Dunn’s next contract

[Spektre]

Dunn is making $775,000 this year with a cap hit of $722,500. He’s obviously getting a good raise on the next contract but it’s a little difficult to figure out what he will get.

Does he get a bridge deal? Does he sign a longer 5-6 year deal? He’s 23 and will be 24 in October. A 2 year bridge deal might be his best option. He would be 26 on the next contract and should be in a great position to sign a lucrative 7-8 year deal.

He might be somewhat of an offer sheet risk. A signed offer of up to $4,227,437 would only cost another team a 2nd round pick.

The Pietrangelo situation makes it seem a bridge deal is the best alternative for the organization.

Click to read more...

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

If Pietrangelo re-signs, not sure where the money comes from.

$2.9M/1 year is my guess

 

[simon IC]

I am pretty sure he will get a two-year bridge. He doesn't have arbitration rights, so he doesn't have much leverage.

 

[Beauterham]

Copy/Paste from something I just posted in the trade section:


I think the Blues will try to give him the Sanford/Blais/Barbashev-special; a 2 year bridge deal worth 1.5 million a year. His agent will probably try to shoot higher, eventually with both parties ending up in the middle at 2-2,5 million. Dunn's TOI and usage isn't high enough yet to warrant a higher AAV, unless the Blues sign him to a much longer deal, which I don't see happening.

He might be somewhat of an offer sheet risk. A signed offer of up to $4,227,437 would only cost another team a 2nd round pick.

There's a chance this could potentially happen, however with a flat salary cap and a lot of teams potentially in cashflow problems due to Covid-19 I don't see a lot of teams doing this. But if a team does, we'll just match the offer and trade him for a future first afterwards.

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

I can't see a scenario where both Dunn and Pietrangelo re-sign.

Too many trades have to happen to facilitate both re-signing.

I see Pietrangelo walking and Dunn getting peanuts. Meaning the least we can give him to stay.

If we decide to keep Pietrangelo, then Dunn is as good as gone IMO.

 

[Reality Czech]

I can't see a scenario where both Dunn and Pietrangelo re-sign.

Too many trades have to happen to facilitate both re-signing.

I see Pietrangelo walking and Dunn getting peanuts. Meaning the least we can give him to stay.

If we decide to keep Pietrangelo, then Dunn is as good as gone IMO.

If that's the cost of keeping Petro then Blues fans will have to accept it. I like Dunn a lot, but he's still a 2nd/3rd pair defenseman. Even if he improves his defense and overall game, he will never be close to Petro's level. So if they need to move salary, then moving Dunn has to be on the table.

These are the kinds of tough decisions Army will have to make (and Blues fans will have to stomach) if we want to win more championships. Keeping the band together is totally unrealistic. Look at all the great young players the Blackhawks had to ship out during their reign of dominance. They parted with Byfuglien, Saad, TT and others so they could keep their core intact and keep their Cup window open for as long as they could.

 

[simon IC]

A few posters have pointed out that Armstrong is not above recognizing his mistakes and correcting them. I honestly wonder if he has been exploring possible trade scenarios concerning Justin Faulk. I would not be unhappy if we had to pay to ship Faulk out. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking on my part, but I keep hoping.

 

[tfriede2]

1 year, $1.3 assuming Petro somehow gets re-signed. Dunn has no leverage whatsoever. He’s worth more than that, but what can he do?

 

[Mike Liut]

A sneaky team could offer sheet him knowing the Blues couldn’t match.

 

[Beauterham]

A sneaky team could offer sheet him knowing the Blues couldn’t match.

We can go 10% over the cap on the offseason, we can match it as long as we trade him/someone else afterwards.

 

[SwivelSchwartz]

We can go 10% over the cap on the offseason, we can match it as long as we trade him/someone else afterwards.

This is all correct except you can’t trade him for 12 months after you match.

 

[Beauterham]

This is all correct except you can’t trade him for 12 months after you match.

Ah, and so you learn something every day.

Thanks for the info!

