Speculation: Pietrangelo's future (reports: to go to FA)

[MissouriMook]

I don't think it is as bleak as some are making it out to be. We are absolutely a better team with Petro than without him, but I don't see this being a prolonged stretch of mediocrity unless we try to force things. If Petro walks and next season doesn't go the way you want, you trade Schwartz at the deadline for futures. Steen, Bozak, Schwartz and Gunnarsson will all come off the books for 2021-22.

One of the most important things to figure out either way next season is whether or not Kyrou is going to be a reliable Top 6 forward. Even with the losses of Petro, Steen, Schwartz and Bozak, you still have a D corps to build around of Parayko and Faulk on the right side and Dunn, Scandella, Mikkola and Perunovich on the left. You have ROR, Schenn, Thomas, Kyrou, Perron and Sanford as forwards to build around. You have a big question mark in Tarasenko, but you will have cap flexibility to add a premium forward or defenseman to that mix in the next 2-3 years along with (hopefully) some hits from the prospects and draft capital you've accumulated.

I don't feel like it gets talked about enough, but my biggest concern right now is the goaltending. If Binnington is more like Bubble Binny going forward than 2019 Binny, we don't have anyone to address that position immediately unless Husso pans out quickly. That means spending money on a free agent goalie crap shoot.

TL;DR - I think we've got what we need to quickly return to competing for a Cup even if Petro walks, or the young talent and future draft/prospect capital from selling a few pieces to quickly supplement the roster and get back there in 2-3 years.

 

[Celtic Note]

I don't think it is as bleak as some are making it out to be. We are absolutely a better team with Petro than without him, but I don't see this being a prolonged stretch of mediocrity unless we try to force things. If Petro walks and next season doesn't go the way you want, you trade Schwartz at the deadline for futures. Steen, Bozak, Schwartz and Gunnarsson will all come off the books for 2021-22.

One of the most important things to figure out either way next season is whether or not Kyrou is going to be a reliable Top 6 forward. Even with the losses of Petro, Steen, Schwartz and Bozak, you still have a D corps to build around of Parayko and Faulk on the right side and Dunn, Scandella, Mikkola and Perunovich on the left. You have ROR, Schenn, Thomas, Kyrou, Perron and Sanford as forwards to build around. You have a big question mark in Tarasenko, but you will have cap flexibility to add a premium forward or defenseman to that mix in the next 2-3 years along with (hopefully) some hits from the prospects and draft capital you've accumulated.

I don't feel like it gets talked about enough, but my biggest concern right now is the goaltending. If Binnington is more like Bubble Binny going forward than 2019 Binny, we don't have anyone to address that position immediately unless Husso pans out quickly. That means spending money on a free agent goalie crap shoot.

TL;DR - I think we've got what we need to quickly return to competing for a Cup even if Petro walks, or the young talent and future draft/prospect capital from selling a few pieces to quickly supplement the roster and get back there in 2-3 years.

Losing Petro, JBo, Schwartz, and productive Tarasenko all within two years seems pretty crippling to me, especially when their replacements are significant question marks. I am not sure how we can pencil in those young guys and call ourselves a contender. Maybe we get lucky and strike gold a few times, but I can’t imagine the percentages of that happening will instill much confidence.

 

[Alklha]

The one wildcard in that is the involvement in ownership. We don't know if they have put an internal cap on how much Army could spend. You would have to think that they moved Allen to free up cap space in order to sign Petro, but possibly ownership wants to cut cap because they don't know how this season will play out. Could they really afford to spend to the cap if we play this season with limited fans? I have no idea myself, but it is an angle a lot of people are overlooking. I can't see most teams wild about spending guaranteed money when their revenue for the upcoming season is very much up in the air.

That wildcard doesn't really change the point I was making. If Pietrangelo was wanting a deal done last year, and his demands were reasonable? The deal should have been done last year and the current circumstances are meaningless. We'll see if that was the case, but it's how Pietrangelo is saying it was.

As for ownership... I don't think that is an overly likely scenario for a variety of reasons.

To start with, the deal can be structured in a way that the big money isn't in year 1 or year 2. That is actually beneficial to Pietrangelo as well, as it means he has lower escrow. Cap hit is one number, but the meaningful number is the salary paid by year. We could still offer him something like $8.4m and be paying the same in the first couple of years as a deal at $7.7m.

