2019-2020 St. Louis Blues - Defending the Cup - Part 1: Off-Season Edition

[ChicagoBlues]

We offered him a deal, but it was a year shorter than Boston’s offer.

Oh I see forgot thanks

 

[ChicagoBlues]

The Blues absolutely offered Backes a contract. JR reported that we were 'close' to the AAV he got with the Bruins, but that we weren't willing to match the 5th year of term.

Backes bids fond farewell to Blues

Edit: from a financial standpoint, Backes has already been paid more by Boston than he would have been paid by us over the life of a 4 year deal. With the way his contract was structured, he has been paid $25 mil by Boston after receiving his signing bonus on July 1. He'll receive another $1 mil in salary this year, a $1 mil bonus next summer and is set to earn another $3 mil in salary next year. If he is bought out next summer, his total earnings on the contract will be $29 mil, which would be $5 mil more than a 4 year deal we offered (assuming we would go right to $6 mil AAV).

I'm happy that we didn't get stuck with that contract, but I don't blame any player for taking a deal that is going to see them make an extra $5+ mil even if they are bought out early and lose some money.

Yeah I was just reminded. thanks

 

[BlueDream]

So, Ben Fred. has an article about Armstrong in today's paper. Would link to STLToday but it's not gonna let me access anymore on a desktop, sorry.

But anyways, the part that stuck out is Armstrong's quotes about Barbashev. He first vaguely indicated they are "close enough that it could only take one phone call" to get a deal done but then basically followed it up with "that phone call might not happen before training camp."

When asked if he expected Barbashev back, Armstrong said verbatim "I expect him to be playing hockey somewhere, whether it's in North America or elsewhere." He then referenced Vladimir Sobotka's situation and how he understands the 'economics' part of it.

Barbashev has no arb rights of course so I'm sure Armstrong is playing hardball with him. He made that very clear as he pointed out that if Barbashev doesn't sign by Dec. 1 he can't play this year. But still, his quotes struck me as kind of odd. I figure it would have been easy for Armstrong to say "yes, I expect him to be here for training camp" but he didn't. He instead essentially hinted at Barbashev going to the KHL so I wonder how likely that is, and how likely it is that Maroon gets the money we would have given Barbashev (at least for 1 year). Armstrong was asked about Maroon in this article and only said "we are staying in contact."

Will be interesting to follow this situation. I could very well be reading too much into it because Armstrong may just be acting intentionally cryptic for negotiations, but if you read the article Armstrong didn't seem all that confident, especially considering he went as far to specifically recall Sobotka.

 

[execwrite1]

I agree with your take on the Barbashev situation. Sounds like his agent is miscalculating how much leverage Barbashev has. Seems Armstrong is suggesting he'll give the money to Maroon if Barbashev doesn't want it. Big mistake by the kid.

 

[Majorityof1]

I agree with your take on the Barbashev situation. Sounds like his agent is miscalculating how much leverage Barbashev has. Seems Armstrong is suggesting he'll give the money to Maroon if Barbashev doesn't want it. Big mistake by the kid.

Big mistake by Armstong if he pays Maroon $1.5-2M+ while trying to nickel and dime Barbashev at less than a million as was rumored. Maroon cannot do what Barbashev did for us defensively and on the PK.

 

[Brian39]

Big mistake by Armstong if he pays Maroon $1.5-2M+ while trying to nickel and dime Barbashev at less than a million as was rumored. Maroon cannot do what Barbashev did for us defensively and on the PK.

I'm not saying that we should pick Maroon over Barby. I'm a big Barby fan and I would like to get a deal done with him. While Maroon can't do some of the things Barby does for us defensively and on the PK, Maroon also does things that Barby can't/doesn't (forechecking, cycling, physicality and possession are all things Maroon does better than Barby). I think Barby's contributions are more important than Maroon's, but it is worth noting that if we hardball Barby to the point that he goes to the KHL and we sign Maroon, someone else would be filling Barby's role on the 4th line, in the defensive zone and on the PK.

I still very much expect a deal to get done with Barby. I think Army is trying to et a very team friendly 2+ deal done, but absent that we will see a very low cost 1 year deal around camp that gets Barby arbitration rights next summer.

 

[Majorityof1]

I'm not saying that we should pick Maroon over Barby. I'm a big Barby fan and I would like to get a deal done with him. While Maroon can't do some of the things Barby does for us defensively and on the PK, Maroon also does things that Barby can't/doesn't (forechecking, cycling, physicality and possession are all things Maroon does better than Barby). I think Barby's contributions are more important than Maroon's, but it is worth noting that if we hardball Barby to the point that he goes to the KHL and we sign Maroon, someone else would be filling Barby's role on the 4th line, in the defensive zone and on the PK.

