Blues 2024 Off-Season Trade Proposals Thread

[Brian39]

I really don't understand this rule. You should be able to extend your own players at any time.

That would open things up to a ton of cap manipulation and completely demolish the core cap calculus that a player's cap hit is the average annual value of his contract.

In win-now mode and want that 30 year old star UFA that would 'normally' be worth $10M per year on a 7 year deal? Give him a 6 year deal worth $4M per year and then promptly sign him to a 4 year extension worth $15M a year. The player gets paid $14M more than that $10M x 7 year deal and everyone knows that he's going to be too hurt to extend his career for the last few years of that $15M hit. Push all the cap trouble down the road, get a stud for a huge bargain and then LTIR him in his mid-late 30s to avoid the cap hit.

That's an extreme example, but allowing early extensions would inevitably lead to every team in the league doing it (the same way restructuring contracts in the NFL has become the complete norm for getting cap compliant). You would very quickly have a league with every team shifting cap dollars year-to-year to fit massive payrolls under the cap.

Eliminating the restrictions on extensions would break the salary cap.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

Depends on who's on the board and you having to sell the team and fanbase on knowing your offense is about to drop. Especially if Buch is also moved.

I would want a + on the pick tho.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Depends on who's on the board and you having to sell the team and fanbase on knowing your offense is about to drop. Especially if Buch is also moved.

I would want a + on the pick tho.

You also free $8M to work with, but yes, offense would take a hit. If we are sold on a defenseman that would be available there to be our long-term #1, then I think it's something we should do. It's the type of move that gains us that top defensive prospect, but also doesn't sink us so bad that that we become a basement team, which is what my worry would be for those advocating for a tank.

Another option would be trying to trade up to 10ish if a guy like Buium is there or one of the others drop. That's probably a spot that's reasonable to get to with the picks that we have.

 

[Brian39]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

I might do it in a deal where the #5 overall was the main asset coming back, but not if it was the only asset coming back.

DeBrincat with 1 year of term plus 1 year of RFA team control returned the #7, #39, and a future 3rd rounder. He had better numbers than Kyrou, but there was also concern at the time that his numebrs were inflated by playing with Kane. He was worse than Kyrou defensively and is much smaller. On-ice, I don't think he was viewed as a noticeably better player than Kyrou, but Kyrou's contract status today is much more team-friendly than DeBrincat's was at the time of that trade.

OEL and Garland returned the #9 overall pick, a 2nd round pick and a good chunk of short-term dead money. OEL was well past his prime at this point.

Kyrou's on-ice performance with 7 years of team control and no active trade protection to block a non-desireable market carries far too much value to trade him for a single draft pick unless that pick guarantees you a true can't-miss prospect. A few such picks like that existed in 2023. I don't think there are enough such prospects in the 2024 class for the #5 to carry that kind of value. I would need additional picks/prospects to do such a deal, even if none of them were super high value assets.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

You also free $8M to work with, but yes, offense would take a hit. If we are sold on a defenseman that would be available there to be our long-term #1, then I think it's something we should do. It's the type of move that gains us that top defensive prospect, but also doesn't sink us so bad that that we become a basement team, which is what my worry would be for those advocating for a tank.

Another option would be trying to trade up to 10ish if a guy like Buium is there or one of the others drop. That's probably a spot that's reasonable to get to with the picks that we have.

We also already have 12mil in capspace so we're not hurting for cap next year.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I might do it in a deal where the #5 overall was the main asset coming back, but not if it was the only asset coming back.

DeBrincat with 1 year of term plus 1 year of RFA team control returned the #7, #39, and a future 3rd rounder. He had better numbers than Kyrou, but there was also concern at the time that his numebrs were inflated by playing with Kane. He was worse than Kyrou defensively and is much smaller. On-ice, I don't think he was viewed as a noticeably better player than Kyrou, but Kyrou's contract status today is much more team-friendly than DeBrincat's was at the time of that trade.

OEL and Garland returned the #9 overall pick, a 2nd round pick and a good chunk of short-term dead money. OEL was well past his prime at this point.

