GDT: Blues @ Kraken| Somehow Only the 2nd Game| 9pm, TNT

[Allens Five Hole]

Yea, Mikkola sucked. But while he was doing bad things, he also did a few good things, too. Those don't balance out, but Bortuzzo might as well have not been on the ice. Maybe that's splitting hairs, but I think the coaching staff thought the same because (without checking a shift chart) it looked like they had just about every other defenseman fill in for Bortuzzo on that pairing in the third period, but they continued to put Mikkola out there.

Yeah Borts got about 3 minutes less TOI than Mikkola which I would imagine coincides with what you saw in the 3rd.

 

[PocketNines]

I don't think Leivo will see much more ice time after that showing, either.

If you're going to be the first to wear 17 in Blue and it's the first game they play the old 17, you have to look like you at least belong in the NHL, and he did not.

 

[BlueOil]

One of my concerns about Kyrou is while his skills are worth 65 million dollars, that still doesn't buy you versatility in your lineup. He is good with Thomas, but most are going to be good with an elite passer. The focus should be on pushing Kyrou to grow his game and I agree about keeping him with ROR longer, as out of sync as they look now.

i put that on kyrou more than orielly too, he's the one who often seems to be doing his own thing instead of meshing with his line

 

[mk80]

Surprised Tarasenko didn’t shoot that but can’t argue with the results.

Schwartz should be credited for drawing up the play

 

[Chojin]

Don't remember that at all. Maybe there were a few people who claimed that, but the majority knows Petro is the better overall player. In fact, reading through this GDT I found myself disagreeing a few of your posts. Our defense contracts aren't "comically bad." Having 3 guys with different skill sets who can play 20+ mins a night at $6.5 million isn't bad at all. Have you seen some of the contracts being given out to d-men lately?

I know it's easy to pile on after a bad game, but some of the takes in this thread are pretty extreme I'd say. If these things become a trend then it's time to worry, but I'll allow guys to have a bit of rust at the start of the season.

Nice to see Faulk pick up where he left off. He was our team MVP last year in my opinion and impacts the game in so many ways. Very fun player to watch and root for.

A top 4 of Parayko, Leddy, Faulk, and Krug, in a vacuum, is pretty decent. Those guys, at an average of just over 30 year old, signed for at least 4 more years with trade protection for $23.5m is indefensible. It already cost us Perron, and it's going to cost us a whole lot more before they're done.

 

[Blueston]

A top 4 of Parayko, Leddy, Faulk, and Krug, in a vacuum, is pretty decent. Those guys, at an average of just over 30 year old, signed for at least 4 more years with trade protection for $23.5m is indefensible. It already cost us Perron, and it's going to cost us a whole lot more before they're done.

It’s the going rate. I’m not going to say they will all be worth in it 3-5 years, but they absolutely are right now. And if we want to contend you need that on D.

Perron was great Blue and had great shot, but his game tailed off last year or so. Would much rather have Leddy. Buchy and Kyrou and Saad and tank are strong top 4 wing set (when healthy); there was no need for Perron.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

A top 4 of Parayko, Leddy, Faulk, and Krug, in a vacuum, is pretty decent. Those guys, at an average of just over 30 year old, signed for at least 4 more years with trade protection for $23.5m is indefensible. It already cost us Perron, and it's going to cost us a whole lot more before they're done.

 

[Chojin]

It’s the going rate. I’m not going to say they will all be worth in it 3-5 years, but they absolutely are right now. And if we want to contend you need that on D.

Is it? Because I think we have the third most expensive defense in the league. Other teams do more for a lot less.

 

[Blueston]

Is it? Because I think we have the third most expensive defense in the league. Other teams do more for a lot less.

None of our guys are on ELC so you gotta pay.

 

[Chojin]

None of our guys are on ELC so you gotta pay.

And we did. I'm saying it wasn't worth it.

 

[Blueston]

And we did. I'm saying it wasn't worth it.

Who is overpaid?

 

[Majorityof1]

None of our guys are on ELC so you gotta pay.

Bortuzzo is cheaper than some ELCs as he has no bonuses and Mikkola isn't too much more than an ELC with bonuses. Rosen is also cheaper than a lot of ELCs (I am not sure if the stats for 3rd most expensive D include Rosen or Scandella). Its not a lack of cheap contracts that is at issue. Its having 3 guys paid like a #2 D.

 

[Blueston]

Bortuzzo is cheaper than some ELCs as he has no bonuses and Mikkola isn't too much more than an ELC with bonuses. Rosen is also cheaper than a lot of ELCs (I am not sure if the stats for 3rd most expensive D include Rosen or Scandella). Its not a lack of cheap contracts that is at issue. Its having 3 guys paid like a #2 D.

I meant that none of our top 4 are elc. So all are being paid market rate. But we have a 1 and 2 2s paid like a 2, so that ain’t cheap.

 

[Chojin]

Who is overpaid?

Right now? Probably just Leddy. A few years from now? All of them, by a lot.

 

[Blueston]

Right now? Probably just Leddy. A few years from now? All of them, by a lot.

I don’t think Leddy is overpaid. Not fir his role and what he brings. In a few years I couid see some of them looking ugly.

