credit where credit is due

[Majorityof1]

Armstrong haters of the world - REPENT.

He's always been the same guy who made all these great moves yesterday. It took time to get into this position to deal from.

The Cup will come here thanks to Tom Stillman and Doug Armstrong.

I hope there is a forgotten sarcasm emoticon or smiley here. I am a big fan of the draft, but it does not redeem DA or give us the inside track to the cup. I really appreciated it for two reasons: (a) we came out ahead in a series of moves that involved trades and (b) multiple moves seemed to work in concert toward an actual beneficial plan. Neither of those have happened for a long time under Army. So some of the excitement for me came from the fact that he didn't screw up like I expected. But he still had to dig himself out from his own troubles, namely the lack of cap space due to all the overpriced 3rd liners and lack of top 6 RW/Cs. Had we better utilized the assets he had previously squandered (Oshie, Shatty) and had he not signed Lehtera and Berglund to too big/long contracts, we wouldn't have need to make the moves we made, and we legitimately would be a favorite. Instead, we still need a move or two to get there.

 

[Celtic Note]

I hope there is a forgotten sarcasm emoticon or smiley here. I am a big fan of the draft, but it does not redeem DA or give us the inside track to the cup. I really appreciated it for two reasons: (a) we came out ahead in a series of moves that involved trades and (b) multiple moves seemed to work in concert toward an actual beneficial plan. Neither of those have happened for a long time under Army. So some of the excitement for me came from the fact that he didn't screw up like I expected. But he still had to dig himself out from his own troubles, namely the lack of cap space due to all the overpriced 3rd liners and lack of top 6 RW/Cs. Had we better utilized the assets he had previously squandered (Oshie, Shatty) and had he not signed Lehtera and Berglund to too big/long contracts, we wouldn't have need to make the moves we made, and we legitimately would be a favorite. Instead, we still need a move or two to get there.

Excellent summary of the points of promise and reasons for excitement, the history of failures and the future work to be done.

 

[simon IC]

I hope there is a forgotten sarcasm emoticon or smiley here. I am a big fan of the draft, but it does not redeem DA or give us the inside track to the cup. I really appreciated it for two reasons: (a) we came out ahead in a series of moves that involved trades and (b) multiple moves seemed to work in concert toward an actual beneficial plan. Neither of those have happened for a long time under Army. So some of the excitement for me came from the fact that he didn't screw up like I expected. But he still had to dig himself out from his own troubles, namely the lack of cap space due to all the overpriced 3rd liners and lack of top 6 RW/Cs. Had we better utilized the assets he had previously squandered (Oshie, Shatty) and had he not signed Lehtera and Berglund to too big/long contracts, we wouldn't have need to make the moves we made, and we legitimately would be a favorite. Instead, we still need a move or two to get there.

Well said. I completely agree.

 

[Dbrownss]

I liked that this plan came together. He could have left Reaves exposed only for us to watch him go to Pittsburg. In a week he made a calculated risk to alleviate some cap space at the very minimum but was able to replace Lehtera with Schenn and still come out with 2 1st round picks and a NHL ready prospect

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I wonder whether Rutherford was trying to have Vegas pick Reaves and trade for him, and Armstrong got wind of it. Either way, he knew Reaves' value well enough to make the right choice on who to protect.

 

[execwrite]

I hope there is a forgotten sarcasm emoticon or smiley here. I am a big fan of the draft, but it does not redeem DA or give us the inside track to the cup. I really appreciated it for two reasons: (a) we came out ahead in a series of moves that involved trades and (b) multiple moves seemed to work in concert toward an actual beneficial plan. Neither of those have happened for a long time under Army. So some of the excitement for me came from the fact that he didn't screw up like I expected. But he still had to dig himself out from his own troubles, namely the lack of cap space due to all the overpriced 3rd liners and lack of top 6 RW/Cs. Had we better utilized the assets he had previously squandered (Oshie, Shatty) and had he not signed Lehtera and Berglund to too big/long contracts, we wouldn't have need to make the moves we made, and we legitimately would be a favorite. Instead, we still need a move or two to get there.

Nope - no sarcasm. I meant what I said. Just my opinion. Not every move has been perfect but Armstrong gets bashed way too much here. He's a top Five GM and has been so for years.

