Confirmed with Link: Parayko signs 8-year extension $52 million $6.5 AAV

[Blueston]

Great deal. I am a little worried about his back, but we are f***ed without him. Best to take the gamble on his back and lock in a great AAV. If his back is bad, we were screwed either way. But if his back is good, the contract is a steal.

Think this is right. We had to take this risk bc we didn't have backup plan. If CP, Krug, Faulk, Binnie, ROR, and Schenn are healthy we are still quite good team. With any of them out (or less than healthy) for extended period we struggle to make playoffs.

 

[bluesXwinXtheXcup]

This really isn't a surprise. I remember a couple years ago when Berube (or was it Army?) was asked which player he would want to date his daughter. Said Parayko and its not close.

I don't think they would have been okay letting Petro walk if they were worried about resigning Parayko. Team loves them some Colt55 and its mutual.

I remember that It was Coach Berube.

 

[Celtic Note]

Great deal. I am a little worried about his back, but we are f***ed without him. Best to take the gamble on his back and lock in a great AAV. If his back is bad, we were screwed either way. But if his back is good, the contract is a steal.

I have been thinking about this a bit more and think it makes sense that the Blues committed long-term and got a better AAV in spite of the potential for back issues to possibly derail things. If Parayko does have those issues, then there is some degree of likelihood that they could LTIR him throughout the rest of his career once it gets bad. Many back injuries are degenerative, so they will never heal/get better. At the early onset, those injuries seem to be about limiting and managing flare ups. Once they progress to being more frequent, then it’s more about pain management and adaptation. That point is where hockey really isn’t in the cards anymore as a player. That’s also when LTIR and injury forced retirements come into play.

Essentially, there could be built in contract insurance given his injury situation should it be a long-term issue.

Also, as noted, the team really could not afford to let him go if they are buying and selling this open window business.

 

[Robb_K]

I like it. If Parayko would have walked, The Blues would have needed to add TWO high-quality defencemen. Only $6.5 million is a good bargain, IF Parayko won't be permanently impaired by chronic back problems. Back problems ARE often chronic, so we'll need some good luck. But, Armstrong had no choice. The Blues MIGHT be able to pick up ONE reasonably high-quality D-Man, but not 2. None of their young defencemen are near ready to be the #3 or above addition they need. So, let's hope Mikkola can progress faster than he has been, so far, and become a decent #4 level, and Parayko's back problems are over, and he continues developing from a solid #2, to eventually reaching a true #1 level.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I was assured that Parayko was going to leave for Edmonton as UFA, or that he'd be offended if he didn't get a full NMC. Would it be possible to stop perseverating on NMCs now?

Obviously Parayko is happy in St Louis to sign a deal like this. Maybe the sky isn't falling for the Blues after all. Sure hope Colton has a full recovery from his back injury, but I like the term on this one.

 

[BlueDream]

I was assured that Parayko was going to leave for Edmonton as UFA, or that he'd be offended if he didn't get a full NMC. Would it be possible to stop perseverating on NMCs now?

Obviously Parayko is happy in St Louis to sign a deal like this. Maybe the sky isn't falling for the Blues after all. Sure hope Colton has a full recovery from his back injury, but I like the term on this one.

Well you can ignore Parayko re-signing here. And Schenn and Binnington. And Faulk. And Buchnevich. And Scandella. And Krug and Saad coming on board.

It really is funny the doom and gloom all because one guy left. Clearly we won’t be able to retain anyone else with Army’s unfair principles!

Funny how everyone else seems to have gotten a long-term deal done without issue. Maybe Armstrong wasn’t the problem…hmm…

 

[Thallis]

Well you can ignore Parayko re-signing here. And Schenn and Binnington. And Faulk. And Buchnevich. And Scandella. And Krug and Saad coming on board.

It really is funny the doom and gloom all because one guy left. Clearly we won’t be able to retain anyone else with Army’s unfair principles!

Funny how everyone else seems to have gotten a long-term deal done without issue. Maybe Armstrong wasn’t the problem…hmm…

Holy strawman batman. Who thought any of those players were NMC caliber?

 

[BlueDream]

Holy strawman batman. Who thought any of those players were NMC caliber?

You can keep moving the goal posts all you want but there’s been numerous posts here insinuating we won’t be able to keep any of our core because of the Pietrangelo situation.

There’s literally a thread a few posts down from here where the majority of people voted that we wouldn’t be able to keep Parayko.

