but I understand your reasoning.

I would have been happy with just Josh Hennesey for the 18th overall pick, but to pick up a 2nd as well? Nice. Highway robbery.

I know you said the 2nd deal was made with the 3rd in mind...In hindsight, was there a way to keep Hennesey and sub another prospect in the Roy deal or was it more or less a 3-way deal from the beginning?

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 09:52 PM
  #18
milieu bluez
Registered User
 
milieu bluez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: 1st shift (Finally)
Country: United States
Posts: 769
vCash: 500
Zus was the #1 center for Chicago. Granted he had Havlat on his wing. But still given a #2 role he may bring some O to the table. If the contract is right. Do it.

milieu bluez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-28-2007, 10:46 PM
  #19
DeuceNine
Wall of Shame
 
DeuceNine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Stymieville
Country: United States
Posts: 388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by milieu bluez View Post
Zus was the #1 center for Chicago. Granted he had Havlat on his wing. But still given a #2 role he may bring some O to the table. If the contract is right. Do it.
Only after we tell Drake to retire and trade/release Hinote.

DeuceNine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2007, 12:11 AM
  #20
Bluester
Registered User
 
Bluester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Kansas City, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 960
vCash: 500
I am still not sold on him coming back.

Bluester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2007, 01:28 AM
  #21
CCBC
Registered User
 
CCBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
I really like Handzus, but, again, he's not what we need.

CCBC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2007, 12:33 PM
  #22
trublu16
Registered User
 
trublu16's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 762
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Checker View Post
I'll answer as best as I can without giving away too much information as to how the other GMs and I had discussions. After all they're still making deals. Firstly, Lombardi is absolutly a player I coveted as was/is Roy. I got my two guys. Lombardi is less than a year older than Lee Stempniak and Stempniak out-pointed him by a not-so great margin (6pts). To say that Lombardi is nothing more than a 2nd/3rd center and to gush as this board does over Stempniak is a bit short-sighted. Not to mention, Lombardi had a fantastic performance under Murray at the World Championships. I think in this system, surrounded by the right players, (Boyes, Stempniak) he's a 60-70 pt. player. In other words probably not a 1st line center, but better than what we currently have. If you think I overpayed, you're probably right. But the thing is, if someone wanted Stempniak, would you let him go for less than an overpayment. Plus, I think the overpayment was minimal and involved trading assets we could afford to move.

You're absolutly right, the 2nd deal was made with the 3rd one in mind.

Roy another player I coveted and discussed getting through any means necessary (RFA cost would be a 1st and a 3rd and they could still match) for what I basically payed for him (18th overall, a third rounder, trading down 5 spots) is well worth it. He can either line up at C or left wing...two positions where we have some openings.



As far as moving 1st round picks go, none of the "top players" in this draft fell to 9th so that didn't hurt. The only player I really like at 9 is Esposito (who many will disagree with) and I didn't like him enough to stop me from filling two needs (young top 6 talent) from two surplusses (defesemen and draft picks). Moving on, I'm still open to trading some of our 3rd/4th line talent and I assure you that outside of Esposito, alot of the players I truly like alot in the draft should be there from 20-40 where I still have 3 picks.
Ok lets, agree to to diagree on Lombardi. I thik he would probably make a good winger, but not a centerman. The WC is a whole different situation, he would have to work with younger kids and help bring them along. And him being in the league on 3 years now, can he bring a leadership by example. I am not sure, couldn't tell you. But I am one that does not gush over Stempy, I think that he is a good player. I think it is more gushing over the Blues drafted a guy like him. A late round gem!! I guess the problem is that Lomardi , in my mind, is not enough to get me to make that move. But I do like the Roy deal, and I wouyld sign off on that one too.

As a side note, is there a reeason why you passed up the chance at Ellerby?

trublu16 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-29-2007, 01:46 PM
  #23
CCBC
Registered User
 
CCBC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Illinois
Country: United States
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
I'm all for trading some excess picks for real value.

CCBC 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 06:58 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.