Doug Armstrong

[Reality Czech]

This must be how Army feels right now:

Nah, but it does describe about half of this forum.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Did I understand this correctly. Was Maroon under Blues team when this crying happened, he didnt get contract in Blues? Really sad if that is case. Just shows what Army is.

You mean the whole “Maroon will block prospects from playing” nonsense? You need heart and soul guys in the locker room who can move the group emotionally and help them fight through those battles and the Bolts obviously value Maroon like that.

If a guy like Maroon who prolly plays 5-10 mins a night is ‘blocking’ prospects, either you got trash for prospects or your HC needs to be fired.

Guys like Maroon keep a locker room level headed and right. You can’t put a price or metric on that.

BTW: Pat’s now a BACK to BACK to BACK Cup Champ. Feel free to hate, the tears fill up and nourish my soul lol.

Yeah his stats don’t speak volumes of himself in Tampa or the STL but his teammates, coaches, GM and owner does and that’s the ONLY stat you need.

Hell, Oiler fans WANT him back.

 

[Reality Czech]

You mean the whole “Maroon will block prospects from playing” nonsense? You need heart and soul guys in the locker room who can move the group emotionally and help them fight through those battles and the Bolts obviously value Maroon like that.

If a guy like Maroon who prolly plays 5-10 mins a night is ‘blocking’ prospects, either you got trash for prospects or your HC needs to be fired.

Guys like Maroon keep a locker room level headed and right. You can’t put a price or metric on that.

BTW: Pat’s now a BACK to BACK to BACK Cup Champ. Feel free to hate, the tears fill up and nourish my soul lol.

Yeah his stats don’t speak volumes of himself in Tampa or the STL but his teammates, coaches, GM and owner does and that’s the ONLY stat you need.

Hell, Oiler fans WANT him back.

Well said, every teammate of Maroon's couldn't speak more highly of the guy. I've listened to enough podcasts with current and ex NHLers to know that team chemisty is so important, and you need guys to pick the team up during tough times. Plus they know that he's got their back on the ice. Guys like Maroon fire up their teammates and you need character guys around to have a successful team atmosphere.

Hell, Jon Cooper was just on Spittin' Chiclets talking about what a great influence Maroon is (and he's known Pat since his NAHL days in 2006-7 when Cooper coached the STL Bandits). So, I'm gonna take the two-time Cup winning coach at his word.

The only disappointing thing about Maroon is that the Blues couldn't find the cash or roster spot to keep the lovable local boy in town, not that Maroon regrets signing with Tampa.

I've only got a couple people on ignore, so I don't know who you're replying to but I can probably imagine who it is.

 

[Brian39]

You mean the whole “Maroon will block prospects from playing” nonsense? You need heart and soul guys in the locker room who can move the group emotionally and help them fight through those battles and the Bolts obviously value Maroon like that.

If a guy like Maroon who prolly plays 5-10 mins a night is ‘blocking’ prospects, either you got trash for prospects or your HC needs to be fired.

You can plug your ears and scream all you want, but you are simply ignoring a real-world consideration. You know damn well he doesn't and didn't play 5-10 minutes a night. He was used in our top 9 pretty much all season and in the playoffs on our Cup run. 14:10 a night in the regular season and 12:20 a night in the playoffs. He was 9th on the team in even strength playoff minutes and he was used on the 2nd PP unit. On top of that, the identity of Berube's team that year and the following year was to essentially use the 3rd and 4th lines interchangeably.

Having Maroon on the bottom 6 unquestionably blocks another player from that spot. It is not nonsense and is a credible concern when there are already multiple players that locked down bottom 6 jobs heading in to 2019/20. ROR, Perron, Schenn, Schwartz, Tarasenko, Steen, Sunny, Bozak, Thomas, and Barby had spots in the starting lineup locked in. And correctly so. That leaves 2 more lineup spots and 4 total roster spots for Sanford (who was coming off a successful season), Blais, Mac, Fabbri, Maroon and any prospects.