Ownership has also been willing to spend beyond the cap in prior years. They're happy to have multiple players on one-way deals in the AHL, or have multiple guys on $400k+ in the AHL. They are also happy to give players a degree of lockout protection by giving them lower salaries in potential lockout years, which is a risk considering that the end of the last two CBAs have resulted in lockouts. So 20/21 was a lockout risk season and we see Tarasenko's salary drop from $9.5m last year to $5.5m this year, Parayko's drop from $5.25m to $3.35m, Schwartz's from $5.75m to $4m. 22/23 was also seen as a lockout risk and we see the significant drops in salary in the Tarasenko, Schenn and Faulk deals that reflect that.

Owership know business. They'll be happier cutting lower end assets and keeping the more difficult to replace assets. You're more likely to go deep in the playoffs in 20/21, and start making significant revenue, with Pietrangelo rather than letting him go and keeping lesser assets.

It should be noted that our current expenditure for next season is $68.265m (23 players; 21 one-way contracts & the Thomas & Kyrou ELCs). It's actually very manageable for us to extend Pietrangelo at something like $8.25m and end up at ~$70m salary expenditure next season once we look at who would be moved to create cap space. This $70m seems to be the magic number talked about by the media, and that's what we're actually naturally looking at.

Also, if salary is a concern then buying out Steen is going to be very much on the table. People talk about paying a player for nothing, but that's not the correct perspective. Buying out Steen would cost $1.167m next season rather than $3.5m, his roster replacement is already signed at $700k (DLR)... it's a net saving to ownership. Yes, there is $1.167m owed to Steen the following season, but that deferral is valuable if they're hurting for cash now and we're still making a net saving on the total buyout + roster replacement cost over letting Steen play out his final year.

 

[Stlblue50]

It’s pretty funny to see people keep posting about a re-build will be needed if the Blues lose Petro. Just for a friendly reminder, the Blues have the same group of forwards that won the cup a year ago and then went on to be 2nd in the league in points this season after 90% of the season was completed. Name one of these players that won’t be in their prime anymore in the near future?

DP57 and Bozak can be brought up only because of age. Perron just had one of his best seasons of his career and has been close to that level for quite a while. Bozak only has a year left on his deal right? He’s replaceable but is an important player.

I’m honestly just as concerned, possibly more about losing Jaybo. The guy was somehow playing some of the best hockey of his career at 36 years old!

I will admit that I am now more concerned about the Blues defense because losing both Jaybo and Petro would be a huge hit. If Bo would have been back again for this upcoming season then the Blues could have handled the loss of Petro much better.

 

[SaintLouHaintBlue]

What would be the most par-the-course, ho-hum thing that could happen in this situation?

 

[Note Worthy]

It’s pretty funny to see people keep posting about a re-build will be needed if the Blues lose Petro. Just for a friendly reminder, the Blues have the same group of forwards that won the cup a year ago and then went on to be 2nd in the league in points this season after 90% of the season was completed. Name one of these players that won’t be in their prime anymore in the near future?

DP57 and Bozak can be brought up only because of age. Perron just had one of his best seasons of his career and has been close to that level for quite a while. Bozak only has a year left on his deal right? He’s replaceable but is an important player.

I’m honestly just as concerned, possibly more about losing Jaybo. The guy was somehow playing some of the best hockey of his career at 36 years old!

I will admit that I am now more concerned about the Blues defense because losing both Jaybo and Petro would be a huge hit. If Bo would have been back again for this upcoming season then the Blues could have handled the loss of Petro much better.

Okay...but they won't have their franchise defenseman who was critical to those achievements you listed. It's comical how you just causally disregard that important piece.

 

[The Note]

What would be the most par-the-course, ho-hum thing that could happen in this situation?

Pietrangelo walks. The Blues sign Brodie/Tanev for 5+ years and we hear all offseason about depth and being a team of "well paid players" "liking our group" and Tarasenko being "as good as a trade". Finish 3rd in the Central and lose in the first round.

Okay...but they won't have their franchise defenseman who was critical to those achievements you listed. It's comical how you just causally disregard that important piece.

Also conveniently glosses over the fact that they've lost one of their best forwards and best goal scorers and you have no idea what you'll be getting out of him moving forward.

 

[execwrite1]

I don't think it is as bleak as some are making it out to be. We are absolutely a better team with Petro than without him, but I don't see this being a prolonged stretch of mediocrity unless we try to force things. If Petro walks and next season doesn't go the way you want, you trade Schwartz at the deadline for futures. Steen, Bozak, Schwartz and Gunnarsson will all come off the books for 2021-22.

