Confirmed with Link: Torey Krug (7 years @ $6.5m)

[Blueston]

It seems just as disingenuous for Armstrong to say that he wants Pietrangelo to stay, and then refuse to give him a clause that would guarantee exactly that. Seems like Armstrong wanted to be sure that Pietrangelo was here only as long as Armstrong wanted Pietrangelo to be here, so Armstrong let him go.

See how that works?

Which is what you would want GM to do. Keep him only as long as it works for team.

 

[pdavemoney]

I'm not sure why people believe Petro was being disingenuous about St. Louis being his preferred destination. I really believe STL was option A for Petro, and I believe for DA option A was Petro. It didnt work out and both moved onto option B.
Or is this just the way we argue about who's more at fault for letting Petro get away? I'm blaming management because this contract is not that freaking bad. If 8x8 full NMC would have got it done, I'm team Petro. All the way. Hes going to be all star caliber in 2028 haha. Just kidding but for real, a very serviceable number 2 RD.

 

[EastonBlues22]

Which is what you would want GM to do. Keep him only as long as it works for team.

Gee, and why wouldn't a player/family man want that hanging over his head if he doesn't need to?

Pietrangelo wanted that, and he wanted it here. Armstrong wanted Pietrangelo here, but he didn't want that.

Pietrangelo leaving doesn't mean Pietrangelo didn't want to be here. It just means he valued that security more than he wanted to be here. Tough to blame him. That clause is huge for a professional athlete/family man.

Pietrangelo leaving also doesn't mean that Armstrong wanted Pietrangelo to leave, but he obviously valued having more control for himself over having Pietrangelo. That sort of power is huge for him, too.

It cuts both ways, not just one.

I personally think the Blues needed Pietrangelo more than Pietrangelo needed the Blues, so this hurts the Blues a lot more. The Blues lost an elite #1 D, and perhaps their ability to contend for the Cup in the near future. All Pietrangelo really lost was a couple of million dollars, the ability to continue living in St. Louis, and perhaps some nebulous things like a jersey/# retirement, a statue, and whatever else that I'm sure he cares very little about right now.

 

[pdavemoney]

Gee, and why wouldn't a player/family man want that hanging over his head if he doesn't need to?

Pietrangelo wanted that, and he wanted it here. Armstrong wanted Pietrangelo here, but he didn't want that.

Pietrangelo leaving doesn't mean Pietrangelo didn't want to be here. It just means he valued that security more than he wanted to be here. Tough to blame him. That clause is huge for a professional athlete/family man.

Pietrangelo leaving also doesn't mean that Armstrong wanted Pietrangelo to leave, but he obviously valued having more control for himself over having Pietrangelo. That sort of power is huge for him, too.

It cuts both ways, not just one.

I personally think the Blues needed Pietrangelo more than Pietrangelo needed the Blues, so this hurts the Blues a lot more. The Blues lost an elite #1 D, and perhaps their ability to contend for the Cup in the near future. All Pietrangelo really lost was a couple of million dollars, the ability to continue living in St. Louis, and perhaps some nebulous things like a jersey/# retirement, a statue, and whatever else that I'm sure he cares very little about right now.

I think he lost his statue but still gets his jersey retired. If management takes that away from him then eff em all.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Which is what you would want GM to do. Keep him only as long as it works for team.

Damn players, being selfish and wanting control over a GM deciding when and where to ship a player off to - especially if it's to somewhere the player doesn't want to go.

Why the hell can't they just be appreciative of playing in the NHL? Isn't that enough?

 

[mike1320]

I think he lost his statue but still gets his jersey retired. If management takes that away from him then eff em all.

He also left a team steeped in tradition, a rabid fan base, and a city where his kids were born to join an expansion team with questionable ethics when it comes to the treatment of their players. But hey, he got a full NMC.

 

[pdavemoney]

He also left a team steeped in tradition, a rabid fan base, and a city where his kids were born to join an expansion team with questionable ethics when it comes to the treatment of their players. But hey, he got a full NMC.

I'm not sure that any of what you just said has anything to do with a Jersey retirement or statue, but alright.
If it was the eff em all line, I was just being sarcastic.
I'm curious though, what is this questionable ethics in dealing with their players you speak of?

 

[EastonBlues22]

He also left a team steeped in tradition, a rabid fan base, and a city where his kids were born to join an expansion team with questionable ethics when it comes to the treatment of their players. But hey, he got a full NMC.

He left a team he didn't choose in the first place, his kids aren't old enough to remember anything about their time in St. Louis, he'll be playing in front of plenty of good fans in Vegas, and his full NMC is pretty darn good insurance against getting moved, which is the biggest knock against the Vegas management crew.

He already had financial security, and now he has location security, which is what he wanted and what the Blues wouldn't offer. We can sour grapes all we want up in here, but he did just fine for himself and his family.

