Jaden Schwartz’s next contact

[CaliforniaBlues310]

The most I’d offer Schwartz is 5x5. If he wants more, let him walk.

 

[Ranksu]

The most I’d offer Schwartz is 5x5. If he wants more, let him walk.

Let em all walk.

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

I think if we acquire a legitimate top line LW to go with 90-57 it would take a lot of pressure of Schwartz, and we know that 17-10-25 is a very solid second line.

As far as Bozak, I’d bring him back if we either A.) trade Thomas or B.) miss out on other middle 6 options to put with Thomas/Kostin on our third line.

I don’t think Hoffman will return.

 

[Zachary Hines]

I think if we acquire a legitimate top line LW to go with 90-57 it would take a lot of pressure of Schwartz, and we know that 17-10-25 is a very solid second line.

As far as Bozak, I’d bring him back if we either A.) trade Thomas or B.) miss out on other middle 6 options to put with Thomas/Kostin on our third line.

I don’t think Hoffman will return.

Who would you consider a legitimate LW
We all know we arent gonna get Landeskog or Hall. We would have to move serious money out.

 

[CaliforniaBlues310]

Who would you consider a legitimate LW
We all know we arent gonna get Landeskog or Hall. We would have to move serious money out.

Tarasenko is likely gonna be moved

 

[Zachary Hines]

I have listened to a couple guys on youtube and the one says Seattle will grab him as the Blues will leave him exposed. The other guy that is with Top Shelf Hockey has heard LA Kings and Blues would be a good fit.

 

[TruBlu]

I watched a youtube video today on how to make aged cheddar cheese.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Is there a significant chance that Kostin will out-produce Schwartz next season? How about Kyrou? I think the second is likely. Do the Blues have a realistic chance of acquiring a young forward breaking into the league who might outproduce Schwartz?

It wouldn't probably be a draft pick from this draft, but maybe a prospect that hasn't established himself yet.

I think a path that leads to that - identifying CORRECTLY young talent that ends up with top 6 production, even if its not a 'name' prospect that everyone already knows. If the Blues can make moves like that I think they can extend their window. You need good production from entry level contracts to keep a veteran core roster fully stocked under the salary cap. All these scenarios where the Blues trade Kostin, Kyrou, etc to acquire a veteran player on a UFA contract will simply lead to a top heavy roster with insufficient depth.

Its not as exciting to discuss, but the Blues really need their pro scouting to identify some homeruns, and for Armstrong to make the creative moves that will replace guys like Schwartz and Tarasenko with younger players that can produce enough.

 

[TruBlu]

Is there a significant chance that Kostin will out-produce Schwartz next season? How about Kyrou? I think the second is likely. Do the Blues have a realistic chance of acquiring a young forward breaking into the league who might outproduce Schwartz?

It wouldn't probably be a draft pick from this draft, but maybe a prospect that hasn't established himself yet.

I think a path that leads to that - identifying CORRECTLY young talent that ends up with top 6 production, even if its not a 'name' prospect that everyone already knows. If the Blues can make moves like that I think they can extend their window. You need good production from entry level contracts to keep a veteran core roster fully stocked under the salary cap. All these scenarios where the Blues trade Kostin, Kyrou, etc to acquire a veteran player on a UFA contract will simply lead to a top heavy roster with insufficient depth.

Its not as exciting to discuss, but the Blues really need their pro scouting to identify some homeruns, and for Armstrong to make the creative moves that will replace guys like Schwartz and Tarasenko with younger players that can produce enough.

Tarasenko is the big question mark. We've gone two seasons without him being in the equation. If he returns to form, he's like adding two or three guys. I think the focus is about to shift to drafting very soon.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Tarasenko is the big question mark. We've gone two seasons without him being in the equation. If he returns to form, he's like adding two or three guys. I think the focus is about to shift to drafting very soon.

Well, at least they have a 1st this year, but I think Armstrong would like to have added a couple more draft picks since the Blues don't have a 2nd or 3rd. I won't be surprised if Dunn is traded for a 2nd.

 

[Celtic Note]

Is there a significant chance that Kostin will out-produce Schwartz next season? How about Kyrou? I think the second is likely. Do the Blues have a realistic chance of acquiring a young forward breaking into the league who might outproduce Schwartz?