One of the most important things to figure out either way next season is whether or not Kyrou is going to be a reliable Top 6 forward. Even with the losses of Petro, Steen, Schwartz and Bozak, you still have a D corps to build around of Parayko and Faulk on the right side and Dunn, Scandella, Mikkola and Perunovich on the left. You have ROR, Schenn, Thomas, Kyrou, Perron and Sanford as forwards to build around. You have a big question mark in Tarasenko, but you will have cap flexibility to add a premium forward or defenseman to that mix in the next 2-3 years along with (hopefully) some hits from the prospects and draft capital you've accumulated.

I don't feel like it gets talked about enough, but my biggest concern right now is the goaltending. If Binnington is more like Bubble Binny going forward than 2019 Binny, we don't have anyone to address that position immediately unless Husso pans out quickly. That means spending money on a free agent goalie crap shoot.

TL;DR - I think we've got what we need to quickly return to competing for a Cup even if Petro walks, or the young talent and future draft/prospect capital from selling a few pieces to quickly supplement the roster and get back there in 2-3 years.

Agree with all your points, particularly on the goaltending. Binnington is the great unknown. He could bounce back or prove to be a one-shot wonder (but what a one-shot).

Surely the preference is to keep Petro (although the back end years will be quite a noose on the payroll). But there are ways produce a contending team without him.

If Binnington didn't emerge from nowhere last year there would have been no Cup with Petro.

 

[67Blues]

That wildcard doesn't really change the point I was making. If Pietrangelo was wanting a deal done last year, and his demands were reasonable? The deal should have been done last year and the current circumstances are meaningless. We'll see if that was the case, but it's how Pietrangelo is saying it was.

As for ownership... I don't think that is an overly likely scenario for a variety of reasons.

To start with, the deal can be structured in a way that the big money isn't in year 1 or year 2. That is actually beneficial to Pietrangelo as well, as it means he has lower escrow. Cap hit is one number, but the meaningful number is the salary paid by year. We could still offer him something like $8.4m and be paying the same in the first couple of years as a deal at $7.7m.

Ownership has also been willing to spend beyond the cap in prior years. They're happy to have multiple players on one-way deals in the AHL, or have multiple guys on $400k+ in the AHL. They are also happy to give players a degree of lockout protection by giving them lower salaries in potential lockout years, which is a risk considering that the end of the last two CBAs have resulted in lockouts. So 20/21 was a lockout risk season and we see Tarasenko's salary drop from $9.5m last year to $5.5m this year, Parayko's drop from $5.25m to $3.35m, Schwartz's from $5.75m to $4m. 22/23 was also seen as a lockout risk and we see the significant drops in salary in the Tarasenko, Schenn and Faulk deals that reflect that.

Owership know business. They'll be happier cutting lower end assets and keeping the more difficult to replace assets. You're more likely to go deep in the playoffs in 20/21, and start making significant revenue, with Pietrangelo rather than letting him go and keeping lesser assets.

It should be noted that our current expenditure for next season is $68.265m (23 players; 21 one-way contracts & the Thomas & Kyrou ELCs). It's actually very manageable for us to extend Pietrangelo at something like $8.25m and end up at ~$70m salary expenditure next season once we look at who would be moved to create cap space. This $70m seems to be the magic number talked about by the media, and that's what we're actually naturally looking at.

Also, if salary is a concern then buying out Steen is going to be very much on the table. People talk about paying a player for nothing, but that's not the correct perspective. Buying out Steen would cost $1.167m next season rather than $3.5m, his roster replacement is already signed at $700k (DLR)... it's a net saving to ownership. Yes, there is $1.167m owed to Steen the following season, but that deferral is valuable if they're hurting for cash now and we're still making a net saving on the total buyout + roster replacement cost over letting Steen play out his final year.

I agree with you that if Petro's demands were reasonable, they would have extended him last year because no one at that time even knew what Covid was, so that excuse wouldn't fly. But it could come down to a matter of principle if Petro is stuck on SB and Army and ownership are deadset against giving any SB. That very well could be the impasse, and although it doesn't affect the AAV of the contract, it may affect the perception and thus the reason why we don't have a deal in place.

I also agree with you on the Steen buyout. It makes economic sense if they need to pull that trigger to free up cap space. That money is negligible in the overall scheme of getting things done since he only has 1 year left on his contract.