 

[Celtic Note]

I wonder whether Rutherford was trying to have Vegas pick Reaves and trade for him, and Armstrong got wind of it. Either way, he knew Reaves' value well enough to make the right choice on who to protect.

It certainly turned out to be a good choice protecting Reaves.

 

[carter333167]

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

 

[TheDizee]

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

hell no

we replaced lehteras dead weight with a player who can hit 60 points.

 

[Edgar Carrow]

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

Had the Schenn trade never happened, I'd be thrilled to get another 1st. We could have taken Kostin at 27 then Timmins/Lind/Hague/Ikonen at 31.

Despite how cool that would've been, I prefer the Schenn trade.

 

[Evocable Manager]

I gave DA a lot of **** for protecting Reaves. Thankfully, it was a lot smarter of a move than I anticipated. Full marks to DA on that.

However in my defense, nobody ever thought Reaves would return that value in a trade. Not even Reaves himself lol.

 

[Bluesguru]

No doubt, I've always said I'll give Armstrong credit if he deserves it, and I give him credit for the definitive action he took yesterday. Even if the Kostin pick turns out to be a bust, and it might, it shouldn't take away the luster of what he did yesterday. The Blues made things happen, and it was long overdue.

 

[DatDude44]

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

shedding lehtera was worth giving up the 27th....now we bring in a 55-60 pt hard nosed all around top 6 fwd who can play all 3 positions on a contract relatively the same as lehteras....yeah i'm ok giving up next years non top 10 1st for that. Especially since we then got rid of a 4th liner and drafted Kostin, makes losing next years 1st even easier.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

How does the alternate scenario help the present window? The team would have still needed to:
1) part with Lehtera
2) find RW/C for the top6

So likely would wind up trying to deal futures for those deals.

I feel like there is one more move. Not sure if it will happen this summer or after training camp.

 

[BlueDream]

I liked that this plan came together. He could have left Reaves exposed only for us to watch him go to Pittsburg. In a week he made a calculated risk to alleviate some cap space at the very minimum but was able to replace Lehtera with Schenn and still come out with 2 1st round picks and a NHL ready prospect

Can you imagine this board if Vegas had drafted Reaves and then traded him for a 1st round pick? Oh my god, the entertainment of seeing Armstrong's name lit on fire might have been worth it.

The Schenn trade was pricey and I hate losing the 2018 first but I understand and support it, particularly b.c of the Pens trade.

Interesting question:

Would anyone just prefer that we have taken the Pens deal without the Philly deal?

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, our 27th pick and our 2018 pick and Lehtera

vs

1. Klostin, Sundkvist, Schenn

I think the latter move is the hybrid for now and the future whereas the former is all future.

I honestly don't think either trade happens without the other.

And I would say no to your question easily anyways.

 

[Dbrownss]

Can you imagine this board if Vegas had drafted Reaves and then traded him for a 1st round pick? Oh my god, the entertainment of seeing Armstrong's name lit on fire might have been worth it.


I honestly don't think either trade happens without the other.

And I would say no to your question easily anyways.

Yea, it would have been comical. From Army's comments, he seemed aware of the situation. Also from Perrons comments...he seemed to be on the outs when Sobokta returned and his playoff performance just made it worse. So unless Vegas flips Perron for some great package, it was a great move.

I think Army admitted the deals were tied together. They felt comfortable dealing the 2 first because we had the 31st waiting for us.

 

[Got One Cup]

I seem to be the minority here. Like the Reaves deal even though I'll miss watching him that was good value. I don't see how trading 2 1st rounders and not filling your biggest need in a 1st or 2nd line center is good. What are we going to do when Stastny goes ufa? Are Bergy and sobotka going to fill those spots? I don't think we have a prospect that can grow fast enough to fill in there. Maybe he has another deal or something up his sleeve but until we get a center better than Stastny I dont see us being contenders.

 

[simon IC]

I seem to be the minority here. Like the Reaves deal even though I'll miss watching him that was good value. I don't see how trading 2 1st rounders and not filling your biggest need in a 1st or 2nd line center is good. What are we going to do when Stastny goes ufa? Are Bergy and sobotka going to fill those spots? I don't think we have a prospect that can grow fast enough to fill in there. Maybe he has another deal or something up his sleeve but until we get a center better than Stastny I dont see us being contenders.

