Confirmed with Link: Jordan Binnington 6 Year Extension

[joe galiba]

Tarasenko was asking a trade request before last season. I dont think he will be eager to sign at a discpunt if he signs at all. I think he has to be the onethat goes.

says the man with oreilly in his name

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I agree that we have more proof of concept that Perron will age more gracefully. However, that doesn't negate the fact that he is already 3 years further along the aging curve.

Let's say we can say with certainty that Perron will be better from age 34-36 than ROR and Tarasenko will be in their 34-36 seasons. That doesn't mean that he will provide more value overall to us since we are in a window right now. ROR and Tarasenko are bigger components to the current roster than Perron is right now. ROR does way more non-offensive heavy lifting than Perron while still producing at a decent clip. He plays 2+ extra minutes a night, he plays center and he will be the guy responsible for matching up against the top player of every team we face. Tarasenko and Perron play similar roles/minutes, but Tarasenko has 35% more offensive production than Perron. I'm confident that ROR and Tarasenko at 31/32 will be noticeably better players next year than Perron at 34. If signing Perron forces us to lose one of 90/91 this summer, next year's team has a larger hole to fill than letting Perron walk. If extending Perron means that you lose both of ROR and Tarasenko beyond next year instead of keeping one, then I think the 2023/24 team and possibly the 2024/25 team is worse. The value gained between Perron's 34-36 years vs ROR/Tarasenko's 34-36 years could very well be more than erased by the value lost by losing the 31-33 years of ROR/Tarasenko to keep Perron from 34-36.

I'd rather eat a market value deal on Tarasenko than a market value deal on Perron (because I think Perron's market value is a 3 year deal with a decent raise on the AAV). Perron being closer to worth his current market price in year 3 of his deal than Tarasenko will be in year 5 of his deal doesn't outweigh the good we'd get out of Tarasenko in the front half of the deal. I think Perron will take a fairly hefty discount and I want to sign him if he does. But I am weary about prioritizing a 34 year old over a 30 or 31 year old because I think the 34 year old will age better.

A big reason I feel this way is because I don't view dead money in 2026+ as a huge risk. The cap will be increasing by millions each year at that point, so contracts that are expensive now will start looking cheaper quickly. A new CBA is coming in the summer of 2026. The NHL has made it clear that LTIRing aging players is pretty highly accepted. We're probably going to have to rebuild/retool at that point anyway. We've locked a lot of aging guys into contracts and the prospect pool isn't good enough for a huge core shift anyway. For all these reasons, I'm very much prioritizing the next 3 years over the years where ROR/Tarasenko are 35+. I view a potential +5% increase to team success right now as about the same value as -10% in 2026. I wouldn't have felt this way without the deals we gave Schenn, Binner, Faulk, and Krug, but here we are. We are in a window right now and Schenn/Krug/Faulk are all 30+. That is the reality, so I'm ready to start mortgaging futures.

It makes me wonder when Armstrong will step aside. For home to create a ‘timebomb’ window where things need to be torn down and rebuilt is antithetical to how he’s always operated in St Louis. Would he do that and then say, “Time for a new captain to come in and do his own rebuild.”

 

[Xerloris]

Tarasenko was asking a trade request before last season. I dont think he will be eager to sign at a discpunt if he signs at all. I think he has to be the onethat goes.

All indications point to that request no longer being active and Armstrong himself said those requests happen all the time but they hardly ever become public knowledge. I honestly wouldn't even worry about it being an issue.