One of my concerns is looking past this coming season into next. What will Binnington demand? What will happen with Schwartz? How big will Thomas' raise be? Will Kyrou start playing better and also require a raise? You can add on Sanford and Barbie who will also be due raises, but I suspect Sanford will be minimal, but Barbie could command a decent bump. Add a salary for Petro of say $8.5m, we'd have about $25m to address those players. I suspect some of those players on that list won't be back or gone by the TDL.

 

[A1LeafNation]

Yeah, I am bummed out too, fellow Blues fans. . Btw, may as well stay on our board for Pietrangelo talk/news. The Pietrangelo thread on the main boards has been turned into a thread about the Toronto Maple Leafs.

I thinks its all negotiations through the media and he remains a blue.

JT talks were quiet up until July 1. Stamkos had noise around him and he ended up resigning the day before July 1.

I think it's 60-40 in favour of the blues.

 

[MissouriMook]

Losing Petro, JBo, Schwartz, and productive Tarasenko all within two years seems pretty crippling to me, especially when their replacements are significant question marks. I am not sure how we can pencil in those young guys and call ourselves a contender. Maybe we get lucky and strike gold a few times, but I can’t imagine the percentages of that happening will instill much confidence.

Well, for starters, if we're discussing a scenario where Petro doesn't return in the first place, three of those four are already gone. You certainly don't go into next season as sellers, but moving Schwartz if you're going to do a re-tool/mini-rebuild makes sense if things don't go as you hope.

My thought is that if you embrace the idea of 2-3 lean years before things get back to contender status you still have an awful lot to build on. The idea of becoming the Wild (or more appropriately, the Blues from 2009-2018) because you hang on to good players until they age off your roster is why you move on from a guy like Schwartz instead of keeping him as part of your core. You probably have 3-5 more good years of ROR, Schenn, Parayko and Faulk all being productive at the same time before one or more of them starts to fade. Teams that mini-re-build or re-tool properly build around a few existing core guys, newer core guys (like Thomas, Kyrou, Dunn and hopefully one or both of Mikkola and Perunovich), and compliment with developed prospects and strategic UFA signings. If you're moving Schwartz at the deadline next season because the team is fading, ideally you exchange him for an NHL ready prospect rather than the lotto ticket of a late 1st round pick.

Going into 2021-2022 right now (per CapFriendly) we have $33,450,000 in cap space with the following 12 man roster:

F: ROR, Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Sunny, Blais, Mac Mac (RFAs are Thomas, Kyrou, Sanford, Barby, DLR)
D: Faulk, Paryako, Scandella, Bortuzzo (Dunn is currently and RFA)
G: Husso

I can't see those 5 RFA forwards costing more than $10M-$12M and Dunn is probably less than $4M. That leaves you $18M-$20M to fill a starting goalie and 4 other roster spots, and 2-3 of those are likely to be ELC level salaries. I just don't think the mini-re-build/re-tool path is as dire as people are making it out to be.

 

[Alklha]

One of my concerns is looking past this coming season into next. What will Binnington demand? What will happen with Schwartz? How big will Thomas' raise be? Will Kyrou start playing better and also require a raise? You can add on Sanford and Barbie who will also be due raises, but I suspect Sanford will be minimal, but Barbie could command a decent bump. Add a salary for Petro of say $8.5m, we'd have about $25m to address those players. I suspect some of those players on that list won't be back or gone by the TDL.

If we work on the basis that Pietrangelo gets $8.5m and we move Bozak & Dunn at the draft this year, then we have just over $24m in cap space for 21/22 with nine players to sign/replace...

Steen replaced with a $1m player.
Schwartz isn't getting more than $6.5m (Schenn).
Say Sanford has a good year and is looking at $3.75m.
Barbashev isn't getting more than $2.75m (Sundqvist).
Kyrou is looking at a $1.5m bridge (Sanford, Blais, Barbashev).
DLR with a $750k prospect (Poganski?).
Gunnarsson replaced with Perunovich/Mikkola ($925k).
Binnington is highly unlikely to get more than $6m.

I think they are all pretty realistic numbers based on them having good years and it's ~$23m. So it's about opening up space for what is likely to be a Robert Thomas bridge deal.

That's before remembering that we'll lose a contract to Seattle, so we'll have some flexibility there.

Looking ahead it is all manageable, but it's tight. It is making roster changes more awkward, but it isn't cap hell.

 

[Celtic Note]

Well, for starters, if we're discussing a scenario where Petro doesn't return in the first place, three of those four are already gone. You certainly don't go into next season as sellers, but moving Schwartz if you're going to do a re-tool/mini-rebuild makes sense if things don't go as you hope.

