Perunovich

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Good. He needs to go somewhere else and get a fresh start. He can't catch a break here, injury-wise. And we can give his minutes to someone who can put them to better use.

As I said a long time ago, he’s going to be a star….in Europe…

 

[STL fan in MN]

I believe that playoff games count as "NHL games" for the purpose of these calculations, so I'm somewhat sure that his current games played number is 57 instead of 50.

But still a pretty good chance of playing fewer than 23 more this year.

That’d be good. Still unlikely to reach 80 GP. I’d prefer to keep him a RFA and keep him. But I guess we’ll see what happens.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Ted what is your point to all these rants? In a sentence or two at most please. Cuz I'm thinking it's that Peru was rushed to the NHL, and I think in that case you're clearly wrong. But if it's something else please (again, in a sentence or two) reiterate it.

I ... kind of thought my point was evident across about 48 posts on Perunovich this season, but I'll give give you a hint in the form of a question:

Given what we'd seen out of Perunovich coming into this season, does anyone here think, coming into the 2023-24 season, Scott Perunovich had earned an NHL roster spot?

Not welhewoudabenonwavers - that's giving someone a roster spot for fear of somwonmituvclaimdim, did he in all the professional games played up to September 15, 2023 play sufficiently well for what you'd expect out of a defenseman that he had earned a spot on this NHL roster - and especially earned a spot over other guys who were in the system and had played consistently the last few years, maybe even especially guys who'd played more than a few NHL games?

Because if he did - and that means a more stringent argument than look at all those points he put up in Springfield - I'd like to hear how he earned it, especially given what we've seen out of him defensively this season that's exactly like what we saw out of him 2 years ago [and what I saw out of him at MN-Duluth, but I've noted he was able to get away with because NCAA talent <<<< NHL talent] and especially since 3 1/2 months ago a much-respected poster here had a pretty brutal [but accurate] write-up of his defense and it's not gotten any better.

Correct me if I’m wrong but Perunovich is likely to be a Group 6 UFA this summer, right? You get to be a UFA if you’re 25+, played 3 pro seasons and played less than 80 NHL games. Because of all of his injuries, he’s only played 50. The Blues have 33 games left in the season. Which means, as soon as he missies 4 games, he definitely won’t reach 80.

Playoff games count so really all he needs is to play 23 more games this season (regular season + playoffs) to get to 80, but it's not like Perunovich has a history of injuries such that there's reason to think he'll miss ........ oh, yeah, right.

Well, it's not like he's injured right n- .... oh, yeah, right.

He may [probably will] qualify for Group 6, I won't be surprised if we sign him to another 1 year, 1-way for the league minimum again, because ... potential.

 

[Reality Czech]

I ... kind of thought my point was evident across about 48 posts on Perunovich this season, but I'll give give you a hint in the form of a question:

Given what we'd seen out of Perunovich coming into this season, does anyone here think, coming into the 2023-24 season, Scott Perunovich had earned an NHL roster spot?

Not welhewoudabenonwavers - that's giving someone a roster spot for fear of somwonmituvclaimdim, did he in all the professional games played up to September 15, 2023 play sufficiently well for what you'd expect out of a defenseman that he had earned a spot on this NHL roster - and especially earned a spot over other guys who were in the system and had played consistently the last few years, maybe even especially guys who'd played more than a few NHL games?

Because if he did - and that means a more stringent argument than look at all those points he put up in Springfield - I'd like to hear how he earned it, especially given what we've seen out of him defensively this season that's exactly like what we saw out of him 2 years ago [and what I saw out of him at MN-Duluth, but I've noted he was able to get away with because NCAA talent <<<< NHL talent] and especially since 3 1/2 months ago a much-respected poster here had a pretty brutal [but accurate] write-up of his defense and it's not gotten any better.


Playoff games count so really all he needs is to play 23 more games this season (regular season + playoffs) to get to 80, but it's not like Perunovich has a history of injuries such that there's reason to think he'll miss ........ oh, yeah, right.

Well, it's not like he's injured right n- .... oh, yeah, right.

He may [probably will] qualify for Group 6, I won't be surprised if we sign him to another 1 year, 1-way for the league minimum again, because ... potential.