I still very much expect a deal to get done with Barby. I think Army is trying to et a very team friendly 2+ deal done, but absent that we will see a very low cost 1 year deal around camp that gets Barby arbitration rights next summer.

Defense and PK, are much harder to replace than physicality. Jordan Nolan or Sammy Blais hit more than Maroon per 60. Maroon is good on the cycle, but only with a very specific line make-up to support him. He wasn't so strong on the cycle when he played with players that didn't support that style of play. It wasn't until he meshed with Thomas and Bozak that his cycle game stood out. Besides, its not like Barbashev is bad at any of these aspects of the game. He was 5th on the team in hits/60 (5v5, min 300 min) and 2nd in the playoffs only to Blais with a ridiculous 17.8 hits/60 (5v5, min 60 minutes). Whereas Maroon is just bad on defense. So the gap between Barbashev and Maroon is much, much larger on the areas Barbashev has the edge than ones Maroon does. Plus Maroon is a short-term play who will start to regress soon while Barbashev could be a bottom 6 staple for multiple years with a bit of potential upside yet to tap.

I too expect a deal to be done with Barbashev. I am only saying that it would be a mistake if we lost Barbasehv and then turned around and offered Maroon a number that could have signed Barbashev. Barbashev is a far more versatile and useful player, even if he is slightly less phsyical and strong on the boards at this point in his career.

 

[Stealth JD]

I'm not saying that we should pick Maroon over Barby. I'm a big Barby fan and I would like to get a deal done with him. While Maroon can't do some of the things Barby does for us defensively and on the PK, Maroon also does things that Barby can't/doesn't (forechecking, cycling, physicality and possession are all things Maroon does better than Barby). I think Barby's contributions are more important than Maroon's, but it is worth noting that if we hardball Barby to the point that he goes to the KHL and we sign Maroon, someone else would be filling Barby's role on the 4th line, in the defensive zone and on the PK.

I still very much expect a deal to get done with Barby. I think Army is trying to et a very team friendly 2+ deal done, but absent that we will see a very low cost 1 year deal around camp that gets Barby arbitration rights next summer.

I bet Barbashev sees guys like Sanford and Sundqvist get sizable raises and expects to be in the same boat because his on-ice contributions have been comparable...however, he fails to acknowledge that he's in the Fabbri-Blais pay-class simply because he doesn't have arbitration rights. Sucks for him, but he'd be smart to play out this final year and command himself a nice second contract rather than pout and play the KHL card. I'm sure MacEachern would have no issue taking his 4th line roster spot is Barbashev wants to follow Sobotka's path to more money.

 

[MissouriMook]

I suspect that this is all a bit overblown. This smells to me like Army holding onto his cards because he knows that the contract for Eddy will determine how much is left over for Barbashev. A larger contract for Eddy likely means a 1 year deal at a nice raise for Barby. A smaller contract for Eddy offers him some flexibility to give Barby more money on a longer deal.

I'm sure Barby's agent is just doing his job reminding Army that his client has an option outside the NHL to further his career and Army is just doing his job reminding Barby's agent that if his client wants to play in the NHL it will be on the team's terms and not the player's.

 

[Chojin]

$3.1m for Edmundson, a raise of only $100k. Pretty good for the Blues.

 

[hockensm77]

$3.1m for Edmundson, a raise of only $100k. Pretty good for the Blues.

Am I remembering right that the team chooses whether it's for 1 year or 2, since the player elected arbitration? I saw one Tweet that said 1 year, but not from a reliable source..

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Can someone confirm, a year in the KHL would not contribute to getting him closer to arbitration eligibility next year?

 

[Em etah Eh]

Am I remembering right that the team chooses whether it's for 1 year or 2, since the player elected arbitration? I saw one Tweet that said 1 year, but not from a reliable source..

He only had 1 year left until UFA so all it could be was 1 year.

 

[MissouriMook]

Am I remembering right that the team chooses whether it's for 1 year or 2, since the player elected arbitration? I saw one Tweet that said 1 year, but not from a reliable source..

Has to be 1 year because this is his last year of RFA status and arbitration can't award contracts for UFA years.

Now they have $2,670,406 according to Cap Friendly once you replace Pouliot on the roster with Edmundson. If this opens the door to giving Barby the same AAV and term as Sanford, which would leave them with $1,170,406 in cap space going into the season with a full roster.

 

[hockensm77]

He only had 1 year left until UFA so all it could be was 1 year.

Aha -- got it, thanks.

 

[Blueston]

Still a lot of money for #7D

 

[Majorityof1]

Still a lot of money for #7D

He averaged 19:23 a game over 64 games. He missed 15 games do to injury and was only scratched 3 times. How is that a 7th D? Both Bortuzzo and Gunnarsson averaged more than 3 minutes less a game.

