2021-2022 S Blues Multi Purpose Thread Part 2

[Louie the Blue]

I think it's pretty clear what we need to do this offseason, the problem is that it's much easier said than done. The way I see it, the #1 priority this offseason (as others have said) is adding a #1/#2 LHD that can play solid defense. Everything else is secondary.

Here is what I see:

Perron - O'Reilly - Kyrou
Buchnevich - Thomas - Tarasenko
Saad - Schenn - X
X - Joshua - Toropchenko

X - Faulk
Leddy - Parayko
Krug - Bortuzzo

Binnington
X

The forward core does not need a whole lot changed (honestly, the entire team doesn't need much changed). I really like the way we've constructed the top 9 especially. You've got a really good mixture of different playstyles. Each player brings something different to the table. Perron and Tarasenko are elite scorers, O'Reilly and Buchnevich are great two-way players, Kyrou and Thomas have great speed and passing, Schenn isn't elite at anything, but solid at just about everything. He reminds me a lot of Steen in the sense that Steen could play in just about any role you wanted him to. Saad is what he is, but he's a solid depth piece. The whole top 9 showed some really good chemistry this year and I'd hate to disrupt that too much. However, I do believe that Barbashev should be traded. That should be the biggest change we do to the forward group.

I like Barbashev, but I think now is too good of a time to trade him. His value has never been higher, and he's due for a raise at the same time that Thomas, Kyrou, O'Reilly and Tarasenko's contracts are up. Of those players, Barbashev is the clear option to move on from. On top of that, we have Toropchenko who is projecting to be a solid 3rd line option and for much cheaper. So we already have an internal replacement. We've also got Neighbours knocking on the door. So there are cheaper and younger players that can immediately fill in on that 3rd line. It just makes too much sense to get as much as you can in return for Barbashev. You can then turn around and use those newly gained assets to improve your defense.

Husso we just can't afford. We'll need to replace him with a cheaper backup. That's probably the easiest decision. Even just going with Lindgren might be fine. Hate to see him go, but we simply can't keep him while paying Binnington 6M.

Now the defense will be tricky. Krug is the guy that makes everything kinda difficult. I like Krug as a player, but when you take into account contracts, needs, and the playstyles of other defenseman, it's clear that he's a square peg and our defense is a round hole. He could certainly work here, and it's not like his presence makes the team worse, not at all. It's just not efficient. Ideally, Krug is the type of player that you shelter at 5v5 on the 3rd pairing and give lots of PP/offensive zone time to. 6.5 million is way to much money to allocate towards that role. I'd much rather have a player with a similar playstyle that is worse, but costs way less. That way you could take that extra 4-5 million and put it towards a LHD that greatly improves our team on the defensive side of things. I think this defense looks a lot sexier and more cost-effective, although pretty much impossible right now:

X (6.5m) - Faulk (6.5m)
Leddy (3.5-4m?) - Parayko (6.5m)
Perunovich (1m) - Bortuzzo (950k)

With X being a #2 defensive defenseman.

Unfortunately, I think we're stuck with Krug and his 6.5M cap hit for the foreseeable future. Then there's Scandella who would almost certainly have to be traded in any kind of scenario where we're getting player X (unless Leddy wants to sign elsewhere or he's asking for too much). Regardless, the defense is out of sorts right now, and I think Army knows that. I trust him though, so let's see what he does this off-season. I will say that we have to be trying to win now, so any move that makes us a better team short term without completely clearing our future/prospect cupboard is a good move in my mind. It might sting seeing one of our top prospects go, but it might have to happen.

This is a big offseason for DA.

I think I agree with like 95% of your post aside from the opinion of Krug, which you've acknowledged he likely isn't going anywhere to begin with.

Barbashev is 100% expendable and should be moved. If he replicates his performance this season elsewhere, great, but the Blues have cheaper options available who can likely replicate his production at some point in the future and need playing time to develop in the near term.

Aside from that, I'd honestly consider moving Tarasenko. I think the value he could bring by freeing up cap and gaining assets to help acquire a top 1/2 D would be worth it while also being able to extend ROR, Kyrou, and Thomas. I don't think he's in STL past 2023 regardless, so why keep him in a position of strength when you can use him to upgrade a weakness? I'd also move Scandella.