My thought is that if you embrace the idea of 2-3 lean years before things get back to contender status you still have an awful lot to build on. The idea of becoming the Wild (or more appropriately, the Blues from 2009-2018) because you hang on to good players until they age off your roster is why you move on from a guy like Schwartz instead of keeping him as part of your core. You probably have 3-5 more good years of ROR, Schenn, Parayko and Faulk all being productive at the same time before one or more of them starts to fade. Teams that mini-re-build or re-tool properly build around a few existing core guys, newer core guys (like Thomas, Kyrou, Dunn and hopefully one or both of Mikkola and Perunovich), and compliment with developed prospects and strategic UFA signings. If you're moving Schwartz at the deadline next season because the team is fading, ideally you exchange him for an NHL ready prospect rather than the lotto ticket of a late 1st round pick.

Going into 2021-2022 right now (per CapFriendly) we have $33,450,000 in cap space with the following 12 man roster:

F: ROR, Tarasenko, Schenn, Perron, Sunny, Blais, Mac Mac (RFAs are Thomas, Kyrou, Sanford, Barby, DLR)
D: Faulk, Paryako, Scandella, Bortuzzo (Dunn is currently and RFA)
G: Husso

I can't see those 5 RFA forwards costing more than $10M-$12M and Dunn is probably less than $4M. That leaves you $18M-$20M to fill a starting goalie and 4 other roster spots, and 2-3 of those are likely to be ELC level salaries. I just don't think the mini-re-build/re-tool path is as dire as people are making it out to be.

A couple of things...
If we have 2-3 lean years, then what is left of our core will only have a couple years of useful play left (3 to 5 - (2 to 3 = 1 to 3). Those 1-3 years would fall outside of their primes. If we are lucky, a couple may still be pretty good. So the core will be worse because we lost a big chunk of it and because it will have diminished in capability.

If 2-3 years is our timetable, then what players are we expecting to develop to take over the missing and aging core? I am not seeing much in our system that will amount to being on par with our current core. We don’t have a Petro in the system and if we draft one, it will take longer than 3 years from now for that player to have an impact. Mikkola looks pretty good defensively, but has minimal offensive upside from what we have seen to date, so I think you can pencil him in as a third pairing guy. Dunn maybe a 2nd paring guy, but has to be able to clean up his defensive game to do so. Peurnovich maybe breaks out or maybe doesn’t. He hasn’t played pro hockey to the point where we have an idea. All we know is he has high offensive talent with suspect defensive skills. Out of that group there is no two-way, 20+ minute a night guy.

I am also not sure we have forwards to replace what we lose and for inevitable decline. Thomas’s growth may cover the decline of Schenn. Kyrou is still a great unknown. But, if he is our Schwartz replacement, then he will need to out point Schwartz, because Jaden is the much better all around player. Let’s just say those deficits are covered for the sake of argument (even though I wouldn’t bet on it). Who covers any loss in play from Tarasenko, ROR, or Perron? I am not seeing players currently in the system that fill those voids. If we are to look outside of the organization, then I would ask who are we trading? Our prospect pool is both pretty bare or already pencilled in to replace someone. If we are trading old core pieces then you have to factor in their replacement loss.

One of the biggest challenges for a retool is we will be losing both Petro and JBo with no assets coming back. Those are big asset deficits.


Our window with our current core is probably 3-4 years. Whatever happens probably has to happen within that window, unless you are fortunate enough to create a newly emerging core. That would essentially take having a Petro draft and a Schwartz + Tarasenko draft again, with one of those happening this year.

 

[Ranksu]

So Doug thought Faulk can be played at powerplay. Pietro, Paraykoa and Dunn beat him on that part.
Doug was high on Faulk's career at Carolina.
Doug thought Faulk would not need sheltered icetime.
Doug thought Faulk would make Blues better.

5:45 when JR is asking does it have affect on Pietrangelo.
7:00 we don't have highest price of athletics, but we've really well paid athletics. So Pietro asking deserved high price money doesn't fit on Army's philosophy?

 

[MissouriMook]

A couple of things...
If we have 2-3 lean years, then what is left of our core will only have a couple years of useful play left (3 to 5 - (2 to 3 = 1 to 3). Those 1-3 years would fall outside of their primes. If we are lucky, a couple may still be pretty good. So the core will be worse because we lost a big chunk of it and because it will have diminished in capability.