I agree that we should have offered Maroon a contract and found a way to make it work at the expense of plugging younger guys in to the lineup. His personality and role absolutely has positive value to an NHL team. But don't pretend that doing so wouldn't have blocked a prospect or two from getting a shot. Bringing Maroon back would have absolutely meant risking a young NHL caliber player to waivers AND making it harder for a guy like Kyrou to stick on the roster. Again, I think Maroon has demonstrated that his contribution is enough to outweigh those negatives, but you can't just pretend the negatives didn't exist.

 

[shpongle falls]

Nah, but it does describe about half of this forum.

hahaha

 

[BrokenFace]

You mean the whole “Maroon will block prospects from playing” nonsense? You need heart and soul guys in the locker room who can move the group emotionally and help them fight through those battles and the Bolts obviously value Maroon like that.

If a guy like Maroon who prolly plays 5-10 mins a night is ‘blocking’ prospects, either you got trash for prospects or your HC needs to be fired.

Guys like Maroon keep a locker room level headed and right. You can’t put a price or metric on that.

BTW: Pat’s now a BACK to BACK to BACK Cup Champ. Feel free to hate, the tears fill up and nourish my soul lol.

Yeah his stats don’t speak volumes of himself in Tampa or the STL but his teammates, coaches, GM and owner does and that’s the ONLY stat you need.

Hell, Oiler fans WANT him back.

Do you believe the Blues would have beat either Vancouver last year or Colorado this year if they had Maroon? I love the guy, but an absence of Maroon is not one of our big problems right now.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Do you believe the Blues would have beat either Vancouver last year or Colorado this year if they had Maroon? I love the guy, but an absence of Maroon is not one of our big problems right now.

Well they sure didn’t without him and he hoisted the Cup both years without them.

 

[Novacain]

We'll be glad we don't have a mega thread in 6 years devoted to trying to dump a guy destroying our cap like Chicago does.

If you are talking about Keith, who is the logical comparison, he helped the Hawks win a cup, they signed him to a long term extension knowing it would look bad at the back end, and they proceeded to win 2 more Stanley Cups with him. Ask Hawks fans if they regret that contract for a single second.

It’s like you guys look at the Blackhawks and Kings, who won there cups on similar talent sets that we had, and are looking at them currently, thinking “we don’t want to give them the long term extensions because it would be bad in the long term” while ignoring those teams won multiple cups specifically because they prioritized there franchise players and let other good but not cornerstone players walk. We went the opposite direction, and instead signed inferior players while apparently thinking we could stay a cup defender without our version of Doughty or Keith. Of course it isn’t going to work!

 

[Celtic Note]

If you are talking about Keith, who is the logical comparison, he helped the Hawks win a cup, they signed him to a long term extension knowing it would look bad at the back end, and they proceeded to win 2 more Stanley Cups with him. Ask Hawks fans if they regret that contract for a single second.

It’s like you guys look at the Blackhawks and Kings, who won there cups on similar talent sets that we had, and are looking at them currently, thinking “we don’t want to give them the long term extensions because it would be bad in the long term” while ignoring those teams won multiple cups specifically because they prioritized there franchise players and let other good but not cornerstone players walk. We went the opposite direction, and instead signed inferior players while apparently thinking we could stay a cup defender without our version of Doughty or Keith. Of course it isn’t going to work!

I think there is a difference between signing your best players long term and signing players below that tier or players that weren’t on your Cup team to long term contracts, especially on players that don’t project to age well.

Keith, Doughty and Pietrangelo were all worth the risk.

Schenn, Krug and Faulk? They aren’t in the same tier as the aforementioned and none seem to project to age well.

So, I agree we went the opposite direction.

 

[boots legrand]

Searched for a general Doug thread and I didn't see one.