Having a top 6 that includes Leddy, Krug, and an acquired 1/2D would be feasible to do under that scenario.

I also feel a lot better heading into the off-season than last year where Armstrong pulled a rabbit out of a hat in getting Buchnevich while also replacing Schwartz with Saad.

 

[PocketNines]

We can talk in circles around how Torey Krug provides value and isn't likely to be moved. Nevertheless, if the Blues want to get past Colorado they have to specifically improve to counter Colorado's speed. We saw clear proof of concept that the Blues don't need Krug on the PP for Colorado, but I also think people will ignore this and keep emphasizing how he helps the PP.

 

[Louie the Blue]

We can talk in circles around how Torey Krug provides value and isn't likely to be moved. Nevertheless, if the Blues want to get past Colorado they have to specifically improve to counter Colorado's speed. We saw clear proof of concept that the Blues don't need Krug on the PP for Colorado, but I also think people will ignore this and keep emphasizing how he helps the PP.

Well, two ways of doing that are moving Barbashev and Tarasenko who did almost nothing vs Colorado.

The PP was being ran by a heavily sheltered Perunovich who still needs to improve his defense to even Krug levels to view him as a viable alternative.

 

[Brian39]

Yes, I think Krug is easy to replace with Perunovich long term, but until Perunovich can show he can at least be Krug defensively AND come within 90% of what Krug can do on offense, there's no point in trying to replace him. I think Krug's doing exactly what he was brought in to do. I think Krug's shortcomings can be covered by bringing in a legit long-term solution to the top 4. Leddy was a band-aid who was fine, but ideally, you don't want him playing top 4 minutes.

The chances of Perunovich accomplishing that before having a chance to walk as a UFA are well below 10%. I will be surprised if he ever gets to that level. It will certainly be far from easy to pencil Perunovich into hitting those goals even long term.

Krug has his shortcomings, but the difference between Krug and Perunovich at this moment is gigantic. Krug's deployment is sheltered, but he is still playing 20+ minutes a night. He is very sheltered for a 2nd pairing D man. Perunovich is getting sheltered by a significantly greater margin than Krug. Perunovich is going against lesser competition, playing fewer minutes and starts in the offensive zone substantially more often than Krug (78.8% vs 64.6%). While Krug's deployment isn't tough by 2nd pair standards, it is much tougher than the deployment Perunovich has been getting. Krug has gotten fantastic results in his deployment while Perunovich has lost Berube's trust to stay in the lineup multiple times.

Krug is +34 in his 2 years with the Blues and scores an even strength point a little more than once every three games. Perunovich is a +2 in his 19 games as a Blue and scores an even strength point a little less than once every 6 games. Perunovich's defensive game is bad enough that he couldn't stay in the lineup in the playoffs even though we very obviously needed him as the PP1 QB.

At 23, Krug was already significantly better than Perunovich is today. He was handling 19+ minutes a night. He was sheltered, but his offensive zone starts were a hair below 60%, not a hair below 80%. He was a double-digit "plus" player in each of his first 2 seasons (+18 and +13) and his possession numbers were all in the mid-50s in that sheltered usage.

I totally agree that trying to replace Krug with Perunovich in the short term is a complete and total non-starter. I also don't think that there is a good chance that he will be able to replace Krug long-term. He needs to take multiple steps. Krug is a below-average NHL defender, but his defensive play is still NHL-caliber. His decision-making defensively is average (and arguably above average) and his biggest deficiency is his size. Perunovich isn't remotely NHL-caliber defensively. He needs to take a couple steps just to be a below-average NHL defender.

Krug has consistently done a good-to-great job as a #3/4 D man at 5 on 5 who gets deployed offensively and is an elite PP QB. At this point, I view Perunovich's ceiling as a #4/5 D man who gets deployed offensively and is an elite PP QB. I think that his most likely outcome is a bottom pair D man at 5 on 5 who gets deployed offensively at 5 on 5 and is a very good PP QB. You can absolutely have success with that kind of guy deployed in your lineup, but you have to use him a hell of a lot less than we use (or the Bruins used) Krug.