Kyrou's on-ice performance with 7 years of team control and no active trade protection to block a non-desireable market carries far too much value to trade him for a single draft pick unless that pick guarantees you a true can't-miss prospect. A few such picks like that existed in 2023. I don't think there are enough such prospects in the 2024 class for the #5 to carry that kind of value. I would need additional picks/prospects to do such a deal, even if none of them were super high value assets.

If this is a deal that Montreal wants to pursue and Army considers it, Montreal has a whole collection of picks to fill whatever value gap there is.

 

[Brian39]

If this is a deal that Montreal wants to pursue and Army considers it, Montreal has a whole collection of picks to fill whatever value gap there is.

Edit: I was typing this as you posted lol. I hadn't checked the main board. Did't realize that the original post was specifically about a Habs-Blues trade.

They currently have four D under the age of 23 in their organization who were 1st round selections (Reinbacher, Mailloux, Guhle, and Barron) on top of Lane Hutson who was a 2nd round pick. If their top couple forwards are off the board by the time they pick, I could see them being interested in trading the pick for a guy like Kyrou instead of selecting another D man to add to an already crowded young blueline.

Beyond their own pick, they have Winnipeg's 1st this year, a future 1st rounder from Calgary, a surplus 2nd rounder in 2025, plus a few surplus 3rds in the next couple drafts. They have the draft picks to meet my 'additional assets' demand as well.

They are a team on a lot of no trade lists. Between the taxes, the language barrier, and the gigantic media spotlight, they have a hard time attracting free agents. A 25 year old with 7 more years of term offers a hell of a lot of certainty. They shouldn't be in win-now mode yet, but 7 more years fits their timeline well.

They have the cap space to bring in a guy like Kyrou for pure futures. Capfriendly shows $9M in space, but that is before you factor in Price's $10.5M being on LTIR. They'd still have about $11M to fill 2 roster spots after adding Kyrou.

Finally, Kyrou strikes me as a guy who could thrive under Martin St. Louis. Expectations should still be low for 2024/25 so growing pains as St. Louis shapes his game to fit his own vision can be tolerated and then there are 6 more years on the deal as the young D start dragging that roster up the standings.

I hadn't been considering it, but I actually think there is a deal to be made there that could make a lot of sense for both teams.

Edit: Assuming we love a player still on the board (or have enough guys in a 'love' tier that we'd be assured to get one no matter what) I think I'd pull the trigger for Montreal's 2024 1st and the conditional 1st they get from Calgary in the Monahan deal.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Yeah, it actually make a decent amount of sense when you think about it. If we want to trade Kyrou, we should do it before his NTC kicks in. For teams in Canada, it makes a lot of sense to trade for young players alreaady locked up before their NTC kicks in. Montreal needs offense, and they have a ton of picks.

 

[WeWentBlues]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

Keep the 5th pick and send Kaiden Guhle instead

 

[Blueston]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

yes. i'm not anti-kyrou, but if we deal him it is for young d to build around and 5 should be in position to draft one.

 

[TheOrganist]

That would open things up to a ton of cap manipulation and completely demolish the core cap calculus that a player's cap hit is the average annual value of his contract.

In win-now mode and want that 30 year old star UFA that would 'normally' be worth $10M per year on a 7 year deal? Give him a 6 year deal worth $4M per year and then promptly sign him to a 4 year extension worth $15M a year. The player gets paid $14M more than that $10M x 7 year deal and everyone knows that he's going to be too hurt to extend his career for the last few years of that $15M hit. Push all the cap trouble down the road, get a stud for a huge bargain and then LTIR him in his mid-late 30s to avoid the cap hit.

That's an extreme example, but allowing early extensions would inevitably lead to every team in the league doing it (the same way restructuring contracts in the NFL has become the complete norm for getting cap compliant). You would very quickly have a league with every team shifting cap dollars year-to-year to fit massive payrolls under the cap.

Eliminating the restrictions on extensions would break the salary cap.

