Confirmed with Link: Faulk & 5th to STL for Edmundson, Bokk, 2021 7th

[Stealth JD]

I really think we should just balance out the pairs to save some energy throughout the season.

Gunnarsson-Pietrangelo
Dunn-Parayko
Bouwmeester-Faulk

I’d feel comfortable with all 3 pairs being on the ice at any point of a game, to be honest.

Yep - this is what i'd do. Sub in Bortz, likely on the left-side.

 

[rumrokh]

What are you guys talking about on Eddy being bad for the past 2 seasons? I recall him having one of his best seasons the year they missed the playoffs on the last day.

It’s hard to use stats when measuring defenseman. Still for a good example, Petro had 42 points in the 2017-18 season and was a plus 2. Eddy had 17 points and was a -1.

Eddy's good year was the previous year when they made the playoffs. Good regular season and then he and Parayko made a great pairing in the playoffs. The following year was wobbly and he's basically just leveled off.

 

[Blueston]

Faulk not playing with much confidence right now. His offensive game not matching his talent.

 

[EastonBlues22]

I would love to hear @EastonBlues22 take on Faulk overally? His usage, who should pair, contract extension etc etc

I think it's a bit too early to judge his play. He has better in him than he's showing now. It's always tough when you join a new team and don't get the benefit of full training camp with them.

It would help if he wasn't such a forced fit into the current roster construction. If you just slot him into the third pairing and play everyone else like you normally would, you're underplaying him. If you try to get him more minutes, someone either needs to play out of position or get underplayed themselves. I'd just throw him on the third pairing and be done with it, probably. Ease up on the minutes a bit for Pietrangelo/Parayko given how much hockey they've played this past calendar year.

I did not like the extension, at all.

The awkwardness of the roster situation and timing of the extension strongly suggests to me that the deal was more about having some Pietrangelo insurance in place than it was about obtaining a piece that filled an obvious need and locking him in at a good value. It might make Armstrong feel better having that "security blanket" locked up, but it sure doesn't make me feel better about a potential post-Pietrangelo future.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

If Pietro or Parayko got injured, it would look a lot smarter. I don’t mind if that never happens.

 

[MissouriMook]

...

I did not like the extension, at all.
...

The thing that bothers me about it is the lack of leverage we’re left with to move him if it becomes apparent that it is time for both parties to move on. Not only does he now have a full NTC, the fact that he has seven more years under contract destroys the leverage that the threat of playing him in a less productive role or sitting as healthy scratch would have on his numbers and, therefore, his willingness to consider other options.

 

[Blueston]

Faulk looks like he is pressing. Trying to justify trade and contract. He needs to relax and play his game. But he needs to be better.

 

[DatDude44]

Honestly, like if u look at our franchises trades overall in a nutshell.... I wouldn’t be shocked if the 5th rd pick we got from Carolina ended up being the best player in the trade lmao

 

[Halak Ness Monster]

Honestly, like if u look at our franchises trades overall in a nutshell.... I wouldn’t be shocked if the 5th rd pick we got from Carolina ended up being the best player in the trade lmao

We traded for Schenn, O'Reilly, Bouwmeester, and a 1st round pick with the plan of drafting Tarasenko with it.

What am I missing?

 

[DatDude44]

We traded for Schenn, O'Reilly, Bouwmeester, and a 1st round pick with the plan of drafting Tarasenko with it.

What am I missing?

I was thinking older trades like the 3rd from Eric Brewer becoming Binnington etc... lol just being facetious

 

[execwrite1]

I think it's a bit too early to judge his play. He has better in him than he's showing now. It's always tough when you join a new team and don't get the benefit of full training camp with them.

It would help if he wasn't such a forced fit into the current roster construction. If you just slot him into the third pairing and play everyone else like you normally would, you're underplaying him. If you try to get him more minutes, someone either needs to play out of position or get underplayed themselves. I'd just throw him on the third pairing and be done with it, probably. Ease up on the minutes a bit for Pietrangelo/Parayko given how much hockey they've played this past calendar year.

I did not like the extension, at all.

The awkwardness of the roster situation and timing of the extension strongly suggests to me that the deal was more about having some Pietrangelo insurance in place than it was about obtaining a piece that filled an obvious need and locking him in at a good value. It might make Armstrong feel better having that "security blanket" locked up, but it sure doesn't make me feel better about a potential post-Pietrangelo future.

Agree - Armstrong over thought this deal - not a good move.

 

[MissouriMook]

I feel like people are forgetting that Eddy was probably bolting for nothing after this season. We just need Faulk to outperform Eddy. Period. Unless Bokk turns into something special I think it would be hard for us to lose the trade. The extension could become a negative even if I understand why it was done, especially so soon.

 

[Stealth JD]

If Petro wants to leave, Blues protect Parayko, Faulk & Dunn and move forward with that group. If Petro wants to sign here for under $10M/year he will and the Blues will gift Faulk to Seattle, because established top-4 guys like him will be a valuable commodity. Though losing a top-4 D to expansion may not be the best value play. If you can get a bounty from someone other than Seattle for one of your D-men, I’d think you’d look into that as well. If nothing, Army has options for which other teams should be envious.