I’ll admit, at first I blamed Armstrong for Petro leaving but now it’s pretty clear that Alex would still be here if he wanted to be and wasn’t so stubborn. Armstrong is signing everyone else with ease it seems like.

 

[Majorityof1]

You can keep moving the goal posts all you want but there’s been numerous posts here insinuating we won’t be able to keep any of our core because of the Pietrangelo situation.

There’s literally a thread a few posts down from here where the majority of people voted that we wouldn’t be able to keep Parayko.

I’ll admit, at first I blamed Armstrong for Petro leaving but now it’s pretty clear that Alex would still be here if he wanted to be and wasn’t so stubborn. Armstrong is signing everyone else with ease it seems like.

Pat Maroon must not love his kid. He could still be in St. Louis if he was willing to accept whatever lowball offer Army would give him. If Perron walks because Armstrong won't give him a competitive offer at his age, he must not want to be here. Let's ignore that he has signed here twice: once after getting traded and once after getting exposed in the expansion draft. If he really wanted to be here, he'd accept whatever Armstrong offers, no matter how low it is.

Give me a break with this "If he really wanted to be here narrative". Nobody is arguing that Pietrangelo couldn't have compromised down to what Armstrong was offering and accepted an offer to remain a Blue. Likewise, he'd be a Blue if Armstrong was willing to compromise up to what he wanted. The question that is being discussed by the more intelligent members of the board is which one if any SHOULD have compromised, not COULD they have.

As to whether we can re-sign our players, most of the trepidation with Parayko (at least for me) was because he was a big Oilers fan growing up. Having won a cup here, I didn't know if he could pass up the boy hood dream of playing for Edmonton. The NMC question is about players who could get an NMC elsewhere. Those are generally the upper echelon players. For whatever reason Parayko didn't sign a contract of an upper-echelon player. That could be becuase he loved it here and took a team friendly deal. It could be because people get paid for offense and his numbers are merely ok. Or it could be back-related. Whatever the reason,not many $6.5M contracts have NMCs.

Can we re-sign ROR without an NMC, or could we have signed a guy like Dougie Hamilton? Those are the questions the NMC will play a role. And it will only play a role if that particular player puts any value in an NMC. Not everyone will. But I doubt anyone is arguing that we should give NMCs away like candy on Halloween. Its just a tool that we should have in our arsenal for the right player. If its not necessary, then its not necessary.

Also, we didn't sign Hoffman, Chara or Sutter. All are guys we expressed interest in. So we didn't sign everyone with ease. We signed the guys we signed with apparent ease, because we don't see the negotiations. Who knows how hard it was to sign them. We could have paid significantly more AAV than their next best offer and we'd have no clue.

 

[Blanick]

Great contract here IMO. The back issues of the last season are slightly worrying but it is about time the Blues get some good luck on injuries. This contract also shows me that Parayko wants to be here in St. Louis. With the crazy contracts that were handed out this summer some team would have absolutely offered him 8+ million on a 7 year contract.

Just really, really happy with this deal.

 

[Frenzy31]

Pat Maroon must not love his kid. He could still be in St. Louis if he was willing to accept whatever lowball offer Army would give him. If Perron walks because Armstrong won't give him a competitive offer at his age, he must not want to be here. Let's ignore that he has signed here twice: once after getting traded and once after getting exposed in the expansion draft. If he really wanted to be here, he'd accept whatever Armstrong offers, no matter how low it is.

Give me a break with this "If he really wanted to be here narrative". Nobody is arguing that Pietrangelo couldn't have compromised down to what Armstrong was offering and accepted an offer to remain a Blue. Likewise, he'd be a Blue if Armstrong was willing to compromise up to what he wanted. The question that is being discussed by the more intelligent members of the board is which one if any SHOULD have compromised, not COULD they have.

As to whether we can re-sign our players, most of the trepidation with Parayko (at least for me) was because he was a big Oilers fan growing up. Having won a cup here, I didn't know if he could pass up the boy hood dream of playing for Edmonton. The NMC question is about players who could get an NMC elsewhere. Those are generally the upper echelon players. For whatever reason Parayko didn't sign a contract of an upper-echelon player. That could be becuase he loved it here and took a team friendly deal. It could be because people get paid for offense and his numbers are merely ok. Or it could be back-related. Whatever the reason,not many $6.5M contracts have NMCs.