That DOES seem a bit extreme....I think it's more like why you can't you re-sign your own guy in the last year of his contract after January 1 if all parties agree to a deal?...if I was a manager that would certainly help in the budgetary process leading into the offseason as well as enabling hockey ops to focus on other matters....the draft, trades, signings, etc instead of having to dick around with having to finalize contracts with your own guys. Unless I'm missing something...

 

[Brian39]

That DOES seem a bit extreme....I think it's more like why you can't you re-sign your own guy in the last year of his contract after January 1 if all parties agree to a deal?...if I was a manager that would certainly help in the budgetary process leading into the offseason as well as enabling hockey ops to focus on other matters....the draft, trades, signings, etc instead of having to dick around with having to finalize contracts with your own guys. Unless I'm missing something...

Buch isn't in the last year of his contract. He is in the 2nd to last year of his contract. July 1st will mark the flip to the next league year (2024/25), which is the final year of his deal. Starting that day, we can extend him since he will then be in the last year of his contract.

Like I said earlier, we can do all of the leg work to extend Buch right now. We could have already done it. An agreed-upon contract could be sitting in a drawer just waiting to be finalized on 7/1.

 

[LogosBlue]

Interesting thread just started on the main boards. Kyrou for the 5th overall. Would you do it?

Yes. Thats a good starting point.

 

[TheOrganist]

Buch isn't in the last year of his contract. He is in the 2nd to last year of his contract. July 1st will mark the flip to the next league year (2024/25), which is the final year of his deal. Starting that day, we can extend him since he will then be in the last year of his contract.

Like I said earlier, we can do all of the leg work to extend Buch right now. We could have already done it. An agreed-upon contract could be sitting in a drawer just waiting to be finalized on 7/1.

I need a drink...

 

[Xerloris]

Edit: I was typing this as you posted lol. I hadn't checked the main board. Did't realize that the original post was specifically about a Habs-Blues trade.

They currently have four D under the age of 23 in their organization who were 1st round selections (Reinbacher, Mailloux, Guhle, and Barron) on top of Lane Hutson who was a 2nd round pick. If their top couple forwards are off the board by the time they pick, I could see them being interested in trading the pick for a guy like Kyrou instead of selecting another D man to add to an already crowded young blueline.

Beyond their own pick, they have Winnipeg's 1st this year, a future 1st rounder from Calgary, a surplus 2nd rounder in 2025, plus a few surplus 3rds in the next couple drafts. They have the draft picks to meet my 'additional assets' demand as well.

They are a team on a lot of no trade lists. Between the taxes, the language barrier, and the gigantic media spotlight, they have a hard time attracting free agents. A 25 year old with 7 more years of term offers a hell of a lot of certainty. They shouldn't be in win-now mode yet, but 7 more years fits their timeline well.

They have the cap space to bring in a guy like Kyrou for pure futures. Capfriendly shows $9M in space, but that is before you factor in Price's $10.5M being on LTIR. They'd still have about $11M to fill 2 roster spots after adding Kyrou.

Finally, Kyrou strikes me as a guy who could thrive under Martin St. Louis. Expectations should still be low for 2024/25 so growing pains as St. Louis shapes his game to fit his own vision can be tolerated and then there are 6 more years on the deal as the young D start dragging that roster up the standings.

I hadn't been considering it, but I actually think there is a deal to be made there that could make a lot of sense for both teams.

Edit: Assuming we love a player still on the board (or have enough guys in a 'love' tier that we'd be assured to get one no matter what) I think I'd pull the trigger for Montreal's 2024 1st and the conditional 1st they get from Calgary in the Monahan deal.

I thought Price was traded? His contract at least.

Is there anyone in the upcoming draft that you would absolutely trade Kyrou for if they were available at #5? I understand you said Kyrou should get more than just a pick but outside of the projected #1 who would it take to be available for you to think it's a good trade? I have no knowledge of prospects.

 

[joe galiba]

yes. i'm not anti-kyrou, but if we deal him it is for young d to build around and 5 should be in position to draft one.