First of all, let me say I wouldn't trade DA for any other GM in the league. But - I feel like Army does his best work when he's feeling pressure which makes him aggressive. His moves (or lack thereof) since the Cup, have been atypical from Army.

I know 2020 has given us some unique circumstances but I hope if there was an O'Reilly or Schenn trade to be made over the last couple years he would have made it regardless of the Cup right? I know only time can really The 2019 Stanley Cup ( and ,at age 76, I am so grateful for) depleted our high- end prospect pool

 

[boots legrand]

The 2 shortened seasons and ensuing bubble changed all that. We won our Stanley Cup -grateful, thankful pause !- but Army had to ignore an already very weak prospect pool these past 3 years and our entry draft record recently(again, 3 yrs. worth) is rife with empty or late picks within the early( 1 thru 4 )rounds. We were consistently high in the final standings for a long while. This is part of the price .

 

[TruBlu]

If you are talking about Keith, who is the logical comparison, he helped the Hawks win a cup, they signed him to a long term extension knowing it would look bad at the back end, and they proceeded to win 2 more Stanley Cups with him. Ask Hawks fans if they regret that contract for a single second.

It’s like you guys look at the Blackhawks and Kings, who won there cups on similar talent sets that we had, and are looking at them currently, thinking “we don’t want to give them the long term extensions because it would be bad in the long term” while ignoring those teams won multiple cups specifically because they prioritized there franchise players and let other good but not cornerstone players walk. We went the opposite direction, and instead signed inferior players while apparently thinking we could stay a cup defender without our version of Doughty or Keith. Of course it isn’t going to work!

We don't know that Petro even wanted to be here. You can point to different things he said on the road leading up to it, but I look at things he actually did. He turned down about the same amount of money from the team that drafted him and also went out to test the market. If he was intent on staying he'd have signed for what he was offered. Think about it...he uprooted his wife, who is a St. Louis native, and kids and moved them to another state away from family, friends, etc. More likely, he's got his cup now and he's looking for somewhere a little more sexy to live for a late 20's couple with big money. You can point to DA and say that he's a bad GM all you want, but he's kept this team competitive the whole time he's been here. Signing long term contracts for big money is a recipe for disaster. Many teams in the league have done and it hasn't worked out. Forgive me if I don't want to fall into a repeat of 2006 every ten years.

 

[Prosaic]

We don't know that Petro even wanted to be here. You can point to different things he said on the road leading up to it, but I look at things he actually did. He turned down about the same amount of money from the team that drafted him and also went out to test the market. If he was intent on staying he'd have signed for what he was offered. Think about it...he uprooted his wife, who is a St. Louis native, and kids and moved them to another state away from family, friends, etc. More likely, he's got his cup now and he's looking for somewhere a little more sexy to live for a late 20's couple with big money. You can point to DA and say that he's a bad GM all you want, but he's kept this team competitive the whole time he's been here. Signing long term contracts for big money is a recipe for disaster. Many teams in the league have done and it hasn't worked out. Forgive me if I don't want to fall into a repeat of 2006 every ten years.

Ya I sure am glad Schenn, Krug, Faulk, Binnington and Scandella aren’t signed past 32.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Ya I sure am glad Schenn, Krug, Faulk, Binnington and Scandella aren’t signed past 32.

3 of those 5 contracts are ones that I’m not actually concerned about.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Ya I sure am glad Schenn, Krug, Faulk, Binnington and Scandella aren’t signed past 32.

Can you give ONE example of a team and GM that operates without giving out veteran contracts like those? These complaints are fantasy land.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Can you give ONE example of a team and GM that operates without giving out veteran contracts like those? These complaints are fantasy land.

I have no problem with the Faulk and Scandella contracts, but the timing of them were odd…

 

[Prosaic]

Can you give ONE example of a team and GM that operates without giving out veteran contracts like those? These complaints are fantasy land.

What does that matter?
I mean, let those teams make those mistakes and capitalize on them doing so.