 

[MissouriMook]

We can talk in circles around how Torey Krug provides value and isn't likely to be moved. Nevertheless, if the Blues want to get past Colorado they have to specifically improve to counter Colorado's speed. We saw clear proof of concept that the Blues don't need Krug on the PP for Colorado, but I also think people will ignore this and keep emphasizing how he helps the PP.

I think you're making a good point, but I also think you're ignoring the fact that we also saw that our PP is barely average without Krug or Perunovich running it. If we move Krug, you have to be good with one of these scenarios:

1. We have Perunovich as a regular with more defensive deficiencies but more speed and at less money.

2. We use Krug's money to sign someone who is faster and defends better, and can also do a great job running a PP. I think you're running into Unicorn territory here.

3. We use Krug's money to sign someone who is faster and defends better, but can't run a PP and we settle for having an average to below average PP.

I don't disagree with the idea that Krug makes too much money to be a PP specialist who will likely struggle against Colorado's speed, but I also think you're underselling what he brings to the roster. Ultimately, I think we need to get faster (or at least play faster) as a team because that's the way the league is trending, but I also think it is a mistake to overhaul your roster for the sole purpose of being able to match up against 1 of the other 31 teams.

 

[WeWentBlues]

Well, two ways of doing that are moving Barbashev and Tarasenko who did almost nothing vs Colorado.

The PP was being ran by a heavily sheltered Perunovich who still needs to improve his defense to even Krug levels to view him as a viable alternative.

I think you could get away with Perunovich as your sheltered third pairing PP specialist. A lot easier to pay a guy close to the league minimum for that role than it is to pay a guy 6.5M while also trying to add another piece that plays the same position to upgrade the defense.

Looking back at the last two offseasons, the contracts given out to Krug and Saad are going to hurt the team's ability to upgrade more than anything. I like both players but they account for 11M against the cap and I think you could get similar production out of players making much less. Saad was totally invisible in the Avalanche series. I can vividly remember watching him in Game 6 with several chances to dig a puck out along the boards or behind the net and he was outworked/outmuscled every time.

 

[Xerloris]

Krug is currently and will always be better than Perunovich.

 

[Blueston]

I think you're making a good point, but I also think you're ignoring the fact that we also saw that our PP is barely average without Krug or Perunovich running it. If we move Krug, you have to be good with one of these scenarios:

1. We have Perunovich as a regular with more defensive deficiencies but more speed and at less money.

2. We use Krug's money to sign someone who is faster and defends better, and can also do a great job running a PP. I think you're running into Unicorn territory here.

3. We use Krug's money to sign someone who is faster and defends better, but can't run a PP and we settle for having an average to below average PP.

I don't disagree with the idea that Krug makes too much money to be a PP specialist who will likely struggle against Colorado's speed, but I also think you're underselling what he brings to the roster. Ultimately, I think we need to get faster (or at least play faster) as a team because that's the way the league is trending, but I also think it is a mistake to overhaul your roster for the sole purpose of being able to match up against 1 of the other 31 teams.

I'd also add that it's a bit rich to say Krug couldn't handle Colorado speed when he didn't even play. And Krug's puck moving abilities were huge part of what we were missing.

 

[joe galiba]

Other than Faulk or Leddy, how many times did our D wind up with the puck on their stick in our zone only to hand it right back to the Avs?
how many times did they hesitate and allow the Avs to close off the reverse or the short outlet?
how many times did they panic and just toss the pucks up the boards even though the Avs already had that closed off?
how many stretch passes did we complete, which could have backed off the forecheck some? (and it was there)

no matter how fast an opposing player can skate, a properly passed puck is ALWAYS faster

 

[Louie the Blue]

I think you could get away with Perunovich as your sheltered third pairing PP specialist. A lot easier to pay a guy close to the league minimum for that role than it is to pay a guy 6.5M while also trying to add another piece that plays the same position to upgrade the defense.