Maybe I shouldn't jump into the fray but I don't get why this debate is so contentious. We could argue all day about whether or not Peru has "earned" his spot, but let's keep in mind that the coaches have seen him a lot more in training camp and practices. He's had bad injury luck but regardless, the team needs to know what they have in him.

I'd fall on the side that he hasn't completely earned it based on his limited body of work, but you also don't want to lose a decent asset for nothing by risking him on waivers. And I don't really see anyone else knocking on the door who should have been given the roster spot instead of Perunovich. At the very least he earned a chance to prove himself, especially if he's been working hard behind the scenes to get healthy again and has been a good teammate off the ice.

If it were up to me, I probably would have tried to trade him a couple years ago while his stock was relatively high but I don't see any issue keeping him around to see if he can build on his performance from before he was injured. I doubt he'll ever be a difference maker but we've hung onto him this long, so I don't see what we've got to lose by keeping him around. If someone else outplays him and steals his spot, so be it. And if he walks as a Group 6 UFA (something I know next to nothing about), it's no big loss either. But I also don't see why people are getting so worked up about it.

 

[Majorityof1]

I ... kind of thought my point was evident across about 48 posts on Perunovich this season, but I'll give give you a hint in the form of a question:

Given what we'd seen out of Perunovich coming into this season, does anyone here think, coming into the 2023-24 season, Scott Perunovich had earned an NHL roster spot?

Not welhewoudabenonwavers - that's giving someone a roster spot for fear of somwonmituvclaimdim, did he in all the professional games played up to September 15, 2023 play sufficiently well for what you'd expect out of a defenseman that he had earned a spot on this NHL roster - and especially earned a spot over other guys who were in the system and had played consistently the last few years, maybe even especially guys who'd played more than a few NHL games?

Because if he did - and that means a more stringent argument than look at all those points he put up in Springfield - I'd like to hear how he earned it, especially given what we've seen out of him defensively this season that's exactly like what we saw out of him 2 years ago [and what I saw out of him at MN-Duluth, but I've noted he was able to get away with because NCAA talent <<<< NHL talent] and especially since 3 1/2 months ago a much-respected poster here had a pretty brutal [but accurate] write-up of his defense and it's not gotten any better.

So first, we ruined his development by not giving him enough time in the AHL Then....

... he hadn't earned his time in the NHL. Oh wait, I am sorry, he hasn't earned his time in the NHL. You have to bold and underline it. That will make us realize how important him earning his ice time is, in case the dozen times you said it didn't.

Here's the thing. Who gives a shit if he earned it? Earning a spot is a fiction you tell little kids with no natural talent to teach them hard work. In a professional sports league, whether the player earned it is the 559th consideration on whether you call him up and play him. Can he help us win, what are the cap considerations, can he boost ticket sales if he is an exciting player, and yes, is he an asset we might lose to waivers otherwise are all more important than him earning it.

I also love how you are like...show me he earned it, but don't mention the points he put up in college or the AHL, the work he did in rehab, his skill or potential. Those don't count. Specifically show me he earned it with earned it only meaning he played 100 AHL games before being called up. HA....got ya,...you can't prove he played 100 pro games...I mean earned it.

I don't like Perunovich. I think he is an awful hockey player at the NHL level. I think he will always be an awful hockey player at the NHL level. I also think your argument is wholly pointless.

 

[ezcreepin]

So first, we ruined his development by not giving him enough time in the AHL Then....

... he hadn't earned his time in the NHL. Oh wait, I am sorry, he hasn't earned his time in the NHL. You have to bold and underline it. That will make us realize how important him earning his ice time is, in case the dozen times you said it didn't.

Here's the thing. Who gives a shit if he earned it? Earning a spot is a fiction you tell little kids with no natural talent to teach them hard work. In a professional sports league, whether the player earned it is the 559th consideration on whether you call him up and play him. Can he help us win, what are the cap considerations, can he boost ticket sales if he is an exciting player, and yes, is he an asset we might lose to waivers otherwise are all more important than him earning it.