I like Krug, I even like Faulk. Are either of them worth 6.5M currently? Debatable, but I'd lean towards Krug maybe but probably not and Faulk no.

Currently, Krug and Faulk are tied for the 22nd highest cap hit among defensemen in the league.

Do you see either of them as top 30 D in the league? Even if you exclude players on their ELC they probably don't cut the list or at least it's something that can be reasonably disputed.

Both are entering their 30s and have term as well. If they aren't truly worth the price NOW, at least undeniably worth it, then how do you expect them to be worth it going forward?

It would be different if they were either A) in their prime of career and signed though their prime, not their decline or B) undisputedly in the upper echelon of Defensemen in the NHL.

Krug is a premium PP player and does produce offence, so again, I'm not saying he's worthless but that also doesn't mean his contract is of surplus value. Faulk had a decent season, that is definitely way overhyped by the fan base but is he terrible? No.

Are either ideally your best defender? Absolutely not.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

What does that matter?
I mean, let those teams make those mistakes and capitalize on them doing so.

I like Krug, I even like Faulk. Are either of them worth 6.5M currently? Debatable, but I'd lean towards Krug maybe but probably not and Faulk no.

Currently, Krug and Faulk are tied for the 22nd highest cap hit among defensemen in the league.

Do you see either of them as top 30 D in the league? Even if you exclude players on their ELC they probably don't cut the list or at least it's something that can be reasonably disputed.

Both are entering their 30s and have term as well. If they aren't truly worth the price NOW, at least undeniably worth it, then how do you expect them to be worth it going forward?

It would be different if they were either A) in their prime of career and signed though their prime, not their decline or B) undisputedly in the upper echelon of Defensemen in the NHL.

Krug is a premium PP player and does produce offence, so again, I'm not saying he's worthless but that also doesn't mean his contract is of surplus value. Faulk had a decent season, that is definitely way overhyped by the fan base but is he terrible? No.

Are either ideally your best defender? Absolutely not.

You describe a standard where Armstrong would have signed no one in UFA to replace holes in the roster. You don’t get to just conjure up players from thin air. You have to navigate what is actually available on the market.

If your team is in a rebuild, maybe you can avoid veteran aged players, although even that is pretty debatable. But if you are trying to make w competitive team and need players in their prime years, you must sign them through their early decline. It’s just the reality of the market, for every team, even with their own free agents. If you are so hardball about that, you’re limiting yourself to leftover players of lower skill level, and probably not a competitive team.

 

[TruBlu]

Ya I sure am glad Schenn, Krug, Faulk, Binnington and Scandella aren’t signed past 32.

I wouldn't consider any of those contracts "big money." Some of them were risky on the return at the time they were signed, but none of them were going to break the bank. You're also skimming past the big reason why Petro wasn't signed...None of them have a NMC attached.

 

[simon IC]

What does that matter?
I mean, let those teams make those mistakes and capitalize on them doing so.

I like Krug, I even like Faulk. Are either of them worth 6.5M currently? Debatable, but I'd lean towards Krug maybe but probably not and Faulk no.

Currently, Krug and Faulk are tied for the 22nd highest cap hit among defensemen in the league.

Do you see either of them as top 30 D in the league? Even if you exclude players on their ELC they probably don't cut the list or at least it's something that can be reasonably disputed.

Both are entering their 30s and have term as well. If they aren't truly worth the price NOW, at least undeniably worth it, then how do you expect them to be worth it going forward?

It would be different if they were either A) in their prime of career and signed though their prime, not their decline or B) undisputedly in the upper echelon of Defensemen in the NHL.

Krug is a premium PP player and does produce offence, so again, I'm not saying he's worthless but that also doesn't mean his contract is of surplus value. Faulk had a decent season, that is definitely way overhyped by the fan base but is he terrible? No.

Are either ideally your best defender? Absolutely not.

Very well said!

