Blues Trade Proposals 2020-21
- Thread starter EastonBlues22
- Start date
- Status
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
Doesn't matter. Expansion requires we expose 1 dman who played 40 games in 2020-21 or 70 games between 2019-21 and is signed through the 2021-22 season.
Bortz played 42 games this past year, if he plays 28 games this year he satisfies the defence exposure requirements.
So a player that doesn't meet the 40/70 rule doesn't get exposed. So in effect said player is "protected"? Or is the player still exposed and that 40/70 rule becomes meaningless once a team has 2 forwards and 1 defenseman that DO meet that requirement and are exposed?
Memento
Future Authoress.
I was thinking about a Dunn / Mittelstadt deal (I know someone on here, not sure whom they are, posted the idea first, but I like it a lot myself.) From what I've seen with Buffalo fans, they're fine with it as well.
Your thoughts?
Your thoughts?
I think you are trading a great asset for a bust.
- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,857
- 8,191
Truth. Dunn is a player who has developed a little more slowly than we had hoped, and who is currently blocked in their role and has two other prospects at their position pushing him for playing time. Mittelstadt is a player who hasn’t established himself as an NHL player and basically had the 2C position handed to him and couldn’t take it. They’ve both been in the league too long for draft pedigree to matter. I’m not suggesting that Mittelstadt won’t eventually become an NHL player, and he might very well blossom with a change of scenery. But at the moment there’s a significant difference in their value. Buffalo would have to add to balance a deal involving these two, and I feel like there are more useful players we should target if we trade Dunn.
stl76
No. 5 in your programs, No. 1 in your hearts
- Jul 2, 2015
- 9,043
- 8,322
Exactly. There is a reason that Buffalo fans are open to trading a recent #8 overall pick...
I trust our talent evaluation on an organizational/developmental level. I wouldn't do it, but if Blues' brass gave a green light, I'd trust them.
I think turning Dunn into a young forward to add to the next core makes too much sense not to try, but there's no need to trade him for magic beans IMO.
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
My understanding is that Seattle is being held to the same standard Vegas was. Each team was required to make available 2F, 1D and 1 G under contract for the next season at a minimum. In theory, many more players than the specified 4 here will be exposed, but those are a minimum requirement.
However, those players who were injured (non career threatening), RFAs or pending UFAs were still eligible to be taken - so long as they were not protected, or exempt as prospects not having played 2 eligible full pro seasons.
I can't remember where I'd discussed it with another HFBlues user, but I believe Tarasenko is eligible to be selected if not protected under the expansion rules as written. Despite the fact that he will most likely not have played 70 games between 2019-21 due to injury - because the rules don't specify players not meeting the criteria are exempt.
"* Vegas must select the following number of players at each position: 14 forwards, nine defensemen and three goaltenders. * Vegas must select a minimum of 20 players who are under contract for the 2017-18 season."
The latter. The 40/70 requires team to expose a player meeting that criteria. Players who don’t but have 3 pro seasons still eligible to get picked if not protected.
We could add about $60 to pay for a copy of NHL21, and boom: Jack Quinn.
Joel Armia has been mentioned on the trade boards. I doubt Montreal actually trades him, but he would be a great addition to our RW. What do you think he might cost?
DatDude44
Hmmmm?
- Feb 23, 2012
- 6,146
- 2,905
Probly a 2nd?
This year he really impressed me for the first time, he’s like a Finnish Alex Tuch stylistically with size, a powerful stride and some hands and scoring ability and kills penalties
I have no interest in Armia - 27 years old, career 30-35 point player. He is a nice middle six forward, but we seem to have those in spades. I would rather, if we are bringing in someone, go after someone with more offensive pop and would fit into the top 6 and on the PP, vs a guy who is more of what we already have.
CaliforniaBlues310
Registered User
I wouldn’t mind Granlund on a one year prove-it deal. He wasn’t a fit in Nashville, but he was very solid as a winger in Minnesota. I think him on a line with any of ROR/Thomas/Schenn would be good for him.
Also, it might be good for Mikkola and Husso to have a veteran Finn on the team to show them what it’s like to be an NHL’er. I know Vladi has taken Barbie and Kostin under his wing, so maybe that’s something Army would look at.