 

[STL BLUES]

I was one of Dunn’s biggest fans last season. Dunn was looking great last season and slipped considerably this season. He should get less than the Sanford/Blais/Barbashev 2 year bridge deal worth 1.5 million per year. If he has a better 20-21 season, then renegotiate a new contract.

 

[Brian39]

I was one of Dunn’s biggest fans last season. Dunn was looking great last season and slipped considerably this season. He should get less than the Sanford/Blais/Barbashev 2 year bridge deal worth 1.5 million per year. If he has a better 20-21 season, then renegotiate a new contract.

I've been pretty vocal about low-balling Dunn out of necessity, but I vehemently disagree that he should get less than Sanford/Blais/Barby based on play.

He scored 23 points in 71 games as a D man, which is identical offensive production to Barby's 26 points in 80 games last year before his extension. It is an identical points pace to Blais, but without a 30 game injury. It is also an identical points pace to what Sanford did last year over 60 games. Looking at goals instead of points, Dunn's scoring .127 goals per game. Blais is at .15, Barby was at .175 last year and Sanford was at .133 last year. Those aren't significant margins when you are comparing forward goal scoring to D man goal scoring. In what is fairly described as a down year for Dunn, he is producing at nearly-identical paces as the 3 forwards we are comparing him to.

Additionally, his underlying metrics are fantastic. These are certainly impacted positively by sheltered/limited usage, but usage alone doesn't account for numbers this good: 55.5% CF%, 54.3 FF%, 6.3 rel CF%, 5.9 rel FF%, +7.4 ex +/-, a points share of 5.3 and an actual +/- of +15. Those are remarkably good numbers. He has his weaknesses defensively when he doesn't have the puck, but he has a huge amount of positives to his game.

Again, I have been vocal about low-balling him out of cap necessity and his lack of leverage, but his on-ice play doesn't even remotely cause him to be less deserving than Blais/Sanford/Barby even though he took a step back from last season.

 

[Bluesguru]

If Pietrangelo re-signs, not sure where the money comes from.

$2.9M/1 year is my guess

Yeah, really reinforces the thought that Army had a strong feeling that there was a good chance Petro was bolting when he acquired Faulk and gave him that contract. I think Army was prepared to play hard ball and he figured the odds were he'd be walking. But with the economics changed now given the stoppage, it looks like Petro might end up here by default.

 

[cardinalnation]

A few posters have pointed out that Armstrong is not above recognizing his mistakes and correcting them. I honestly wonder if he has been exploring possible trade scenarios concerning Justin Faulk. I would not be unhappy if we had to pay to ship Faulk out. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking on my part, but I keep hoping.

I was thinking the exact thing. Lets be honest, Justin Faulk was horrible last year. I mean he brought absolutely Nothing. Guy was out of position constantly and probably should have been benched but that contract demands he plays. No doubt Army is going to have to take a loss to get rid of him as no GM in their right mind is going to take on that awful contract without incentive. I think he has a NTC but that shouldn't be a problem because he didn't look like he wanted to play here in the first place to me. If that trade had never happened things would be really rosy in St.Louis but it did so Army will have to get creative, let Petro walk or get rid of Allen and Steen and probably Bozek too in order to resign Petro and Dunn.

 

[Brian39]

I was thinking the exact thing. Lets be honest, Justin Faulk was horrible last year. I mean he brought absolutely Nothing. Guy was out of position constantly and probably should have been benched but that contract demands he plays. No doubt Army is going to have to take a loss to get rid of him as no GM in their right mind is going to take on that awful contract without incentive. I think he has a NTC but that shouldn't be a problem because he didn't look like he wanted to play here in the first place to me. If that trade had never happened things would be really rosy in St.Louis but it did so Army will have to get creative, let Petro walk or get rid of Allen and Steen and probably Bozek too in order to resign Petro and Dunn.

I have brought this up numerous times, but what evidence is there that Berube makes ice time decisions based on contract?