 

[mike1320]

I'm not sure that any of what you just said has anything to do with a Jersey retirement or statue, but alright.
If it was the eff em all line, I was just being sarcastic.
I'm curious though, what is this questionable ethics in dealing with their players you speak of?

There's been talk about roster turnover...always looking for the next, new shiny toy. Someone here posted a tweet earlier that summed it up perfectly but I can't find it right now.

 

[mike1320]

He left a team he didn't choose in the first place, his kids aren't old enough to remember anything about their time in St. Louis, he'll be playing in front of plenty of good fans in Vegas, and his full NMC is pretty darn good insurance against getting moved, which is the biggest knock against the Vegas management crew.

He already had financial security, and now he has location security, which is what he wanted and what the Blues wouldn't offer. We can sour grapes all we want up in here, but he did just fine for himself and his family.

If he is looking for long term security and he doesn't give a shit about anything else, great. He got exactly what he wanted.

edit- and it's laughable when we're talking about "security" when it comes to a guy who's already made enough money in his career to ensure that none of his children will ever have to work a day in their life.

 

[Xerloris]

I think he lost his statue but still gets his jersey retired. If management takes that away from him then eff em all.

I would give Faulk #27 tomorrow morning because he can f*** right off. He chose to walk away from it.

 

[EastonBlues22]

If he is looking for long term security and he doesn't give a shit about anything else, great. He got exactly what he wanted.

I'm sure he gives a shit about plenty of things. They just don't seem to be the things you give a shit about.

And vice versa, probably.

 

[pdavemoney]

There's been talk about roster turnover...always looking for the next, new shiny toy. Someone here posted a tweet earlier that summed it up perfectly but I can't find it right now.

Hmm fair enough, and could be. I would say that being an expansion team, of course the roster turnover will be greater than an established team, being that they took other teams spare or unwanted parts to form a complete roster. I'm not sure why anybody would hold that against them. And they seem to be doing a mighty fine job of finding what works.

 

[mike1320]

I'm sure he gives a shit about plenty of things. They just don't seem to be the things you give a shit about.

And vice versa, probably.

Exactly. Great talk

 

[pdavemoney]

I would give Faulk #27 tomorrow morning because he can f*** right off. He chose to walk away from it.

Hahaha ok...

 

[mike1320]

Hmm fair enough, and could be. I would say that being an expansion team, of course the roster turnover will be greater than an established team, being that they took other teams spare or unwanted parts to form a complete roster. I'm not sure why anybody would hold that against them. And they seem to be doing a mighty fine job of finding what works.

A mighty fine job for their entire existence of *checks notes* 4 years. I have a feeling he's going to hate life (career wise anyway) by the end of his contract.

 

[EastonBlues22]

If he is looking for long term security and he doesn't give a shit about anything else, great. He got exactly what he wanted.

edit- and it's laughable when we're talking about "security" when it comes to a guy who's already made enough money in his career to ensure that none of his children will ever have to work a day in their life.

It's clearly not about his kids working, or just about the money (as if that wasn't obvious from the get-go). It's about things like not having to yank your kids out of school and move them to a new city one or more times during the next contract because your GM thinks it is what's best for the team.

He was in a position where he could guarantee that would never happen, and now he has. If only every family could be so lucky.

If you're a father and don't put any value in that, then I don't know what to say except that there are a lot of people who do.

 

[Em etah Eh]

27 not worthy of that special treatment and a good captain/leader would want that and say the exact thing. He is not a Hall of Famer like 2, 44 were. 27 is a good player that can help your team win when hes right but dont forget, when Yeo got fired up until Feb or so of cup winning year, he was a total trainwreck of a player. that is very likely going to be the future of his play as he regresses.

This is gonna turn into another Pujols situation but the main difference is that Albert is a 1st ballot HOF. 27 is just a very good player but not on that level. Blues dodged a big bullet here

maybe if we had took the 250M we offered to Pujols and then after we lost him we gave 200M to somebody a year younger to play first base and bat 6th in the lineup for the next decade.

in this current scenario , we took most of the money we saved and used it on lesser assets that may not even fit the team.

It’s the fact that we went and blew all of our flexibility on a PP specialist when the year prior we had just spent a boatload of money on a PP specialist. So now we are spending like 300M in Pujols dollars on worse fits and players that aren’t even much younger.

 

[mike1320]

It's clearly not about his kids working, or just about the money (as if that wasn't obvious from the get-go). It's about things like not having to yank your kids out of school and move them to a new city one or more times during the next contract because your GM thinks it is what's best for the team.

He was in a position where he could guarantee that would never happen, and now he has. If only every family could be so lucky.

If you're a father and don't put any value in that, then I don't know what to say except that there are a lot of people who do.

His contract will end when his kids are in elementary school at the latest. You really think a Canadian boy with a wife from St. Louis is suddenly going to decide that Vegas is the greatest place on earth to stay long term?