 

[Prosaic]

You describe a standard where Armstrong would have signed no one in UFA to replace holes in the roster. You don’t get to just conjure up players from thin air. You have to navigate what is actually available on the market.

If your team is in a rebuild, maybe you can avoid veteran aged players, although even that is pretty debatable. But if you are trying to make w competitive team and need players in their prime years, you must sign them through their early decline. It’s just the reality of the market, for every team, even with their own free agents. If you are so hardball about that, you’re limiting yourself to leftover players of lower skill level, and probably not a competitive team.

It would be one thing if the Blues desperately needed either Krug or Faulk, but did they?

Even with Krug, his role and his strengths, I don’t see him as a “can’t miss, home run” player.

What if the Blues simply gave Dunn that role to see what he could do?

What if the Blues waited and then got on the Devon Toews deal? (Who by the way is absolutely incredible and signed through the prime of his career). Or Nate Schmidt? Both are better than Krug at 5 on 5 and didn’t cost nearly as much in terms of years and dollars.

What about Scandella? Was the need to massively overpay him on an extension out of necessity? Could the Blues not have gotten the exact same out of another UFA for a third of the price and 1/4 the term?

It’s easy for people to say Faulk was the Blues best defender last year, but that isn’t exactly a positive when you look at where Faulks stands relative to the league. If he’s a guy the Blues were targeting they probably could’ve avoided the trade and pursued him via UFA or not extended him immediately and been able to keep him for half the price and half the term.

 

[Ranksu]

It would be one thing if the Blues desperately needed either Krug or Faulk, but did they?

Even with Krug, his role and his strengths, I don’t see him as a “can’t miss, home run” player.

What if the Blues simply gave Dunn that role to see what he could do?

What if the Blues waited and then got on the Devon Toews deal? (Who by the way is absolutely incredible and signed through the prime of his career). Or Nate Schmidt? Both are better than Krug at 5 on 5 and didn’t cost nearly as much in terms of years and dollars.

What about Scandella? Was the need to massively overpay him on an extension out of necessity? Could the Blues not have gotten the exact same out of another UFA for a third of the price and 1/4 the term?

It’s easy for people to say Faulk was the Blues best defender last year, but that isn’t exactly a positive when you look at where Faulks stands relative to the league. If he’s a guy the Blues were targeting they probably could’ve avoided the trade and pursued him via UFA or not extended him immediately and been able to keep him for half the price and half the term.

It's crazy that your points doesnt get more likes.

You are on right there where Army's vision was bad.

I think we are on same page what should be done now in Blues if we want really be competitive at some point in future.

1) re-tool (sell pending UFA's at TDL for futures)
2) fill prospect pool
3) trade away Krug in package deal. Prospect + pick for top2 LHD
4) find a package deal Tarasenko + prospect (Walman/Mikkola) + pick for top winger
5) find UFAs what you trade possible at TDL.

Repeat same 2-3 years until we are stacked on prospect pool. Then use assets for needed all-in moves where is whole/need upgrade.

6) PAY your best players what they are worth not those who are B level players and use that money for them.

 

[Louie the Blue]

Doug Armstrong is one of the best traders in the NHL.

Change my mind.

 

[Prosaic]

He makes some erroneous and awful moves (Lehtera premature extension, Berglund extension, Faulk trade, Miller trade, etc.)

Then he turns around and robs teams blind like he’s Bane from the Dark Knight Rises.

This Buch trade got me excited.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

He makes some erroneous and awful moves (Lehtera premature extension, Berglund extension, Faulk trade, Miller trade, etc.)

Then he turns around and robs teams blind like he’s Bane from the Dark Knight Rises.

This Buch trade got me excited.

The Faulk trade wasn't bad. What was bad was him signing him to a long-term extension before he even played a game.
Even the Miller trade wasn't bad, everyone and their mother, and even their Mother's mother were saying Miller was the Key. It just didn't work out.