It wouldn't probably be a draft pick from this draft, but maybe a prospect that hasn't established himself yet.

I think a path that leads to that - identifying CORRECTLY young talent that ends up with top 6 production, even if its not a 'name' prospect that everyone already knows. If the Blues can make moves like that I think they can extend their window. You need good production from entry level contracts to keep a veteran core roster fully stocked under the salary cap. All these scenarios where the Blues trade Kostin, Kyrou, etc to acquire a veteran player on a UFA contract will simply lead to a top heavy roster with insufficient depth.

Its not as exciting to discuss, but the Blues really need their pro scouting to identify some homeruns, and for Armstrong to make the creative moves that will replace guys like Schwartz and Tarasenko with younger players that can produce enough.

Are the professional scouts and leadership capable of that? Most of our finds seem to be older. Recently we have acquired players at their apex or downswing of their careers. I am not particularly confident in our scouting staff identifying breakout potential players. And even if they can, because of the flat cap, those players are even more valued today then they were pre-pandemic.

I think trading off a couple of young players for veterans that are themselves still young is one way to extend your window. But you have to follow up and even preclude those trades with high quality drafting. The biggest problem I see is that we have an owner and GM seeing our window open and if they actually want to achieve that they will have to mortgage some future for the present. If they don’t do that, then mediocrity will follow and that doesn’t bode well for now or in the future.

 

[Brian39]

I don't think it is fair to the pro scouts to say that they mostly find older talent and might be incapable of finding younger talent. Sanford and Sunny were both young guys targeted by our pro scouting staff that played important roles in the Cup run. Having 2 cheaply acquired young guys contribute to a playoff run like those two did is a success of pro scouting.

It is fairly rare for teams to give up on 21-24 year olds who are quickly able to contribute to their new team. And the players who fit that description usually are well-touted guys with draft pedigree that cost a noticeable asset. You are correct that we haven't acquired guys fitting that bill in the last 2-3 years, but I also don't think that we were really in the market for them. Teams in the full swing of win-now mode can't really risk known quantities for unknown quantities, so you don't usually see them making those gambles.

I don't think it is an inability of pro scouting to ID talented young guys (whose teams are down on them), but rather that we weren't in that market because we didn't see ourselves as a team that could burn 50 regular season games on an unknown. My hope is that we explore that possibility this summer.

It's also worth noting that Schenn was just 25 when we acquired him and he promptly found another level as a Blue than he had demonstrated before. ROR and Faulk were 27. I think it is fair to say that they were squarely in the apex of their careers when acquired and not on the ledge of the downswing. We've had some strike outs from the pro scouting staff, but that same staff also hit a lot of doubles and triples on guys who brought 3+ years of quality contributions after joining the team.

I don't know that leadership (and possibly ownership) is capable/willing to shift focus towards youth at the expense of win-now mode. They might not be. But if they are, I am confident that the pro scouting staff can identify some good targets for that vision.

 

[Majorityof1]

I don't think it is fair to the pro scouts to say that they mostly find older talent and might be incapable of finding younger talent. Sanford and Sunny were both young guys targeted by our pro scouting staff that played important roles in the Cup run. Having 2 cheaply acquired young guys contribute to a playoff run like those two did is a success of pro scouting.

It is fairly rare for teams to give up on 21-24 year olds who are quickly able to contribute to their new team. And the players who fit that description usually are well-touted guys with draft pedigree that cost a noticeable asset. You are correct that we haven't acquired guys fitting that bill in the last 2-3 years, but I also don't think that we were really in the market for them. Teams in the full swing of win-now mode can't really risk known quantities for unknown quantities, so you don't usually see them making those gambles.

I don't think it is an inability of pro scouting to ID talented young guys (whose teams are down on them), but rather that we weren't in that market because we didn't see ourselves as a team that could burn 50 regular season games on an unknown. My hope is that we explore that possibility this summer.

It's also worth noting that Schenn was just 25 when we acquired him and he promptly found another level as a Blue than he had demonstrated before. ROR and Faulk were 27. I think it is fair to say that they were squarely in the apex of their careers when acquired and not on the ledge of the downswing. We've had some strike outs from the pro scouting staff, but that same staff also hit a lot of doubles and triples on guys who brought 3+ years of quality contributions after joining the team.