 

[EastonBlues22]

His contract will end when his kids are in elementary school at the latest. You really think a Canadian boy with a wife from St. Louis is suddenly going to decide that Vegas is the greatest place on earth to stay long term?

Where they'll be living will be pretty darn nice, so it's certainly possible. People who live in Chesterfield, Town and Country, and Ladue aren't exactly holding the situation in North St. Louis against living in St. Louis.

The bigger point is that they've chosen where they want to be for the next 8 years, and that's where they're going to be. If they move later, it will be on their terms, not the terms of someone else who is making a business decision that doesn't care one bit about their family life.

 

[pdavemoney]

A mighty fine job for their entire existence of *checks notes* 4 years. I have a feeling he's going to hate life (career wise anyway) by the end of his contract.

My man I'm seriously confused. Are we arguing? Just to be clear, I'm not really on either side here, I understand both wanted things that the other side wouldn't concede. One thing I won't do is blame a player for getting more money AND more security. Why would you? Thats crazy town. Now I do question management, because they are the ones doling out the money, and if we're a cap team i would prefer the money to be spent on say Petro and Dunn, rather than Faulk and Krug. I'm critiquing the job done by our GM to keep our team competitive, I'm not hating on a player for doing right by himself and his family. Big difference. And by all accounts, he was willing to take less money if there was a full NMC. This might not be accurate but just what I read.
As far as the Vegas Golden Knights, you can only judge them by their history, lack thereof or not, but it's a lot better than many longer established teams. And you seem to keep moving the goalposts after I answer your posts. You went from questionable ethical moves, to a short history. What would you like the Vegas GM to do? Not upgrade his roster of spare parts?!

 

[mike1320]

Where they'll be living will be pretty darn nice, so it's certainly possible. People who live in Chesterfield, Town and Country, and Ladue aren't exactly holding the situation in North St. Louis against living in St. Louis.

The bigger point is that they've chosen where they want to be for the next 8 years, and that's where they're going to be. If they move later, it will be on their terms, not the terms of someone else who is making a business decision that doesn't care one bit about their family life.

As someone who has 3 kids, I'm not buying it. Kids usually don't make lifelong friends in elementary school, so the reasoning of a full NMC to ensure stability for his kids doesn't hold water with me.

 

[pdavemoney]

maybe if we had took the 250M we offered to Pujols and then after we lost him we gave 200M to somebody a year younger to play first base and bat 6th in the lineup for the next decade.

in this current scenario , we took most of the money we saved and used it on lesser assets that may not even fit the team.

It’s the fact that we went and blew all of our flexibility on a PP specialist when the year prior we had just spent a boatload of money on a PP specialist. So now we are spending like 300M in Pujols dollars on worse fits and players that aren’t even much younger.

Using logic and great analogies. I like it, great post. Shame most won't get it.

 

[mike1320]

My man I'm seriously confused. Are we arguing? Just to be clear, I'm not really on either side here, I understand both wanted things that the other side wouldn't concede. One thing I won't do is blame a player for getting more money AND more security. Why would you? Thats crazy town. Now I do question management, because they are the ones doling out the money, and if we're a cap team i would prefer the money to be spent on say Petro and Dunn, rather than Faulk and Krug. I'm critiquing the job done by our GM to keep our team competitive, I'm not hating on a player for doing right by himself and his family. Big difference. And by all accounts, he was willing to take less money if there was a full NMC. This might not be accurate but just what I read.
As far as the Vegas Golden Knights, you can only judge them by their history, lack thereof or not, but it's a lot better than many longer established teams. And you seem to keep moving the goalposts after I answer your posts. You went from questionable ethical moves, to a short history. What would you like the Vegas GM to do? Not upgrade his roster of spare parts?!

I'm questioning Petro's statement that his first choice was to stay in STL, even though he had a private jet parked on the tarmac waiting to shuttle him off to Vegas within 24 hours of free agency. Not only that, I don't see any situation whatsoever where Army signs Faulk unless he's 100% sure there's no way he can find common ground with Petro. As a GM, if you sign Faulk over Petro you get fired on the spot 10 out of 10 times.

 

[pdavemoney]

I'm questioning Petro's statement that his first choice was to stay in STL, even though he had a private jet parked on the tarmac waiting to shuttle him off to Vegas within 24 hours of free agency. Not only that, I don't see any situation whatsoever where Army signs Faulk unless he's 100% sure there's no way he can find common ground with Petro. As a GM, if you sign Faulk over Petro you get fired on the spot 10 out of 10 times.

Ok, so now we're circling back to whether Petro is being genuine. I mean, if you dont believe he is, that's fine. But then again, so what? The man was offered more money per year, and a full NMC. Why should he turn that down?
I have a question for you. Do you think, if both contracts are equal, he chooses STL over Vegas? Another question, at what point should he have conceded on less money and loss of control to where even YOU would say management is being unreasonable?