Also, it might be good for Mikkola and Husso to have a veteran Finn on the team to show them what it’s like to be an NHL’er. I know Vladi has taken Barbie and Kostin under his wing, so maybe that’s something Army would look at.
Last edited:
I would be cool with Granlund 1 year for 2.5 to 3M max. Not for the 6+ he made last year. The only one I would pay 6M for is Hoffman. But from what others are saying we could probably only spend 2 or 3M?
- Feb 12, 2008
- 19,343
- 8,876
I haven’t seen a ton of Hoffman, but does his defensive game and toughness fit this team?
I am not sure if that matters. The organization seems to be getting away from size and defensive play and leaning towards offensively minded players. I am not thrilled with this trend personally, but I seem to be in the minority. It is was it is. As for Hoffman, from what I have seen (limited) and read (extensively), he doesn't really have a defensive game.
How? Because we let Pietrangelo walk and signed Krug instead?
Nothing else suggests our identity has changed at all.
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
I don't particularly think you can use those to justify much Simon... This same organization drafted Tarasenko and Dunn - who were/are widely regarded as being defensively deficient, these were both pieces in place prior to the off-season.
Tarasenko's game has grown, there's no reason to discount Faulk or Perunovich being consummate pros and molding their game to fit the style Berube wants. There were certainly flashes from Faulk during our lackluster performance in the return to play format. God knows that Faulk playing his offside looked awful most of last season, I'm just hoping he looks better when playing the right side exclusively.
Krug is certainly a downgrade from Petro’s 2-way game, but it seems obvious that DA wasn't prepared to try to fill the defence out with internal options after Petro left. I'm not sure if speaks to a change in organizational thought, or more of a BPA philosophy - Krug was the BPA in free agency (excluding Petro), for a team that isn't in a position to embrace a retool or rebuild right now.
Brockon
Cautiously optimistic realist when caffeinated.
More to your previous point @simon IC I think management is accepting that we don't have the personel available to play that grinding, shutdown defensive style we won the cup with.
I think they're trying to retool on the fly to make the best of the ROR, Schenn, Faulk, Tarasenko, Perron and Parayko contracts over the next 2-3 years. Hoping they can mold the team into something else that will be successful for another deep run or two.
We don't have the horses to fight fire with fire vs EDM, TBL, TOR, COL, FLA or a healthy BOS team... But, I think management is hoping we can be middle of the pack and get hot with some growth from Thomas, Kyrou and maybe a forward addition (if we know Steen is truly out for the season).
I don't think this hybrid approach is going to pay off, unless Binnington regains his 2018-19 form. Without a solid backend, we're not going anywhere in the playoffs, even if we're suddenly scoring in the top 5 teams of the league. I don't see our current dmen personel keeping us out of the 12-22 GA ranks.
I think they're trying to retool on the fly to make the best of the ROR, Schenn, Faulk, Tarasenko, Perron and Parayko contracts over the next 2-3 years. Hoping they can mold the team into something else that will be successful for another deep run or two.
We don't have the horses to fight fire with fire vs EDM, TBL, TOR, COL, FLA or a healthy BOS team... But, I think management is hoping we can be middle of the pack and get hot with some growth from Thomas, Kyrou and maybe a forward addition (if we know Steen is truly out for the season).
I don't think this hybrid approach is going to pay off, unless Binnington regains his 2018-19 form. Without a solid backend, we're not going anywhere in the playoffs, even if we're suddenly scoring in the top 5 teams of the league. I don't see our current dmen personel keeping us out of the 12-22 GA ranks.
Good post, and you make good points, especially regarding Dunn and Tarasenko. I have to nit-pick the Faulk suggestion, though. I have read other posts that suggest Faulk will "revert" to a two-way game when playing exclusively on RD. (I am not suggesting you said that). The issue I have with that narrative is that Faulk never played a two-way game in Carolina. He has always been an offensive PP specialist that likes to drive the play and defend by aggressively challenging the puck carrier. I am not buying that he is suddenly going to change his game at the age of 28 to fit Berube's style. I am certain he will have a better season next year with more responsibilities and ice time, but I am not expecting a two-way player. I am not saying he won't be useful, but he is what he is at this point. I am predicting 30+ pts, and he may even approach"average" level defensively, with the right partner.
- Status