I also love how you are like...show me he earned it, but don't mention the points he put up in college or the AHL, the work he did in rehab, his skill or potential. Those don't count. Specifically showl me he earned it with earned it only meaning he played 100 AHL games before being called up. HA....got ya,...you can't prove he played 100 pro games...I mean earned it.

I don't like Perunovich. I think he is an awful hockey player at the NHL level. I think he will always be an awful hockey player at the NHL level. I also think your argument is wholly pointless.

I was going to type up some stuff but I have to agree with your post even though we obviously disagree about Perunovich the player. I've never felt like you were being bad faith when we we're arguing about him, so I'll just echo your sentiment here.

 

[oldwpgjet]

Hopefully the kid makes it to UFA status. I think he needs a fresh start somewhere. The blues have a small,powerplay, questionable defensively dman already, Tough to have room for 2 of them but the kid might do all right somewhere else if he finds a team that will promote his strengths and work with his weaknesses.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

lol I asked for a sentence and Ted wrote a PHD dissertation. Gotta love it.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I'd fall on the side that he hasn't completely earned it based on his limited body of work, but you also don't want to lose a decent asset for nothing by risking him on waivers.

Given yet another injury, I would be shocked if anyone takes him on waivers. If someone really wants him, great; 12 assists over 31 games with sloppy defense and being hurt the rest of the time isn't moving the needle for this team.

 

[Reality Czech]

Given yet another injury, I would be shocked if anyone takes him on waivers. If someone really wants him, great; 12 assists over 31 games with sloppy defense and being hurt the rest of the time isn't moving the needle for this team.

That's fair, though I guess it doesn't cost anything to keep him until we need to open up a roster spot. My expectations for him have always been modest, but it is a shame that he got hurt when he finally seemed to be finding a groove. Then again he seems about as injury prone as a player can be, which doesn't bode well for his long-term NHL career.

As I've mentioned before, I would have used him as a trade chip a few years ago since we already had Krug signed long-term though teams don't generally give up much for small one-dimensional d-men.

 

[oldwpgjet]

12 assists in 31 games in spot duty. I thought I read somewhere that he had 5 assists in his last 6 games so might be a little more valuable than losing him. These continuous injuries though, hard to be too positive on him. If he can stay healthy , I think he can still be a player.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

12 assists in 31 games in spot duty. I thought I read somewhere that he had 5 assists in his last 6 games so might be a little more valuable than losing him. These continuous injuries though, hard to be too positive on him. If he can stay healthy , I think he can still be a player.

He did have 5 assists in his last 6 games. 4 of those were on the power play.

It's only 7 games, but the Blues power play has been fine without him (8-26, 30.8%).

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

He did have 5 assists in his last 6 games. 4 of those were on the power play.

It's only 7 games, but the Blues power play has been fine without him (8-26, 30.8%).

His ability on the PP is why I think he's not worth moving for what is likely a measly return we'd get for him. Because if we can somehow dump Krug's contract this coming summer, paying league minimum for a guy who's a capable PPQB sounds pretty good to me. That said, this most recent injury does put a bit of a damper on that line of thinking.

 

[STL fan in MN]

His ability on the PP is why I think he's not worth moving for what is likely a measly return we'd get for him. Because if we can somehow dump Krug's contract this coming summer, paying league minimum for a guy who's a capable PPQB sounds pretty good to me. That said, this most recent injury does put a bit of a damper on that line of thinking.

This is pretty much where I’m at with him too. If he can be had for league minimum, or close to it (which shouldn’t be too hard IMO), then I’d try to keep him. Regardless, I’d be trying to get rid of Krug. And if that results in us having to use guys like Faulk and Parayko on the PP more, so be it.

But at league minimum, I’d keep Scotty.