 

[Blueston]

He averaged 19:23 a game over 64 games. He missed 15 games do to injury and was only scratched 3 times. How is that a 7th D? Both Bortuzzo and Gunnarsson averaged more than 3 minutes less a game.

He's making roughly what the 2 of them make combined and the way the club rotated them in postseason they seemed to view the 3 as roughly interchangeable.

 

[SIU LAW]

It is getting a bit tiring to read local media suggesting the Blues don’t have enough cap space for Barbie and to have a cushion without a trade.

If you do not carry an 8th defenseman and a 14th forward, there is approximately 3.4 million left.

Even if the Blues gave Barbie two million (likely lower per negotiation reports), there would still be a cushion of approximately 1.4 million. Armstrong reportedly told JR he wanted a cushion between 1 and 1.5.

Everything fits. Say goodbye to Maroon and opening night can have the same team (minus Maroon) as last year and 13 forwards, 7 D, 2 goalies and the reported cap cushion.

Let’s hope the false cap narrative can stop.

 

[Brian39]

It is getting a bit tiring to read local media suggesting the Blues don’t have enough cap space for Barbie and to have a cushion without a trade.

If you do not carry an 8th defenseman and a 14th forward, there is approximately 3.4 million left.

Even if the Blues gave Barbie two million (likely lower per negotiation reports), there would still be a cushion of approximately 1.4 million. Armstrong reportedly told JR he wanted a cushion between 1 and 1.5.

Everything fits. Say goodbye to Maroon and opening night can have the same team (minus Maroon) as last year and 13 forwards, 7 D, 2 goalies and the reported cap cushion.

Let’s hope the false cap narrative can stop.

I agree with your overall point, but I'd be shocked if we only carried a 22 man roster. That would require risking one of Blais, MacMac, Fabbri and Sanford to waivers. I don't see the organization risking an extra guy to waivers just to increase the cap cushion we carry.

With that said, a 23 man roster with Barby on a $1.67 mil deal still gives us a $1 mil cap cushion without having to risk any of those guys to waivers. Giving Barby anything up to $1.75 mil (which should only happen if we buy a decent term) gives us a sufficient cushion to bank space for a deadline move.

 

[SIU LAW]

I agree with your overall point, but I'd be shocked if we only carried a 22 man roster. That would require risking one of Blais, MacMac, Fabbri and Sanford to waivers. I don't see the organization risking an extra guy to waivers just to increase the cap cushion we carry.

With that said, a 23 man roster with Barby on a $1.67 mil deal still gives us a $1 mil cap cushion without having to risk any of those guys to waivers. Giving Barby anything up to $1.75 mil (which should only happen if we buy a decent term) gives us a sufficient cushion to bank space for a deadline move.

Perhaps I am wrong, but I always assumed Mac would be sent down if the other option was potentially losing a more significant piece vs. keeping a 14th foward in the pressbox.

My assumption also assumes Army really wants that reported cap cushion number.

 

[Brian39]

Perhaps I am wrong, but I always assumed Mac would be sent down if the other option was potentially losing a more significant piece vs. keeping a 14th foward in the pressbox.

My assumption also assumes Army really wants that reported cap cushion number.

I agree with the bolded, but we aren't at risk of losing a more significant piece. Risking a guy to waivers in order to keep a significant piece vs having an extra $750k in unused cap space are very different considerations. I don't view letting Maroon walk as a UFA as losing a significant piece as that appears to be the best decision regardless of whether it costs us an asset or not.

 

[SIU LAW]

I agree with the bolded, but we aren't at risk of losing a more significant piece. Risking a guy to waivers in order to keep a significant piece vs having an extra $750k in unused cap space are very different considerations. I don't view letting Maroon walk as a UFA as losing a significant piece as that appears to be the best decision regardless of whether it costs us an asset or not.

Yeah, I have always assumed Maroon is gone regardless. If you sign him you have at least TWO of the following in the pressbox or elsewhere: Fabbri, Blais, Sandford. All fowards and assets with potentially years in front of them vs. an aging forward with maybe a year or two in him.

 

[BlueDream]

I don’t consider putting MacEachern on waivers - if we need to do so - a risk.

I’d frankly be shocked if he was claimed. He’s 25 years old with a limited number of NHL games. He’s a 4th line grinder who has limited offensively ability and (thus far) hasn’t shown many additional skills such as killing penalties.

If we need to make space he’s absolutely expendable. I’m not crapping on him by any means but every NHL team has multiple Makenzie MacEacherns in their organization. It’d be pretty surprising if someone needed him enough to make a claim especially during training camp.

 

[The Note]

The Blues are slated to play 15 NBC/NBCSN games this year.