Steen was sent to the 4th line last year (and to his credit embraced the role). He is making $5.75M against the cap and at that time had another 2 years left on his deal.

Perron was healthy scratched by Berube last year.

A rookie with less than 90 minutes of NHL experience won the starting job from Allen less than a week after his first NHL start, even though Allen's contract is squarely that of a low end starter.

Berube is playing Faulk 20:34 a night, which is more than 4 minutes a night more than Dunn, almost 5 minutes a night more than Gunnar, and 7 minutes a night more than Bortz. I find it very hard to believe that Berube is playing Dunn, Gunnar and Bortz in more limited roles than he did during a Cup run based on Faulk's contract.

I strongly disagree that Faulk was "horrible" this past season, but that is a topic that has largely been beaten to death around here and I don't think anyone is changing their mind about it so I'm not going to make a lengthy post about it. He hasn't been good compared to the contract extension, but his on-ice play in a vacuum has still absolutely been the caliber of a middle pairing NHL D man. That's far from horrible. But regardless, your issue about his playing time is with Berube's decision making, not the contract. Berube got a 3 year contract last summer, is coming off a Cup win where he was viewed as a savior and the team has been good all season this year. He is about as far from the hot seat as a coach can get and is absolutely not letting a GM dictate time on ice.

 

[WATTAGE4451]

I have brought this up numerous times, but what evidence is there that Berube makes ice time decisions based on contract?

Steen was sent to the 4th line last year (and to his credit embraced the role). He is making $5.75M against the cap and at that time had another 2 years left on his deal.

Perron was healthy scratched by Berube last year.

A rookie with less than 90 minutes of NHL experience won the starting job from Allen less than a week after his first NHL start, even though Allen's contract is squarely that of a low end starter.

Berube is playing Faulk 20:34 a night, which is more than 4 minutes a night more than Dunn, almost 5 minutes a night more than Gunnar, and 7 minutes a night more than Bortz. I find it very hard to believe that Berube is playing Dunn, Gunnar and Bortz in more limited roles than he did during a Cup run based on Faulk's contract.

I strongly disagree that Faulk was "horrible" this past season, but that is a topic that has largely been beaten to death around here and I don't think anyone is changing their mind about it so I'm not going to make a lengthy post about it. He hasn't been good compared to the contract extension, but his on-ice play in a vacuum has still absolutely been the caliber of a middle pairing NHL D man. That's far from horrible. But regardless, your issue about his playing time is with Berube's decision making, not the contract. Berube got a 3 year contract last summer, is coming off a Cup win where he was viewed as a savior and the team has been good all season this year. He is about as far from the hot seat as a coach can get and is absolutely not letting a GM dictate time on ice.

Perron was healthy scratched one game as a discipline message, then back to playing top 6 minutes rest of year.

Ita not like perron was seriously demoted or ever not going to be regular top 6 forward and going to lose major ice time long term

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Perron was healthy scratched one game as a discipline message, then back to playing top 6 minutes rest of year.

Ita not like perron was seriously demoted or ever not going to be regular top 6 forward and going to lose major ice time long term

Perron went back to playing top 6 minutes because the message was received and he responded well to it. Why hadn't Berube scratched Faulk for poor play then?

 

[Robb_K]

A few posters have pointed out that Armstrong is not above recognizing his mistakes and correcting them. I honestly wonder if he has been exploring possible trade scenarios concerning Justin Faulk. I would not be unhappy if we had to pay to ship Faulk out. Perhaps it is just wishful thinking on my part, but I keep hoping.

I, too, would much rather see Faulk traded, and Dunn kept. Keeping 3 highly paid defencemen on the right side, and then, after losing Bouwmeester, dumping off their 2nd best left sider, who will still be paid a relatively low salary, makes no sense.

 

[Mike Liut]

I think Dunn is going to be added in a trade package to move Allen and Bozak. Detroit should be interested in a package for these 3. They could flip Bozak at the TDL for another asset.

 

[Ranksu]

I have brought this up numerous times, but what evidence is there that Berube makes ice time decisions based on contract?