Looking back at the last two offseasons, the contracts given out to Krug and Saad are going to hurt the team's ability to upgrade more than anything. I like both players but they account for 11M against the cap and I think you could get similar production out of players making much less. Saad was totally invisible in the Avalanche series. I can vividly remember watching him in Game 6 with several chances to dig a puck out along the boards or behind the net and he was outworked/outmuscled every time.

I don’t think their contracts are impediments, though.

I think Krug should be fine for all but maybe 1 or 2 years with his contract, same with Saad.

Saad was necessary to bring in to replace Schwartz and I think he was OK in his role vs Colorado.

Schenn’s contract is going to be the one I believe that’s a major impediment long-term moving forward as well as Scandella’s in the near-term. Everyone else is either performing at their current AAV or not at risk being under contract long enough to experience a significant decline in play relative to their pay. Binnington didn’t play great this season, but I’m comfortable in thinking he can rebound and post a .910-.915 over 50ish games the majority of his contract.

I think holding onto Tarasenko for this season would be a mistake, as well as Barbashev, due to the upcoming extensions of ROR, Kyrou, and Thomas as well as the need to upgrade D. Those 2 are really the path of least resistance to free enough cap to make the extensions and adding a top 4 possible. Moving Scandella would be nice as well to free up cap, but isn’t totally necessary if those 2 are moved.

 

[PocketNines]

Well, two ways of doing that are moving Barbashev and Tarasenko who did almost nothing vs Colorado.

The PP was being ran by a heavily sheltered Perunovich who still needs to improve his defense to even Krug levels to view him as a viable alternative.

Like I say, you can go around and around and point to other players. None of the words make Krug better able to keep up with Colorado's speed. Whether or not Barbashev fits or was properly counted on to be a playoff scorer is really beside the point of how do our defenders keep Colorado's forwards in front of them, as the coach talks about. They don't cut to him for an interview mid game on the bench and he cites a couple of forwards who just need to produce and then they'll win, he talks about the structural control of the ice.

It doesn't matter whether an individual forward like Barbashev or Tarasenko is producing up to expectations in every series if, structurally, you don't have the personnel to compete with the speed. It really doesn't. The idea that you're ever going to get a postseason where no top 9 forwards underproduce is a fantasy. It's whack a mole and trying to fix it by whacking moles is not a wise approach.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Like I say, you can go around and around and point to other players. None of the words make Krug better able to keep up with Colorado's speed. Whether or not Barbashev fits or was properly counted on to be a playoff scorer is really beside the point of how do our defenders keep Colorado's forwards in front of them, as the coach talks about. They don't cut to him for an interview mid game on the bench and he cites a couple of forwards who just need to produce and then they'll win, he talks about the structural control of the ice.

It doesn't matter whether an individual forward like Barbashev or Tarasenko is producing up to expectations in every series if, structurally, you don't have the personnel to compete with the speed. It really doesn't. The idea that you're ever going to get a postseason where no top 9 forwards underproduce is a fantasy. It's whack a mole and trying to fix it by whacking moles is not a wise approach.

I don’t understand why citing Krug’s speed has to do with the series. He didn’t play at all vs Colorado this postseason and the entire defense was a flaming mess last season due to the injuries and personnel used. You can cite that as not being an excuse, but when you’re literally playing half of a defense that shouldn’t be playing top 6 minutes in a PO series that’s an issue.

My argument is Barbashev isn’t fast enough to compete with Colorado’s forwards and is the path of least resistance to go about upgrading the roster while Krug’s passing was sorely missed vs Colorado and dressing 7D to shelter Perunovich to QB a PP isn’t sustainable or viable long-term.

The forwards are much slower than Colorado’s and I’d argue Kyrou and Thomas are on par with Colorado’s in terms of speed. That includes ROR, who had a great series, Perron, Buchnevich, Schenn, Tarasenko, Barbashev, and Saad.

Another top 4 D is necessary to cover for Krug’s shortcomings, but to downplay his contributions on offense and act as if Perunovich can easily replicate his play is not an accurate representation of Krug’s ability as @Brian39 posted earlier.

