Vote: How do you feel about how the Blues handled Petro?

[ezcreepin]

Just some of my thoughts.

I think i have made it well known in my position on Pietrangelo. I would have no problem paying him $8.8x7 with bonus and NMC til he is 37 sure the last few years might be an albatross but if you win 2 or 3 more cups in that span it will be worth it.

Obviously the security was the most important to Petro and it was entirely within his right to ask for it because he deserves it.

I believe the friction between Pietrangelo and Armstrong is real. I can also see Petro being upset when he signed Faulk and then Schenn while he was being pushed aside. I'm sure Petro felt disrespected and i don't blame him. I would be as well if i was in his shoes.

I think deep down in his heart he really wanted to stay. But with Army not giving him the security he wanted, Pietrangelo decided to move on.

Armstrong made his decision.
Pietrangelo made his decision.

It is what it is, it's water under the bridge now.
And seeing some posts in these threads it's getting at little ridiculous with the Petro bashing. Sure I've said some things in the past few days about Petro that i didn't mean, it was mostly anger and emotion talking.

So anyway, It sucks to see Pietrangelo go. But he will always be the captain who brought the Stanley Cup to St. Louis. And i know they won it as a team but Petro was the first one to hoist it.

It sucks to see him go so soon after that magical run. Honestly i was happy for him when he signed in Vegas because he got exactly what he wanted. And i wish him nothing but the best in Vegas, I hope he succeeds and I'll be rooting for him except for when the Blues play against him.

I'm sorry for the long post but i feel that i needed to get this out and off my chest. I'm over the initial shock and gut punch that Pietrangelo is gone but I'm already moving on from it. Even though i have my concerns about the Blues and the D core going forward i can't wait to see Krug's first game as a Blue.

Here's the question I ask. If you love the place where you're living, you love the team you're on, and you love the fans you've garnered, do you, as a rational human being, make a decision to stay because of all of those things despite Armstrong being annoying to you? Like, do you swallow your pride and sign a contract you don't necessarily like because of the things you love, or do you just tell him "f*** you"? Because the way I look at it, in one hand, you have a possibility of being traded in your last few years of your career, or you have a 100% chance of moving your family right now, the exact opposite of what you wanted to do. Idk, maybe I'd feel differently about the situation if I were actually in it, but playing for a team my whole life, building a life and family in the city I was drafted, winning a cup as the captain of the team? I feel like I'd swallow my pride and stay with some of my best friends instead of displacing everything I've ever known. That's just me though.

 

[blues80]

Here's the question I ask. If you love the place where you're living, you love the team you're on, and you love the fans you've garnered, do you, as a rational human being, make a decision to stay because of all of those things despite Armstrong being annoying to you? Like, do you swallow your pride and sign a contract you don't necessarily like because of the things you love, or do you just tell him "f*** you"? Because the way I look at it, in one hand, you have a possibility of being traded in your last few years of your career, or you have a 100% chance of moving your family right now, the exact opposite of what you wanted to do. Idk, maybe I'd feel differently about the situation if I were actually in it, but playing for a team my whole life, building a life and family in the city I was drafted, winning a cup as the captain of the team? I feel like I'd swallow my pride and stay with some of my best friends instead of displacing everything I've ever known. That's just me though.

If they offered full no move clause he probably stays

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Where are all the goodbyes from fellow Blues?

I haven't seen any. Maybe I missed them and they are there. I saw a few from Bruins to Torey Krug.

 

[Majorityof1]

Where are all the goodbyes from fellow Blues?

I haven't seen any. Maybe I missed them and they are there. I saw a few from Bruins to Torey Krug.

The Bruins must not have been very close to Krug if they had no way to PRIVATELY reach out and wish him well. Do we really want such a locker room cancer that won't even give his phone number out to teammates? The Bruins were reduced to reaching out on Twitter to say goodbye as they didn't care enough to see him in person or make a private video call.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

The Bruins must not have been very close to Krug if they had no way to PRIVATELY reach out and wish him well. Do we really want such a locker room cancer that won't even give his phone number out to teammates? The Bruins were reduced to reaching out on Twitter to say goodbye as they didn't care enough to see him in person or make a private video call.

Can’t tell if this is parody or not.

How bout this? Most of the Blues are already golfing in Vegas so they dropped by in person to give their regards.

 

[Majorityof1]

Can’t tell if this is parody or not.

How bout this? Most of the Blues are already golfing in Vegas so they dropped by in person to give their regards.