Can we re-sign ROR without an NMC, or could we have signed a guy like Dougie Hamilton? Those are the questions the NMC will play a role. And it will only play a role if that particular player puts any value in an NMC. Not everyone will. But I doubt anyone is arguing that we should give NMCs away like candy on Halloween. Its just a tool that we should have in our arsenal for the right player. If its not necessary, then its not necessary.

Also, we didn't sign Hoffman, Chara or Sutter. All are guys we expressed interest in. So we didn't sign everyone with ease. We signed the guys we signed with apparent ease, because we don't see the negotiations. Who knows how hard it was to sign them. We could have paid significantly more AAV than their next best offer and we'd have no clue.

I want nothing to do with Hamilton at that contact. Nor do I want Nurse, Jones at 9+. As for Hoffman, Chara and Sutter. I would rather have Saad and Buch then Hoffman due to playing style. Both are on great contacts. Chara wanted to stay East. And Sutter went to where he wanted to go. Kind of like a Dman we lost last year.

As for the shot about the "more intelligent posters." So we disagree about the NMC and therefore are not intelligent.... typical cancel culture weak ass bullshit. We are somehow wrong because we disagree with you and are not intelligent.....

 

[Brian39]

When Faulk and Krug are getting 6.5mill.$ AAV and somehow Parayko gets same money it's easy to say this is steal contract. Term is long, but I would be more worried about Krug and Faulk regress for last year's of their contracts vs. Parayko's. It's not like Parayko plays physical way so his body will slow down. Look how Faulk play, we will most likely see fast regression in his speed etc.

Great job by Army get Parayko secured.

I'm not worried Parayko isn't full healthy, but if he isn't this contract is awful looking how long term is, but have to believe our doctors are top of things.

Like I said in my post, this is easily my favorite contract out of Parayko, Faulk and Krug. However, the bolded seems foolish. Parayko is coming off a back injury that held him out for 20 games and saw him noticeably less effective for at least another 15-20. He hasn't looked like an elite shutdown guy for at least 75% of the last 2 seasons and this contract takes him right up to his 37th birthday. Extremely large people tend to lose athleticism and/or succumb to chronic injuries more often than "regular" sized athletes and Parayko plays a game that is heavily reliant on speed.

Faulk's contract expires shortly after his 35th birthday. Krug's contract expires shortly after his 36th birthday.

We're comparing the age regression curves of Parayko at 34-37 to Faulk at 32-35 and Krug at 33-36. Even if Parayko has aged the best of the three by 35 years old, that is largely irrelevant. We will have 2 weeks of the regular season plus the playoffs after Faulk turns 35. Then his contract is finished. Krug turns 35 right at the end of the regular season in the 2nd to last year of his deal. We'll have Parayko for part of a playoff run and then 2 more seasons after he turns 35. I don't think it is all a safe bet that Parayko is better in the last couple years of his deal than Faulk/Krug are on theirs.

Again, I'm happy with the deal and I like it better than any of the other 6+ year deals we have given out since we extended Tarasenko. But it is very much mortgaging the future for a manageable cap hit today.

 

[Thallis]

You can keep moving the goal posts all you want but there’s been numerous posts here insinuating we won’t be able to keep any of our core because of the Pietrangelo situation.

There’s literally a thread a few posts down from here where the majority of people voted that we wouldn’t be able to keep Parayko.

I’ll admit, at first I blamed Armstrong for Petro leaving but now it’s pretty clear that Alex would still be here if he wanted to be and wasn’t so stubborn. Armstrong is signing everyone else with ease it seems like.

There are many reasons why people leave. Just because people thought he might test market doesn't mean it's because of a lack of NMC. Telling you that equating the two is what literally nobody is saying isn't moving the goal posts, it's just the truth.

 

[Brian39]

I want nothing to do with Hamilton at that contact. Nor do I want Nurse, Jones at 9+. As for Hoffman, Chara and Sutter. I would rather have Saad and Buch then Hoffman due to playing style. Both are on great contacts. Chara wanted to stay East. And Sutter went to where he wanted to go. Kind of like a Dman we lost last year.

As for the shot about the "more intelligent posters." So we disagree about the NMC and therefore are not intelligent.... typical cancel culture weak ass bullshit. We are somehow wrong because we disagree with you and are not intelligent.....

He very specifically is talking about people who keep repeating "if he wanted to be here, then he'd be here. He wanted to leave, simple as that." That is a very, very different stance than "teams should never offer NMCs." The first statement is absolutely a declaration about whether Petro COULD still be here. The second is very much a statement about whether the team SHOULD have made another concession to keep him here. People parroting the first statement are absolutely not making an argument one way or another about the debate on NMCs.