 

[BlueMed]

If Petro wants to leave, Blues protect Parayko, Faulk & Dunn and move forward with that group. If Petro wants to sign here for under $10M/year he will and the Blues will gift Faulk to Seattle, because established top-4 guys like him will be a valuable commodity. Though losing a top-4 D to expansion may not be the best value play. If you can get a bounty from someone other than Seattle for one of your D-men, I’d think you’d look into that as well. If nothing, Army has options for which other teams should be envious.

Ideally Petro signs, and we give them Faulk because they might just end up taking one of Binnington or Husso, which we don't want to happen.

 

[BlueMed]

I feel like people are forgetting that Eddy was probably bolting for nothing after this season. We just need Faulk to outperform Eddy. Period. Unless Bokk turns into something special I think it would be hard for us to lose the trade. The extension could become a negative even if I understand why it was done, especially so soon.

Why do people still frame trades that way? It doesn't make any sense. A trade is a voluntary transaction between 2 or more teams with the intention of improving their own club. It's not about beating another team or "winning" the trade.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Why do people still frame trades that way? It doesn't make any sense. A trade is a voluntary transaction between 2 or more teams with the intention of improving their own club. It's not about beating another team or "winning" the trade.

Agreed.

It's like the Fabbri trade or the ROR trade. The fact is that the players who came to us needed a fresh start just like the players who left us.

I think DA has been very good in his philosophy to beat the other teams by a thousand cuts. Or said another way, build a team with many wealthy players rather than a team built around just a few rich players.

 

[Blueston]

Ideally Petro signs, and we give them Faulk because they might just end up taking one of Binnington or Husso, which we don't want to happen.

Husso has a long way to go for Seattle to take him in expansion draft. More likely we lose someone like Barbie or Blais if we don’t lose Faulk or Dunn.

 

[BlueMed]

Husso has a long way to go for Seattle to take him in expansion draft. More likely we lose someone like Barbie or Blais if we don’t lose Faulk or Dunn.

Let's hope they think that. Husso should be NHL ready next season to back up Binnington, and I think Seattle would like to take a young goaltender with high upside that has already been properly developed. Personally, I think Husso has a higher ceiling than Binnington.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Why do people still frame trades that way? It doesn't make any sense. A trade is a voluntary transaction between 2 or more teams with the intention of improving their own club. It's not about beating another team or "winning" the trade.

It’s just shorthand for noting if the team added value or not. It’s not a comparison to the other party in the trade. Both teams can win.

 

[Stealth JD]

Let's hope they think that. Husso should be NHL ready next season to back up Binnington, and I think Seattle would like to take a young goaltender with high upside that has already been properly developed. Personally, I think Husso has a higher ceiling than Binnington.

What's higher than #1, Cup-winning, league-wide top-tier goaltender?

 

[BlueMed]

It’s just shorthand for noting if the team added value or not. It’s not a comparison to the other party in the trade. Both teams can win.

That's not what winning a trade means though. Winning implies a zero-sum outcome, and people use that term to refer to teams that have gotten more value out of a trade than the other team involved as if it's some sort of competition. What they don't understand is that trades, by definition, are designed to improve the value of both teams regardless of how much relative value one team might end up with.

 

[BlueMed]

What's higher than #1, Cup-winning, league-wide top-tier goaltender?

I think Binnington is a very solid #1 goaltender who makes the saves he's suppose to make and some saves he isn't suppose to make. I couldn't ask for more than that. That being said, Binnington isn't the best goaltender in the league. There are other goaltenders like Price and Gibson who have better all around ability (technique, reaction time, athleticism, flexibility, etc). It's also hard to tell how good Binnington really is when he is pretty insulated behind the best defense in the league. Husso might actually have the potential for higher all around ability. That is important because Binnington is a UFA in 2 years. Let's say Seattle takes Husso and Binnington leaves. Then what?

 

[Dbrownss]

I think Binnington is a very solid #1 goaltender who makes the saves he's suppose to make and some saves he isn't suppose to make. I couldn't ask for more than that. That being said, Binnington isn't the best goaltender in the league. There are other goaltenders like Price and Gibson who have better all around ability (technique, reaction time, athleticism, flexibility, etc). It's also hard to tell how good Binnington really is when he is pretty insulated behind the best defense in the league. Husso might actually have the potential for higher all around ability. That is important because Binnington is a UFA in 2 years. Let's say Seattle takes Husso and Binnington leaves. Then what?

Binnington had great defenders in front of him but there is little doubt to his ability. He's in his 2nd NHL year, we need a larger sample size to say where he lands.

 

[Blueston]

Let's hope they think that. Husso should be NHL ready next season to back up Binnington, and I think Seattle would like to take a young goaltender with high upside that has already been properly developed. Personally, I think Husso has a higher ceiling than Binnington.

He is 24 years old and putting up mediocre numbers in AHL. After Binnington's emergence I hate to say Husso can't blossom but he has long way to go to be top quality NHLer.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

That's not what winning a trade means though. Winning implies a zero-sum outcome, and people use that term to refer to teams that have gotten more value out of a trade than the other team involved as if it's some sort of competition. What they don't understand is that trades, by definition, are designed to improve the value of both teams regardless of how much relative value one team might end up with.

Maybe a few people use it that way, but I don’t think the poster you quoted was using it like that. He was simply pointing out the Blues got more value from the trade since they traded a low likelihood prospect and a guy who was going to be zero value after the season, for a player they signed to extended term.