Playing Mikkola in top 4 minutes, while also relying on Rosen, is a reason why the Blues lost even though I thought they played OK given the circumstances. Krug being available would have limited turnovers in the dzone on passes. He would have also been faster than either Mikkola or Rosen.

I don’t think even with Binnington, Scandella, and Krug being healthy they would’ve won the series due to how well the Avalanche possessed the puck and their second line and third lines dominating the Blues.

 

[PocketNines]

I don’t understand why citing Krug’s speed has to do with the series. He didn’t play at all vs Colorado this postseason and the entire defense was a flaming mess last season due to the injuries and personnel used. You can cite that as not being an excuse, but when you’re literally playing half of a defense that shouldn’t be playing top 6 minutes in a PO series that’s an issue.

My argument is Barbashev isn’t fast enough to compete with Colorado’s forwards and is the path of least resistance to go about upgrading the roster while Krug’s passing was sorely missed vs Colorado and dressing 7D to shelter Perunovich to QB a PP isn’t sustainable or viable long-term.

1. Krug's speed has to do with the 2023 playoff series, not the 2022 series.
2. Colorado was very fast and will be very fast again next year.
3. Krug is not fast. At all.
4. He didn't play in this series, and yet both #2 and #3 are true.
5. Krug is easily overpowered by a 5v5 forecheck when it gets in there.
6. To defeat Colorado, the Blues have to specifically improve – not decline – in both speed and ability to evade a forecheck and clear the zone.
7. Next year I want the Blues to be in a better position than this year to defeat Colorado.

And none of the foregoing is relevant to Barbashev. Moving Barbashev is not even a half-measure.

 

[Louie the Blue]

1. Krug's speed has to do with the 2023 playoff series, not the 2022 series.
2. Colorado was very fast and will be very fast again next year.
3. Krug is not fast. At all.
4. He didn't play in this series, and yet both #2 and #3 are true.
5. Krug is easily overpowered by a 5v5 forecheck when it gets in there.
6. To defeat Colorado, the Blues have to specifically improve – not decline – in both speed and ability to evade a forecheck and clear the zone.
7. Next year I want the Blues to be in a better position than this year to defeat Colorado.

And none of the foregoing is relevant to Barbashev. Moving Barbashev is not even a half-measure.

Moving Barbashev allows the Blues more cap to retain Thomas, Kyrou, ROR while also pursuing a top 4 D. At this juncture, I don’t even know if they can afford retaining Leddy with how the rosfer’s constructed.

Krug’s passing ability was sorely missed vs Colorado and we saw what happened when Mikkola was pressured into playing the puck.

 

[HighNote]

I never meant that Perunovich would be replacing Krug, just that I’d rather have Perunovich on our third pairing than Krug on the second. Krug on the third pairing would be overkill

 

[Blueston]

Moving Barbashev allows the Blues more cap to retain Thomas, Kyrou, ROR while also pursuing a top 4 D. At this juncture, I don’t even know if they can afford retaining Leddy with how the rosfer’s constructed.

Krug’s passing ability was sorely missed vs Colorado and we saw what happened when Mikkola was pressured into playing the puck.

Barbie's cap isn't high enough to do all that. You need to move someone like Tank to afford everything you want.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Barbie's cap isn't high enough to do all that. You need to move someone like Tank to afford everything you want.

Those 2, as well as Scandella, being moved would appease me for roster construction purposes.

I know some don’t share that same view.

 

[PocketNines]

Moving Barbashev allows the Blues more cap to retain Thomas, Kyrou, ROR while also pursuing a top 4 D. At this juncture, I don’t even know if they can afford retaining Leddy with how the rosfer’s constructed.

Krug’s passing ability was sorely missed vs Colorado and we saw what happened when Mikkola was pressured into playing the puck.

At no point during that series was I thinking "the Blues miss what Torey Krug could bring to this series."

It's pretty clear none of what I'm saying has to do with Barbashev. Moving on from Barbashev at some point before the trade deadline while also pursuing a top 4 D in the offseason is a given. So it serves as a complete distraction in this conversation.