If a person's only disagreement is about the merit of offering NMCs, then his statement had nothing to do with that person.

If a person's argument about the merit of offering NMCs boils down to "a player just shouldn't ask for one if they like the city/team" then that person isn't actually participating in the discussion about the merit of offering NMCs. Either that person is trying to intentionally deflect from the conversation or that person is lacking the intelligence to have a discussion about a contract negotiation in the NHL player marketplace.

You fundamentally misunderstood the conduct Majority was criticizing and made a false equivalency in order to play victim and for some reason complain about cancel culture (which has absolutely nothing to do with simply calling someone an idiot by the way).

 

[MissouriMook]

Color me shocked that (what should have been) a happy thread about re-signing one defenseman turned into a pissing contest (again) about why another defenseman didn't re-sign here last year. This place, man.

 

[BlueKnight]

It's a steal of a deal and I pray to god that he stays healthy. I still have my criticisms on the defense and Armstrong.

 

[TruBlu]

Two things are certain. Parayko likes it in St. Louis and he also understands that money in hand is better than "the most money." This is how you build a team. I'd argue that the value of Parayko's contract is better than that of Pietrangelo's.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

These long contracts scare me less and less as LTIR usage becomes more normalized among everyone in the industry. If he starts to really suck by age 35/36, we simply say, hey man, we'll pay you your full salary but you're done playing and going on LTIR with a "back issue." As competitive as these guys are, getting paid 4-5 million to do literally nothing is hard for anyone to pass up on.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Color me shocked that (what should have been) a happy thread about re-signing one defenseman turned into a pissing contest (again) about why another defenseman didn't re-sign here last year. This place, man.

First person to reference Pietrangelo in this thread was Blueston. The second was BlueDream.

Neither poster belongs to the group of posters who were upset with Armstrong (for whatever reason) after the Pietrangelo situation played out, so if you want to know why the issue came up in here, perhaps you should start by asking them why they referenced such a sore subject in what should be a happy thread?

Edit: Brian39 mentioned Pietrangelo's $6.5M deal in passing as well on the first page.

 

[Xerloris]

I was assured that Parayko was going to leave for Edmonton as UFA, or that he'd be offended if he didn't get a full NMC. Would it be possible to stop perseverating on NMCs now?

Obviously Parayko is happy in St Louis to sign a deal like this. Maybe the sky isn't falling for the Blues after all. Sure hope Colton has a full recovery from his back injury, but I like the term on this one.

I think Parayko will be just fine. I know not all back injuries are the same but I hurt mine in my mid 20's and I'm still doing just fine.

Pat Maroon must not love his kid. He could still be in St. Louis if he was willing to accept whatever lowball offer Army would give him.

Also, we didn't sign Hoffman, Chara or Sutter. All are guys we expressed interest in. So we didn't sign everyone with ease. We signed the guys we signed with apparent ease, because we don't see the negotiations. Who knows how hard it was to sign them. We could have paid significantly more AAV than their next best offer and we'd have no clue.

I know the first part of your post is hyperbolic but Maroon did sign for a lowball offer with Tampa, the issue was Armstrong decided we didn't have the room for him. As for Suter and Chara, they both wanted to sign here but circumstances were not in eithers favor. Four years for Suter was to long and The Blues simply are to far away from Boston for Chara. Neither of those have anything to do with Armstrong or the reputation the Blues have supposedly earned by not giving out NMC's.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I was assured that Parayko was going to leave for Edmonton as UFA, or that he'd be offended if he didn't get a full NMC. Would it be possible to stop perseverating on NMCs now?

Obviously Parayko is happy in St Louis to sign a deal like this. Maybe the sky isn't falling for the Blues after all. Sure hope Colton has a full recovery from his back injury, but I like the term on this one.

Pietrangelo is also clearly on a different level than Parayko. Parayko never quite developed the offense many of us hoped so I think that knocks him back a tier. But frankly, I still would have expected him to command a NMC. I suspect the back issues may have played a role in this. But we may never know.

 

[Majorityof1]

I want nothing to do with Hamilton at that contact. Nor do I want Nurse, Jones at 9+. As for Hoffman, Chara and Sutter. I would rather have Saad and Buch then Hoffman due to playing style. Both are on great contacts. Chara wanted to stay East. And Sutter went to where he wanted to go. Kind of like a Dman we lost last year.