 

[Majorityof1]

I meant that none of our top 4 are elc. So all are being paid market rate. But we have a 1 and 2 2s paid like a 2, so that ain’t cheap.

How many ELC players are in the top 4 on contenders? I wouldn't think that many outside of the rare elite talent.

 

[Chojin]

I meant that none of our top 4 are elc. So all are being paid market rate. But we have a 1 and 2 2s paid like a 2, so that ain’t cheap.

Just because they're being paid market rate doesn't mean it's good value or a smart investment.

 

[Blueston]

How many ELC players are in the top 4 on contenders? I wouldn't think that many outside of the rare elite talent.

Byram , Miller, likely others. Some obj bridge deals. That is downside to not developing our own.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Just because they're being paid market rate doesn't mean it's good value or a smart investment.

Downside of being a playoff contender for the past 12 years. If we don't sign those deals we are likely to be a bottomdweller or close to becoming one.

 

[Blueston]

Just because they're being paid market rate doesn't mean it's good value or a smart investment.

Would you rather our defense be bad? Cost of doing business. We need each of them.

 

[Majorityof1]

I meant that none of our top 4 are elc. So all are being paid market rate. But we have a 1 and 2 2s paid like a 2, so that ain’t cheap.

How many ELC players are in the top 4 on contenders? I wouldn't think that many outside of the rare elite talent.

I was curious so I checked during commercials. Here all all the teams with an ELC in their top 4 (by ATOI)

-Montreal has half their D on ELC but they are tanking.
-Edmonton has Bouchard as 4th in ATOI, but even if they paid him an extra $4M, we'd still be paying more.
-Colorado has Byram, but they actually spend more than we do as they "waste" those saving on Erik Johnson as their #6 D
-Rangers have Miller, and their 5 and 6 on ELCs. That allows them to sneak under us by a few million. But they also have a Norris winner, which is far better than anyone we have. They are the only team that pays less that would be more if they had to negotiate their ELC Guy.
-Ottawa has Sanderson 4th, but like Edmonton, they could be paying a lot more than Leddy and still be cheaper than us.
- Detroit has Seider, but they are not a contender and could pay him an extra $12M and still be cheaper than our D.
-Anaheim has Drysdale. Give him an extra $5M and they are still cheaper than we are.
-Arizona has Moser as their #1, but like Montreal, they are tanking.
-Buffalo has Power, but they are $14M less on D than we are, so give him a raise and we are still more expensive.
-There were only a couple other team that had ELCs on their NHL D at all as #5 or 6.

I guess my point is that we spend a lot on D for a team with no true #1 (#$@% you, Faulk is not a #1). We decided to pay a premium for 4 #2-3 guys, rather than pay the premium for the top pair and fill it out with cheap talent. Make of that what you will. I think it puts us in a tough position. Others think it gives us good D depth. Time will tell.

 

[Blueston]

I was curious so I checked during commercials. Here all all the teams with an ELC in their top 4 (by ATOI)

-Montreal has half their D on ELC but they are tanking.
-Edmonton has Bouchard as 4th in ATOI, but even if they paid him an extra $4M, we'd still be paying more.
-Colorado has Byram, but they actually spend more than we do as they "waste" those saving on Erik Johnson as their #6 D
-Rangers have Miller, and their 5 and 6 on ELCs. That allows them to sneak under us by a few million. But they also have a Norris winner, which is far better than anyone we have. They are the only team that pays less that would be more if they had to negotiate their ELC Guy.
-Ottawa has Sanderson 4th, but like Edmonton, they could be paying a lot more than Leddy and still be cheaper than us.
- Detroit has Seider, but they are not a contender and could pay him an extra $12M and still be cheaper than our D.
-Anaheim has Drysdale. Give him an extra $5M and they are still cheaper than we are.
-Arizona has Moser as their #1, but like Montreal, they are tanking.
-Buffalo has Power, but they are $14M less on D than we are, so give him a raise and we are still more expensive.
-There were only a couple other team that had ELCs on their NHL D at all as #5 or 6.

I guess my point is that we spend a lot on D for a team with no true #1 (#$@% you, Faulk is not a #1). We decided to pay a premium for 4 #2-3 guys, rather than pay the premium for the top pair and fill it out with cheap talent. Make of that what you will. I think it puts us in a tough position. Others think it gives us good D depth. Time will tell.

Unless you think there are only a handful of #1s, Faulk is #1. He’s one of tip 20 d in league.

 

[Majorityof1]

Unless you think there are only a handful of #1s, Faulk is #1. He’s one of tip 20 d in league.

No he's not. He excels at holding the blue line but otherwise isn't great defensively. Offensively he has broken 40 points once and never 50 points. There may be close to 20 D who are better offensively and defensively and a ton who are better defensively and close offensively.

 

[Blueston]

No he's not. He excels at holding the blue line but otherwise isn't great defensively. Offensively he has broken 40 points once and never 50 points. There may be close to 20 D who are better offensively and defensively and a ton who are better defensively and close offensively.

It’s the totality. He’s very good defending 1 on 1. He’s great in transition too. Smart. He can do anything at high level.

 

[Chojin]

Would you rather our defense be bad? Cost of doing business. We need each of them.

I would, actually. If you have the mortgage the future just to tread water, then you're just wasting time.