 

[Brian39]

1. Krug's speed has to do with the 2023 playoff series, not the 2022 series.
2. Colorado was very fast and will be very fast again next year.
3. Krug is not fast. At all.
4. He didn't play in this series, and yet both #2 and #3 are true.
5. Krug is easily overpowered by a 5v5 forecheck when it gets in there.
6. To defeat Colorado, the Blues have to specifically improve – not decline – in both speed and ability to evade a forecheck and clear the zone.
7. Next year I want the Blues to be in a better position than this year to defeat Colorado.

And none of the foregoing is relevant to Barbashev. Moving Barbashev is not even a half-measure.

Krug handles an aggressive forecheck and clears the zone better than every other D man on our roster and it isn't particularly close. If improving our ability to evade a speedy forecheck and clear the zone is the recipe for defeating Colorado, then Krug should be our least expendable blueliner.

Krug struggles to defend when the puck is on the other team's stick. He gets outmuscled when the race is a tie. He absolutely does not struggle beating forecheckers to contested pucks and he absolutely doesn't struggle to either skate or pass the puck out of danger when he wins those races. That is literally his best asset in our half of the ice. I vehemently disagree that he doesn't have the speed to deal with a forecheck.

 

[Blueston]

Really not getting Krug hate on here. We had 1 playoff game where we dressed our top 4 D. One. And we shut out Wild that game. To jump to conclusions that our D wouldn’t have been good enough even if Krug played is presumptuous. We pay him a lot and play him a lot bc he is key part of our team. And our team is much better when he plays. So wishing him away seems rather foolish. We shouldn’t expect him to be Hedman. He is adequate defensively, strong in transition, and great on pp. none of our other D can you say that about.

 

[Louie the Blue]

At no point during that series was I thinking "the Blues miss what Torey Krug could bring to this series."

It's pretty clear none of what I'm saying has to do with Barbashev. Moving on from Barbashev at some point before the trade deadline while also pursuing a top 4 D in the offseason is a given. So it serves as a complete distraction in this conversation.

Focusing on moving Krug is also a distraction because it isn’t happening and leaves the Blues with another hole on defense.

Perunovich isn’t the caliber of player Krug is (yet) and can’t directly replicate his production on offense or defense.

My argument is keeping Leddy is fine and all, but does nothing with regards to moving the needle on defense because I think the Blues need someone better as long as Krug is penciled in top 4 (because he isn’t going anywhere and should be deployed in the top 4 as long as he’s here).

How I perceive your argument is to move on from Krug, keep Leddy, add another top 4 D, and pencil Perunovich in for bottom pairing today. I find it incredibly unlikely that that happens given Krug’s contract, production, and Perunovich’s performance.

The best compromise is acquiring someone better than Leddy while still playing Krug and also possibly acquiring a bottom pairing D that is better than either Scandella or Bortuzzo. The only realistic way I see to get that done is to move Barbashev, Tarasenko, and Scandella.

Imagine being able to find a way to keep Leddy and Krug and somehow adding a better LD than both on the left side. That defense would be sick.

 

[Reality Czech]

Leddy is a fine top 4 D man, as he shown this season and in prior seasons with the Islanders. The problem here is Krug in the top 4. His powerplay ability is remarkable, but his 5 on 5 play needs improvement (the same applies to Perunovich). Ideally, I'd like to see a top 4 of Chychrun/Sanheim, Parayko, Faulk, and Leddy with Krug and Bortuzzo on the bottom pairing. That way Krug can still run the powerplay but not get the difficult matchups during even-strength.

I honestly don't think Krug is that bad defensively but it's a possession game these days and Krug is by far our best puckhandler on defense if not the whole team. Guys like Parayko and Mikkola have to just flip the puck out a lot, which is why it's so valuable to have guys like Krug and Leddy around.

I think Krug's perceived weaknesses on defense are overstated here. The team was at their best when Krug and Faulk were tearing it up and dominating possession. No way he belongs on the third pairing. Every player has their strengths and weaknesses but I think people focus on Krug's weaknesses way more. And Perunovich is nowhere near Krug's level in terms of defense and decision making, at least not yet.

 

[Blueston]

Focusing on moving Krug is also a distraction because it isn’t happening and leaves the Blues with another hole on defense.