As for the shot about the "more intelligent posters." So we disagree about the NMC and therefore are not intelligent.... typical cancel culture weak ass bullshit. We are somehow wrong because we disagree with you and are not intelligent.....

He very specifically is talking about people who keep repeating "if he wanted to be here, then he'd be here. He wanted to leave, simple as that." That is a very, very different stance than "teams should never offer NMCs." The first statement is absolutely a declaration about whether Petro COULD still be here. The second is very much a statement about whether the team SHOULD have made another concession to keep him here. People parroting the first statement are absolutely not making an argument one way or another about the debate on NMCs.

If a person's only disagreement is about the merit of offering NMCs, then his statement had nothing to do with that person.

If a person's argument about the merit of offering NMCs boils down to "a player just shouldn't ask for one if they like the city/team" then that person isn't actually participating in the discussion about the merit of offering NMCs. Either that person is trying to intentionally deflect from the conversation or that person is lacking the intelligence to have a discussion about a contract negotiation in the NHL player marketplace.

You fundamentally misunderstood the conduct Majority was criticizing and made a false equivalency in order to play victim and for some reason complain about cancel culture (which has absolutely nothing to do with simply calling someone an idiot by the way).

So yeah, what Brian39 said. If you don't like NMC's or don't think Pietrangelo was worth one AND you can intelligently defend your position, I have much respect for you. If you keep making inane arguments that misunderstand the other sides point and distract from the conversation, then I don't. I don't care if someone agrees with me or not. I care if they can have a rational and productive conversation about those disagreements. There are several posters who agree with me that make me cringe. Several times my most respected posters disagree with me as well. The conclusion you come to isn't the sign of intelligence, its the process and understanding that got you there.

As for the people we didn't sign, again you miss the point. It doesn't matter which one you like better or why they didn't sign. The fact that we were interested in them and didn't sign them is proof that we did NOT "sign everyone with ease". We unsurprisingly are not a franchise that nobody wants to play for regardless of contract. The only one who is pushing that narrative is one of those posters who makes me cringe. However, it is also unsurprising that we are not a franchise that everyone is dying to play for regardless of contract. We can't sign everyone with ease. We have to offer players the most attractive package to them, whatever that may be. It could be any combination of money, term, talent of line-mates, location, competitive window, opportunity to play, NTC, NMC, bonuses, coaching staff, medical staff, etc. It all depends on what the player values.

 

[tomin]

I like the contract. Term and money is balanced and makes sense. No one knows the condition of his back moving forward but I'd like to think that was heavily weighed between both parties when putting together a deal. We probably see some of that in the numbers in this extension. I do feel better knowing he's locked in here. If he's unhealthy down the line it'll have to get addressed and adjustments made, if he can play at the level we need him to then great we've got a home grown solid #1/#2 D man locked in. This is a great thread and great for the team. When you look at some comps this is a great extension! Go Blues. I'm very exited to see the new version of this championship caliber team this year.

 

[Majorityof1]

I think Parayko will be just fine. I know not all back injuries are the same but I hurt mine in my mid 20's and I'm still doing just fine.



I know the first part of your post is hyperbolic but Maroon did sign for a lowball offer with Tampa, the issue was Armstrong decided we didn't have the room for him. As for Suter and Chara, they both wanted to sign here but circumstances were not in eithers favor. Four years for Suter was to long and The Blues simply are to far away from Boston for Chara. Neither of those have anything to do with Armstrong or the reputation the Blues have supposedly earned by not giving out NMC's.

I'm sure Armstrong would have taken Maroon for a league minimum, 2-way deal with a low AHL salary. Maroon just didn't debase himself enough to stay here. (Yes, I am being hyperbolic, reductio ad absurdum).

As to why the other players didn't sign, that is kind of my point. Different things matter to different players: term to Sutter, location to Chara, NMC to Pietrangelo. Just because Saad signed here, does not mean someone with a different set of wants would. Nor does it mean we signed him with ease. Saad and Buchnevich signing here has as much to do with NMCs as Sutter or Chara not signing here. Neither was getting an NMC regardless of where they signed.

 

[BlueOil]

happy my jersey is secure for quite awhile here and happy to have parayko on the backend. premier shutdown defenseman and, if he can score more, might be able to be a low end #1 for this team. he still arguably needs an upgraded partner, but a full season of him is worth $6.5m for awhile i think.