I don't know that leadership (and possibly ownership) is capable/willing to shift focus towards youth at the expense of win-now mode. They might not be. But if they are, I am confident that the pro scouting staff can identify some good targets for that vision.

Are you sure it was pro scouting that identified Sanford and Sundqvist, and not just left over interest from amateur scouting. They might have been guy our amateur scouts targeted that we though could fall. They potentially got nabbed before we targeted them, so we stuck their name in a file as a potential trade target. I remmember in Schenn's case specifically Armstrong mentioned that they liked him since his draft year.

 

[Colt55]

Let em all walk.

Who you going to replace him with

 

[Brian39]

Are you sure it was pro scouting that identified Sanford and Sundqvist, and not just left over interest from amateur scouting. They might have been guy our amateur scouts targeted that we though could fall. They potentially got nabbed before we targeted them, so we stuck their name in a file as a potential trade target. I remmember in Schenn's case specifically Armstrong mentioned that they liked him since his draft year.

We were 4+ years removed from their drafts for both of them. If we are crediting that to amateur scouting then I think the question of whether our pro scouts can identify young talent is moot since we don't rely on them for guys who are in their early 20s.

 

[Celtic Note]

We were 4+ years removed from their drafts for both of them. If we are crediting that to amateur scouting then I think the question of whether our pro scouts can identify young talent is moot since we don't rely on them for guys who are in their early 20s.

That’s a fair point.

With regards to finding younger players, I do think Schenn was a relatively known quantity. Yes he blossomed, but then he wilted and blossomed again. The guy is certainly inconsistent. Nevertheless, it was a smart trade.

Sanford is a pretty dime a dozen player. I am not sure he is a feather in the cap of our staff. I would wager that any number of players from a fairly large pool could have replicated his playoff success, which was fairly limited albeit timely.

Sunny was a “ruby in the rough” find. I didn’t say diamond because he is still a bottom six player. He was much better than his initial play suggested. He was a good find.

So we have two wise additions to a roster. My question is does that inspire confidence? To me it’s not enough.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Are you sure it was pro scouting that identified Sanford and Sundqvist, and not just left over interest from amateur scouting. They might have been guy our amateur scouts targeted that we though could fall. They potentially got nabbed before we targeted them, so we stuck their name in a file as a potential trade target. I remmember in Schenn's case specifically Armstrong mentioned that they liked him since his draft year.

Is it that compartmentalized? It makes sense that amateur and pro scouting have some common framework for their evaluations, under the ultimate leadership of one guy. I think we may talk about it here like two totally discrete entities when it probably has more overlap. In other words, I'm not sure the answer to your question really means anything.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

That’s a fair point.

With regards to finding younger players, I do think Schenn was a relatively known quantity. Yes he blossomed, but then he wilted and blossomed again. The guy is certainly inconsistent. Nevertheless, it was a smart trade.

Sanford is a pretty dime a dozen player. I am not sure he is a feather in the cap of our staff. I would wager that any number of players from a fairly large pool could have replicated his playoff success, which was fairly limited albeit timely.

Sunny was a “ruby in the rough” find. I didn’t say diamond because he is still a bottom six player. He was much better than his initial play suggested. He was a good find.

So we have two wise additions to a roster. My question is does that inspire confidence? To me it’s not enough.

Man I remember when I thought Sundqvist wouldn't make the team and was probably not going to be claimed on waivers either. Boy was that wrong. Even after his first year in St Louis, there was nothing I could see to recommend him, but whoever scouted him sure knew what they were doing.

 

[Celtic Note]

Is it that compartmentalized? It makes sense that amateur and pro scouting have some common framework for their evaluations, under the ultimate leadership of one guy. I think we may talk about it here like two totally discrete entities when it probably has more overlap. In other words, I'm not sure the answer to your question really means anything.

I think it is compartmentalized in the sense that one evaluates players from amateur leagues and one watches pro talent. I would have to think that our amateur scouts send along info to our pro scouts however.

 

[Ranksu]

Who you going to replace him with

It was a joke.

Pietro walked

Schwartz walks

Next Parayko walks

Captain ROR walks


I say this as broken record. We have 16.275mill.$ tight on Krug, Faulk and Scandella and we worry can we afford to keep Schwartz at 5-6mill.$.