Except you are trading a known quantity for a maybe:
Cam Barker
Braydon Cobrun
Thomas Hickey
Karl Alzner
Bogosian
Luke Schenn
Ladislav Smid
Boris Valabik
Brian Lee
Luc Bourdon
Keaton Ellerby
OEL
Jared Cowen
Eric Gudbranson
Dylan McIlrath

Jack Johnson
Eric Johnson
Larsson
Hamilton
Brodin
Suter
Phaneuf

Doughty
Petro
Hedman

top 10 D picked over 10 years
3 guys who are absolute game changers
7 guys who are above average to very good
and a lot of guys who are JAG's or never made-its

seems like trading very good player for a lot of hope to me

 

[STL fan in MN]

Except you are trading a known quantity for a maybe:
Cam Barker
Braydon Cobrun
Thomas Hickey
Karl Alzner
Bogosian
Luke Schenn
Ladislav Smid
Boris Valabik
Brian Lee
Luc Bourdon
Keaton Ellerby
OEL
Jared Cowen
Eric Gudbranson
Dylan McIlrath

Jack Johnson
Eric Johnson
Larsson
Hamilton
Brodin
Suter
Phaneuf

Doughty
Petro
Hedman

top 10 D picked over 10 years
3 guys who are absolute game changers
7 guys who are above average to very good
and a lot of guys who are JAG's or never made-its

seems like trading very good player for a lot of hope to me

This is an excellent illustration that it’s typically much harder to accurately project 17-18 year old d-men than 17-18 year old forwards. It’s a harder position and they tend to peak later so they’re typically less finished projects than forwards. Takes more projection, so less certainty and more risk.

Thus at least partially why I have guys like Catton and Helenius ranked a little higher and some of the d-men ranked a little lower than “consensus”.

The 2008 draft was billed as a big D heavy draft with Doughty, Bogosian, Petro and L. Schenn billed as relatively equal. Obviously, two of them did much better than the other 2. And then Karlsson, Carlson and Josi were less heralded but developed way better than most expected. D are harder to project into the future.

 

[PocketNines]

It's certainly something to mull ... would I want the chance to pick my true #1 defenseman without which competition isn't even possible and the Blues have 0 of them and 0 prospects to get them any time soon ... or do I want to keep one of my least favorite players in the entire history of the franchise?

 

[Xerloris]

Doughty
Petro
Hedman

top 10 D picked over 10 years
3 guys who are absolute game changers

Putting Petro in the same category as Hedman and Doughty brings into question your entire post.

 

[The Note]

Putting Petro in the same category as Hedman and Doughty brings into question your entire post.

Jesus man get over it. You hyper focus on anything good said about Pietrangelo. We get it.

 

[Xerloris]

Jesus man get over it. You hyper focus on anything good said about Pietrangelo. We get it.

Oh I'm sorry. I'm just suppose to let clearly bullshit information slide by because you might get some feelings hurt? We get it, you pine over Petro, grow up.

 

[The Note]

Oh I'm sorry. I'm just suppose to let clearly bullshit information slide by because you might get some feelings hurt? We get it, you pine over Petro, grow up.

You seem to pine over Pietrangelo given the way you can’t let one single instance of his name popping up without chiming in on it. My feelings aren’t hurt because it happened years ago, most everyone seems moved on except you.

 

[mk80]

I'll echo the statements from others, that if your trading Kyrou for Pick #5, I wouldn't do it 1 for 1, there would also need to be at least another pick/prospect coming our way.

 

[Majorityof1]

I'll echo the statements from others, that if your trading Kyrou for Pick #5, I wouldn't do it 1 for 1, there would also need to be at least another pick/prospect coming our way.

I mean, you are either going to do the deal or not. To quibble over small potato adds is silly. You don't decide to buy a $50,000 car because they threw in $100 floor mats. You were either going to buy the car or not. You negotiate for every little extra you can get, cause why not. But in the end, if you want the car, you buy the car. If we want a player at 5OA, the extras are meaningless at the end of the day.

Not to call you out specifically, or even people in this trade. Its just something I see on this forum a lot. People want to feel like they won a trade. But those adds are nice, but shouldn't ever be deal breakers.