I think he's quite bad and makes a lot of money.What you guys think of Marc-Édouard Vlasic?
I think he's quite bad and makes a lot of money.What you guys think of Marc-Édouard Vlasic?
I did like Vlasic when he was younger and thought be would be a good partner for Petro. But now he is meh and makes a lot of money.What you guys think of Marc-Édouard Vlasic?
Can't do that contract, he's already 33.
What you guys think of Marc-Édouard Vlasic?
I, begrudgingly, give you my likeSounds like a bit of a pickle if you ask me.
He was one of my all-time favorite defenseman, a few years ago. One of the best defensive defensemen in the League. Olympic Gold Medalist, two time WC gold medals. Unfortunately, he has lost a step and his contract is atrocious,What you guys think of Marc-Édouard Vlasic?
Faulk bad? At least Vlasic can play top2.I think he's quite bad and makes a lot of money.
Generally a NMC stays after a trade unless a player is traded before it kicks in(like Subban getting moved from Montreal to Nashville)Actually, now I am really thinking about Faulk for Vlasic. It gives us more balance with Vlasic being a lefty, and I honestly think that a declining 33 yr old Vlasic is a better all-around defenseman than Justin Faulk. Perhaps if San Jose retains a bit? I am not sure about their cap situation. We could always buy Vlasic out in a year or two, or maybe expose him to Seattle? A trade like this still doesn't solve the situation regarding Pietrangelo, but we can still work on that. (Edit) He has an NMC, so we would have to protect him. Can the Blues choose not to honour the NMC if we trade for him?
Guy in steep decline paid $7 mil until he’s 39 versus guy who is underperforming but still in his prime paid at $6.5 until he’s 35. How is this a debate?
I know most people won't like it but what kind of young cost-controlled asset could a Schwartz and Dunn package bring us? I feel like we will have to lose a core piece going forward with upcoming raises and Schwartz seems like the most likely. The roster still looks really solid and you could be able to give Kostin a shot as well.
What about moving tarasenko instead?
That would be a tough decision between giving up one of the two of them, but I'm hoping that Kostin will eventually become a more valuable than both. Still, Sanford was playing really well after starting to use his body and play a more physical game during that last weeks of the season. And, although Blais has plateaued some, he's still a valuable cog in the machine. I guess the choice would have to depend most upon how both of them play during the playoffs. My hope is that they both play very well, but Sanford is chosen to be kept (in that scenario) because, although both are effective in all areas of the ice when they are "on their game", Sanford produces significantly more scoring points. But, I'll be very curious how everyone will play, with so little preparation before the first series starts.I'd hold off on trading Faulk if it simply becomes a pass-the-trash exercise where we take back someone else's garbage contract. San Jose is probably the one team even more ill-suited to acquire Faulk than STL, with having $20M tied up between Karlsson & Burns on the RHD for the next century or so. I think Army is going to end up sacrificing Blais or Sanford in order to get Seattle to take Faulk...then we'll see Kostin and Kyrou get more ice-time as a result.
Trading your best offensive player -and one of the best goal scorers in the league- isn't something contending teams do. The window to win relies heavily on having Tarasenko and ROR only taking up a combined $15 million of cap over the next 3 years. There should be many options explored before trading Tarasenko is on the table (not to mention he has NTC that kicked in this year and for the remainder of his deal).What about moving tarasenko instead?
...or you think you've got enough depth/offense to score goals without 91. They did just win the West with him sidelined for the bulk of the season. If you can restock with next-generation talent and extend the Cup-window, it's worth considering.The only reason you move Tarasenko is if there is genuine belief that his shoulder will lead to a decline.
Even with a strong regular season, I wouldn't say the Blues should be satisfied with their offense. They were 11th in total GF, but were middle of the pack (tied with EDM at 14th in GF/PG). That's with a lot going right -- the 3rd best PP in the league and multiple guys topping or near career highs; Sanford and Petro both set new highs while Parayko (tied) Schenn, Perron (both 3 off career highs) all were a good game or two away from setting new highs. Even last year, they only scored 5 more goals than they allowed in the postseason and 11 of their 16 wins were by 1 goal. I know the Blues aren't designed to be some high flying offense, but also I don't think they're in any position to subtract a guy who has been pretty much a lock for 30+ goals and 65+ points for 5 years and has scored 33 goals in 70 postseason games....or you think you've got enough depth/offense to score goals without 91. They did just win the West with him sidelined for the bulk of the season. If you can restock with next-generation talent and extend the Cup-window, it's worth considering.