#prioritize

 

[Majorityof1]

We were 4+ years removed from their drafts for both of them. If we are crediting that to amateur scouting then I think the question of whether our pro scouts can identify young talent is moot since we don't rely on them for guys who are in their early 20s.

Is it that compartmentalized? It makes sense that amateur and pro scouting have some common framework for their evaluations, under the ultimate leadership of one guy. I think we may talk about it here like two totally discrete entities when it probably has more overlap. In other words, I'm not sure the answer to your question really means anything.

Except for the fact that the head of our amateur scouting department is now in Phoenix. If we relied on amateur scouting and if Bill's leaving has diminished our amateur scouting, all levels of our talent evaluation could be in trouble moving forward. I'm not saying either is the case. I am merely posing queries.

 

[MissouriMook]

...
I say this as broken record. We have 16.275mill.$ tight on Krug, Faulk and Scandella and we worry can we afford to keep Schwartz at 5-6mill.$.

But, yeah, you got the "broken record" part right anyway...

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I think it is compartmentalized in the sense that one evaluates players from amateur leagues and one watches pro talent. I would have to think that our amateur scouts send along info to our pro scouts however.

My point is that the same leadership supervises both efforts. The head scouts answer to the same person. It’s not like the each have to invent their own wheel. It makes no sense to think that they use no common tools and techniques.

Bill Armstrong is gone. Tony Feltrin has been the head of amateur scouting for almost a year now. Was there much other turn-over when Bill went to Arizona? Did he take his staff with him? If not, I don’t expect a sudden drop off. Time will tell on that.

It has been fashionable on this forum to venerate the amateur scouting and complain about the pro scouting, but I don’t see much to distinguish them one from the other in terms of effectiveness over the past 5+ years. If not for some favorable trades using Blues prospects as currency, we’d probably view amateur scouting more negatively.

 

[Brian39]

So we have two wise additions to a roster. My question is does that inspire confidence? To me it’s not enough.

For me it absolutely does. I can't think of many teams around the league who have a stable of guys who they pulled from other teams when they were under 24. In this league, teams just don't give up on young guys all that often unless they have proven to have major flaws in their game.

Tampa doesn't have any guys that were acquired before they were 25 that you can credit the pro scouting staff. Sergachev and Cernak are the only young acquisitions on the roster and both of them were coming out of junior when traded (Sergachev had 4 games NHL experience). Sergachev required them giving up a 21 year old former 3rd overall pick in Druin. Cernak was the only real asset coming back in the trade that sent Bishop to LA as a rental. Both Sergachev and Cernak were traded less than 2 years after they were drafted and with a combined 4 games of pro experience.

Washington didn't have much youth credited to their pro scouting staff in 2018. Connolly was signed as a 24 year old UFA, but everyone else was home grown or acquired at 25 or older.

The Pens didn't have any playoff contributor that was acquired from another team before they were 25 in either of their 2 most recent Cup wins.

The 2015 Hawks didn't have any playoff contributors that were acquired from outside the organization before the age of 25.

Excluding the Blues, the last 5 Cup winners and the team currently leading 3-1 in the Final have 1 total player that you can credit a pro scouting staff for identifying and targeting before they were 25. Being able to point at two wise sub-25 additions is absolutely a feather in the cap of the pro scouting staff that should inspire confidence. Especially since both guys were very clearly considered secondary pieces to trades and didn't have much fanfare/hype/pedigree.

I'm not saying that the Blues pro scouting staff is in the clear top 5 or 10 based on those moves, but rather am providing the context for how pro scouting staffs need to be judged when talking about their ability to judge young talent. An expectation that you can easily/regularly pry good 22 and 23 year olds away from teams is unrealistic. Right now, if you start calling teams about their good 22 year olds, the response back is probably Parayko. Think of what you would want in order to move Kyrou or Thomas. That is how every team values their young guys, so threading the needle between "we love this guy" and "his current team doesn't" is exceptionally rare.

 

[Ranksu]

But, yeah, you got the "broken record" part right anyway...

I know and I hate myself for that, but I cant help when I observe our team I get so frustrated knowing how bad situation we are.

I have said things what should be done, but those things havent get any wind under their wings.

Maybe I should just try to ignore situation and sit back and watch it burn?

But yeah, I try to control my broken record.