Perunovich isn’t the caliber of player Krug is (yet) and can’t directly replicate his production on offense or defense.

My argument is keeping Leddy is fine and all, but does nothing with regards to moving the needle on defense because I think the Blues need someone better as long as Krug is penciled in top 4 (because he isn’t going anywhere and should be deployed in the top 4 as long as he’s here).

How I perceive your argument is to move on from Krug, keep Leddy, add another top 4 D, and pencil Perunovich in for bottom pairing today. I find it incredibly unlikely that that happens given Krug’s contract, production, and Perunovich’s performance.

The best compromise is acquiring someone better than Leddy while still playing Krug and also possibly acquiring a bottom pairing D that is better than either Scandella or Bortuzzo Krug with. The only way to get that done is to move Barbashev, Tarasenko, and Scandella.

My ideal scenario is to send Tank to NJ for Severenson and futures. That upgrades 3rd pairing and creates cap space to add someone like Provorov or Chycrun (dealing Barbie and Scandella and futures) and retain Leddy on team-friendly deal (and Perron of course). Would be a bit weaker up front but our D would stack up with anyone 1-6.

 

[PocketNines]

Krug handles an aggressive forecheck and clears the zone better than every other D man on our roster and it isn't particularly close. If improving our ability to counter a speedy forecheck and clear the zone is the recipe for defeating Colorado, then Krug should be our least expendable blueliner.

Krug struggles to defend when the puck is on the other team's stick. He gets outmuscled when the race is a tie. He absolutely does not struggle beating forecheckers to contested pucks and he absolutely doesn't struggle to either skate or pass the puck out of danger when he wins those races. That is literally his best asset in our half of the ice. I vehemently disagree that he doesn't have the speed to deal with a forecheck.

We'll disagree. I'm saying he doesn't have the speed to deal with Colorado's forecheck, Saying you'd take Krug over Paryako "and it isn't particularly close" is something I'm ok disagreeing about.

Focusing on moving Krug is also a distraction because it isn’t happening and leaves the Blues with another hole on defense.

Perunovich isn’t the caliber of player Krug is (yet) and can’t directly replicate his production on offense or defense.

My argument is keeping Leddy is fine and all, but does nothing with regards to moving the needle on defense because I think the Blues need someone better as long as Krug is penciled in top 4 (because he isn’t going anywhere and should be deployed in the top 4 as long as he’s here).

How I perceive your argument is to move on from Krug, keep Leddy, add another top 4 D, and pencil Perunovich in for bottom pairing today. I find it incredibly unlikely that that happens given Krug’s contract, production, and Perunovich’s performance.

The best compromise is acquiring someone better than Leddy while still playing Krug and also possibly acquiring a bottom pairing D that is better than either Scandella or Bortuzzo. The only realistic way I see to get that done is to move Barbashev, Tarasenko, and Scandella.

Imagine being able to find a way to keep Leddy and Krug and somehow adding a better LD than both on the left side. That defense would be sick.

Honestly I'm not sold on Perunovich at all and I'd expect to move him in the trade for a top 4 D. I just believe that the Blues' power play doesn't fall apart without one of them on one of the units.

 

[Louie the Blue]

My ideal scenario is to send Tank to NJ for Severenson and futures. That upgrades 3rd pairing and creates cap space to add someone like Provorov or Chycrun (dealing Barbie and Scandella and futures) and retain Leddy on team-friendly deal (and Perron of course). Would be a bit weaker up front but our D would stack up with anyone 1-6.

I’m willing to take the hit to the forward group because I think Kyrou and Thomas are going to still progress and we shouldn’t see a drop off from ROR or Buchnevich for awhile.

That D would be sick.

Honestly I'm not sold on Perunovich at all and I'd expect to move him in the trade for a top 4 D. I just believe that the Blues' power play doesn't fall apart without one of them on one of the units.

That’s where we can agree to disagree. I think not having Krug or Perunovich running the PP would hurt and not having Krug contribute with passing the puck out of the zone on simple plays is something I think that was pretty clearly missed vs Colorado when Mikkola was playing hot potato with the puck on a forecheck.