If 2-3 years is our timetable, then what players are we expecting to develop to take over the missing and aging core? I am not seeing much in our system that will amount to being on par with our current core. We don’t have a Petro in the system and if we draft one, it will take longer than 3 years from now for that player to have an impact. Mikkola looks pretty good defensively, but has minimal offensive upside from what we have seen to date, so I think you can pencil him in as a third pairing guy. Dunn maybe a 2nd paring guy, but has to be able to clean up his defensive game to do so. Peurnovich maybe breaks out or maybe doesn’t. He hasn’t played pro hockey to the point where we have an idea. All we know is he has high offensive talent with suspect defensive skills. Out of that group there is no two-way, 20+ minute a night guy.

I am also not sure we have forwards to replace what we lose and for inevitable decline. Thomas’s growth may cover the decline of Schenn. Kyrou is still a great unknown. But, if he is our Schwartz replacement, then he will need to out point Schwartz, because Jaden is the much better all around player. Let’s just say those deficits are covered for the sake of argument (even though I wouldn’t bet on it). Who covers any loss in play from Tarasenko, ROR, or Perron? I am not seeing players currently in the system that fill those voids. If we are to look outside of the organization, then I would ask who are we trading? Our prospect pool is both pretty bare or already pencilled in to replace someone. If we are trading old core pieces then you have to factor in their replacement loss.

One of the biggest challenges for a retool is we will be losing both Petro and JBo with no assets coming back. Those are big asset deficits.


Our window with our current core is probably 3-4 years. Whatever happens probably has to happen within that window, unless you are fortunate enough to create a newly emerging core. That would essentially take having a Petro draft and a Schwartz + Tarasenko draft again, with one of those happening this year.

I don't really disagree with any of this, but the short version is that the best chance to keep the window open another 5 years is to bring Petro back. I am just refuting the idea that there is NO way we can be a contender if he leaves without turning over the roster on a full re-build. We would need to make some good deals, we would need our current core to be effective for the next 3-5 years and we would need the "new" core to step up.

With Petro it is decidedly easier.

 

[Alklha]

Interesting that in the past week Newport has removed Schwartz from their website.

 

[MissouriMook]

Interesting that in the past week Newport has removed Schwartz from their website.

 

[BlueKnight]

Interesting that in the past week Newport has removed Schwartz from their website.

Whoa

 

[Note Worthy]

 

[Celtic Note]

I don't really disagree with any of this, but the short version is that the best chance to keep the window open another 5 years is to bring Petro back. I am just refuting the idea that there is NO way we can be a contender if he leaves without turning over the roster on a full re-build. We would need to make some good deals, we would need our current core to be effective for the next 3-5 years and we would need the "new" core to step up.

With Petro it is decidedly easier.

I wouldn’t say there in no way either, it’s just incredibly difficult/unlikely.

 

[Ranksu]

Ota almost like Army was made jos minä about Pietro last summer when he acquire and extend Faulk and Scandella. Its mind-boggling knowing we've enough depth in team and even Jbo out there is guys like Mikkola and Perunovich who are ready for NHL at least Mikkola is.

It doesnt fit in my brain you rather take Scandella + Faulk > Pietro.

And if Gunnar/Dunn isn't what he was then trade for new LHD.

Scandella isn't answer IMO.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

JR couldn’t be serving Newport’s interests better if he was on their payroll. He seems to have zero skepticism about the stuff he’s fed, and ignores the reputation and record of Newport in their negotiations. It’s not the least surprising that the situation is what it is. It’s the modus operandi for this agent, and Armstrong has his own record of sticking to his plan. We expected to see a game of chicken, and it’s only amplified by the pandemic and revenue disruption.

I can’t get over how naive JR’s stuff reads. I used to think it was a schtick he played up to obscure his weak background in hockey. But now I think it’s genuine naïveté.

 

[Blueston]

That wildcard doesn't really change the point I was making. If Pietrangelo was wanting a deal done last year, and his demands were reasonable? The deal should have been done last year and the current circumstances are meaningless. We'll see if that was the case, but it's how Pietrangelo is saying it was...

Which suggests that his demands weren't reasonable.

 

[Blueston]

What kinda crap is this? Does JR get a percentage of what Petro signs for?

 

[Note Worthy]

Even the way it's worded is bias. JR states it as the Blues who haven't worked out a deal with Pietrangelo. Not Pietrangelo who hasn't been able to work out a deal with the Blues. Or even saying that the Blues and Pietrangelo haven't come to a mutual agreement would be a better wording.