 

[joe galiba]

Random injuries to different parts of the body at different times doesn't mean that those injuries will happen in the future at any different rate than random injuries to anyone else
no different than a friend who has won the last 4 or 5 times at a casino playing slots, it doesn't mean he will win the next 4 or 5 times (doesn't mean he won't either)

on the other hand, repeated injuries to the same part of the body, such as a back or shoulders, increases the risk of a future injury to that body part

 

[oldwpgjet]

I will admit I'm more of a Perunovich supporter ( hockey draft) than a Blues supporter so I am just assuming Krug is the main powerplay guy, checking his stats ,he is just a shade better than half ppg. All good points other than the powerplay comment. Keeping the aging, (32) , expensive (6.5 mil) option because the powerplay is presently working and not keeping the younger (25) cheaper (league min) potentially better powerplay option for the present and future doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

 

[Brian39]

We are in a super interesting spot with a (recently activated) Perunovich down the stretch.

He will become a UFA if he hasn't played in 80 career NHL games (regular season and playoff) by the end of the year. He has 58 career NHL games played and the Blues currently have 26 remaining games on the schedule. He's been extremely injury-prone through his pro career so far and it is far from a lock that he can stay healthy for those 26 games. A 5+ game injury would mean that he goes UFA unless we get into the playoffs and put him in the lineup in those games.

I'd wager that one of our goals down the stretch is giving him his last audition to remain in the franchise. he's not currently good enough to be a rental and no non-playoff team is going to give up anything of value for a guy who will go UFA if he suffers basically any minor injury. We are going to do pretty much everything we can to get him into enough games to hold his rights and determine whether he has a place in this organization moving forward.

 

[Blueston]

I will admit I'm more of a Perunovich supporter ( hockey draft) than a Blues supporter so I am just assuming Krug is the main powerplay guy, checking his stats ,he is just a shade better than half ppg. All good points other than the powerplay comment. Keeping the aging, (32) , expensive (6.5 mil) option because the powerplay is presently working and not keeping the younger (25) cheaper (league min) potentially better powerplay option for the present and future doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

We would deal Krug if we could.

 

[ezcreepin]

I will admit I'm more of a Perunovich supporter ( hockey draft) than a Blues supporter so I am just assuming Krug is the main powerplay guy, checking his stats ,he is just a shade better than half ppg. All good points other than the powerplay comment. Keeping the aging, (32) , expensive (6.5 mil) option because the powerplay is presently working and not keeping the younger (25) cheaper (league min) potentially better powerplay option for the present and future doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

A lot of the conversations revolve around the idea that Krug is most definitely a better defender than Perunovich (not saying much), has a track record of producing points both 5v5 and powerplay, and he has a better history of remaining healthy (something he's yet to do with the Blues). Perunovich, for all of his skills and assets, just cannot stay healthy. The luxury you have right now is owning both players without having to do anything AND the team is bad so you can allow a guy like Perunovich to get acclimated after multiple injuries. If we're looking just from an NHL 24 perspective, yes you'd obviously trade a guy like Krug and keep Perunovich, but I don't think we have that option at the moment.

 

[Brian39]

I will admit I'm more of a Perunovich supporter ( hockey draft) than a Blues supporter so I am just assuming Krug is the main powerplay guy, checking his stats ,he is just a shade better than half ppg. All good points other than the powerplay comment. Keeping the aging, (32) , expensive (6.5 mil) option because the powerplay is presently working and not keeping the younger (25) cheaper (league min) potentially better powerplay option for the present and future doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

To pile onto the comment from @Blueston, we actively tried to move Krug last summer. It wasn't just rumored, it was confirmed that we had a deal in place to move him and he exercised his NTC to block it. If we move on from Perunovich and keep Krug, it is objectively because we had to, not because we chose to.

We can talk about the Krug contract being a bad one and the fact that we gave him that trade protection, but Perunovich had zero pro experience at the time it was signed. At that point, there wasn't a strong argument that Perunovich was an obvious internal choice over Krug. By the time we actually got faced with an either/or decision between the two, we tried to choose Perunovich and our attempt was blocked.

 

[oldwpgjet]

That all makes sense. Did I read somewhere that playoff games will count as well to the 80 game minimum.? That should help , if the case of another small injury.

 

[Xerloris]

I really like Scotty P on the PP much more than Krug but he's so injury prone that he's simply not reliable.

 

[tfriede2]

That all makes sense. Did I read somewhere that playoff games will count as well to the 80 game minimum.? That should help , if the case of another small injury.

Yes, it’s just 80 NHL games; playoff games count.