As usual, I'm on the fence about this one. I don't think the Schenn trade was a bad one, but neither am I over the moon about it. Schenn certainly is a top 6 forward, and his addition absolutely makes us a better team. He is, however, not the top C we have been looking for. In fact he is not a C at all. According to what I have read and observed, he is a tough as nails PP specialist who thrives in high traffic, (esp.net front)
areas. We can absolutely use that! His skating is decent, but his defensive play is maybe below average, largely because he doesn't anticipate the play well. He is not particularly good on the dot. We certainly overpaid for him with 2 1sts, but recouping another 1st helped that, and most importantly, we got rid of Lehtera. I hope we can get back in to the 1st round in 2018 via trade, as it is apparently a deep draft. I don't think we are contender status yet, but we are better. I would say Armstrong basically dug himself out of a hole that he dug himself.

 

[Alklha]

I wonder whether Rutherford was trying to have Vegas pick Reaves and trade for him, and Armstrong got wind of it. Either way, he knew Reaves' value well enough to make the right choice on who to protect.

I doubt that Pittsburgh's interest appeared from nowhere, I suspect they asked about him at the deadline when we moved Shattenkirk. JR had long been saying that we'd protect Reaves, and I doubt that Rutherford was talking trade during their Cup run.

The other aspect is that it couldn't happen before the expansion draft. If you made an agreement with Vegas, which Pittsburgh did, then McPhee made you agree that you wouldn't add to your roster before expansion. It prevented a team making an agreement then buying up players that would have been unprotected and it hurting the value Vegas got in the expansion draft.

 

[Xerloris]

I'm going to miss Reaves but I am really excited about Schenn and Kostin.

 

[TK 421]

I seem to be the minority here. Like the Reaves deal even though I'll miss watching him that was good value. I don't see how trading 2 1st rounders and not filling your biggest need in a 1st or 2nd line center is good. What are we going to do when Stastny goes ufa? Are Bergy and sobotka going to fill those spots? I don't think we have a prospect that can grow fast enough to fill in there. Maybe he has another deal or something up his sleeve but until we get a center better than St3astny I dont see us being contenders.

From the interviews I've seen with Doug Armstrong it seems pretty clear to me that he's taking a shotgun approach hoping one of our prospects step into a center position soon. He said they'll try Schenn at center in camp, he's said Thompson is a guy they want transitioning to center, he's mentioned Sandford as a possibility etc. Right or wrong this seems to be his approach and I've seen him mention wanting size at the position multiple times over the course of several interviews.

I view next year's centers being Stastny, Sobotka, Barbashev and Brodziak. When Sobotka came back for the PO's they said they didn't want to throw him back into the center position too quickly after a 2 year NHL absence, but with his proficiency on the dot it makes sense to put him there full time for the coming season. Beyond next year our long term situation should be a lot more defined when we have a clearer idea of how Sandford and Thompson factor in and of course Thomas is now added to that mix long term.

 

[Thallis]

Can you imagine this board if Vegas had drafted Reaves and then traded him for a 1st round pick? Oh my god, the entertainment of seeing Armstrong's name lit on fire might have been worth it.


I honestly don't think either trade happens without the other.

And I would say no to your question easily anyways.

Yeah there's some definite crow to be eaten from all of the "keep Perron because he has trade value and Reaves doesn't" posts. I'll admit I agreed with that line of thinking.

 

[trevorftw]

Sad to see Reaves go, but I support both of these trades.

I read this TSN article, and man, what's the deal? It seems pretty misinformed.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-blues-busy-dealing-at-draft-1.788038

 

[TheDizee]

Sad to see Reaves go, but I support both of these trades.

I read this TSN article, and man, what's the deal? It seems pretty misinformed.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-blues-busy-dealing-at-draft-1.788038

article is garbage. i do agree that we need more offensive piece though.

 

[Edgar Carrow]

Sad to see Reaves go, but I support both of these trades.

I read this TSN article, and man, what's the deal? It seems pretty misinformed.

http://www.tsn.ca/statistically-speaking-blues-busy-dealing-at-draft-1.788038

I'm not sure a single person who regularly watches the Blues would say they are worse off now.