Steen was sent to the 4th line last year (and to his credit embraced the role). He is making $5.75M against the cap and at that time had another 2 years left on his deal.

Perron was healthy scratched by Berube last year.

A rookie with less than 90 minutes of NHL experience won the starting job from Allen less than a week after his first NHL start, even though Allen's contract is squarely that of a low end starter.

Berube is playing Faulk 20:34 a night, which is more than 4 minutes a night more than Dunn, almost 5 minutes a night more than Gunnar, and 7 minutes a night more than Bortz. I find it very hard to believe that Berube is playing Dunn, Gunnar and Bortz in more limited roles than he did during a Cup run based on Faulk's contract.

I strongly disagree that Faulk was "horrible" this past season, but that is a topic that has largely been beaten to death around here and I don't think anyone is changing their mind about it so I'm not going to make a lengthy post about it. He hasn't been good compared to the contract extension, but his on-ice play in a vacuum has still absolutely been the caliber of a middle pairing NHL D man. That's far from horrible. But regardless, your issue about his playing time is with Berube's decision making, not the contract. Berube got a 3 year contract last summer, is coming off a Cup win where he was viewed as a savior and the team has been good all season this year. He is about as far from the hot seat as a coach can get and is absolutely not letting a GM dictate time on ice.

Steen has been declining many years before Berube became in coach in Blues. We had better players top6 role what Steen was. In my eyes this season he should had to been benched, but we're bit short in forward depth.

Binnington was forced move to wake up team, team was playing garbage and main reason was Allen was worst goaltender what you can imagine to have. Shakey Allen. I bet there was tight looks from Doug and pressure was building over Tom Stillman, what he has invest to team from off-season at summer. Forced move by Berube. If Allen would played at some level we wouldn't never seen Binnington in this team. Thank God Allen sucked at right time.

Perron was simply gas out, Long season in Vegas and so close to win it all, then go deep run with Blues and win it. It was precaution move by Berube sit Perron. I even seen it this season that ROR was/has been gas out and this corona time will be helping a lot of. He played top2 dmen minutes as a forward. Crazy.



Bolded: thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you.

Justin Faulk 5+11=16 points -3 in 69 GP. Blais and DLR only get negative +/- stats.

NHL.com Stats


I just see that Faulk has give every chance to prove to be pair with Pietro - failure and when it worked at some time, Parayko get injured and was forced to split back to 3rd pair. He was bring back to pair with Pietro and it looked off. I guess Berube saw f*** it go back 3rd pair where Faulk could do least damage for team.

If Faulk can't crack in our powerplay unite, reason was in first place that Doug get him here for specially for that job and Pietro, Parayko and Dunn over worked him. Its sad.

Its quite hard to understand why Faulk gets icetime in Blues. Fabbri is good example, he didn't play Berube's game and I do see same with Faulk too. He does some occasions play physical game, but oveally he is lost and out of position stickless. Fabbri was quite same type of player than Faulk. Played somethimes physical game, but wasn't sync when to give out puck and set a pace for plays. Fabbri had offensive tools, but wasn't used right way like what looks happends with Faulk. Only reason is that that f***er is 7-years more in here and Fabbri was dealt for another team.

And only reason why 16 point dmen is used in Blues, 'cus of his contract. 6.5mill.$ BOOOOOM.

I hope Faulk is out as soon as possible no matter if Pietro is here or not. Its dead plays when Faulk has puck or is in the ice.

 

[Spektre]

Army will trade Faulk

 

[Blueston]

I think Dunn is going to be added in a trade package to move Allen and Bozak. Detroit should be interested in a package for these 3. They could flip Bozak at the TDL for another asset.

We would have to get quite a bit for that. No way we use Dunn to just give other 2 away.

 

[Mike Liut]

We would have to get quite a bit for that. No way we use Dunn to just give other 2 away.

I think we’d get their 2nd rounder too. Unfortunately, nobody is going to want to Bozak and Allen without incentive especially with a flat cap.