It's sarcasm. I don't like Krug, which I have made obvious, but for other reasons. I think it is silly when people obsess and spin social media posts or lack thereof to their own agenda. Our culture is so social media focused that nothing exists that doesn't exist on social media. Having facebook send your "friends" a pre-generated birthday greeting is considered making an effort because it is on their page for the world to see. Actually calling them and taking the time to make their day better is worthless because nobody else can see it. We are more concerned with virtue signaling to everybody else than doing genuine thoughful things for those closest to us.

Its the same with Ajax's post. Pietrangelo still has to move house and doesn't need to report to Vegas for awhile. Blues can stop by and see him. They all have his number and can call him. Just because Ajax didn't see those interactions broadcast for the world doesn't mean they did not happen. I personally think twitter well-wishes show less depth of bonds because they are much easier. Its super easy to type a quick "good luck" on twitter which people are on 24/7 anyway, then to carve time out to have a personal one-on-one interaction.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

It's sarcasm. I don't like Krug, which I have made obvious, but for other reasons. I think it is silly when people obsess and spin social media posts or lack thereof to their own agenda. Our culture is so social media focused that nothing exists that doesn't exist on social media. Having facebook send your "friends" a pre-generated birthday greeting is considered making an effort because it is on their page for the world to see. Actually calling them and taking the time to make their day better is worthless because nobody else can see it. We are more concerned with virtue signaling to everybody else than doing genuine thoughful things for those closest to us.

Its the same with Ajax's post. Pietrangelo still has to move house and doesn't need to report to Vegas for awhile. Blues can stop by and see him. They all have his number and can call him. Just because Ajax didn't see those interactions broadcast for the world doesn't mean they did not happen. I personally think twitter well-wishes show less depth of bonds because they are much easier. Its super easy to type a quick "good luck" on twitter which people are on 24/7 anyway, then to carve time out to have a personal one-on-one interaction.

I don’t use Facebook and rarely read Twitter, never Tweet. Posting here is the closest to social media I get. I think people that daily consume Twitter forget that there is a whole population of people that aren’t on there.

The nature of much of social media is to create echo chambers where you only end up interacting with people that reinforce your own opinions, unless you are ‘engaging’ with opponents for sport. It’s a terrible way to foster a democratic society. Predictably, people have less and less empathy for those who don’t think the way they do.

 

[Bluesguru]

I voted Good Decision.

Blues gave a max offer, they gave a very fair offer not too mention the intangibles of retiring a Blue were priceless.

The NMC is a moot point anyway. Once Petro signs that deal he’s stuck wherever he goes. If he ever slightly declines, nobody is going to want him or that contract anyway.

 

[TK 421]

Here's to you, here's to me. May we never disagree, but if we do...f*** you, here's to me.

 

[DeuceNine]

I voted Good Decision.

Blues gave a max offer, they gave a very fair offer not too mention the intangibles of retiring a Blue were priceless.

The NMC is a moot point anyway. Once Petro signs that deal he’s stuck wherever he goes. If he ever slightly declines, nobody is going to want him or that contract anyway.

I said this earlier: he can decline any movement, but once he's asked to make that choice he probably will move, knowing he's no longer wanted.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

"BOOOO!!!!! BOOOOOO! Krug you suck. Go back to Boston". Getting my practice in. It has nothing to do with Pietrangelo. I don't want him on this team regardless.

 

[TruBlu]

I don’t use Facebook and rarely read Twitter, never Tweet. Posting here is the closest to social media I get. I think people that daily consume Twitter forget that there is a whole population of people that aren’t on there.

The nature of much of social media is to create echo chambers where you only end up interacting with people that reinforce your own opinions, unless you are ‘engaging’ with opponents for sport. It’s a terrible way to foster a democratic society. Predictably, people have less and less empathy for those who don’t think the way they do.

I can't like this enough

 

[ezcreepin]

If they offered full no move clause he probably stays

Well of course he does, that seems to be what the negotiations hinged on. The point was do you swallow your pride and take the partial no move

 

[Prosaic]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

Sounds like you figured out Armstrong’s diabolical plan. Way to go!

 

[simon IC]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

Interesting! Good post.

 

[BlueKnight]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

I always enjoy reading your posts. This particular post i agree with you 100%. This is exactly what I've been thinking all along.

 

[Blueston]

If they offered full no move clause he probably stays

If they offered more money. The NMC is a bit of a red herring. They were never there on $.

 

[blues80]

If they offered more money. The NMC is a bit of a red herring. They were never there on $.

8x8 is 64 million vs 61 million

 

[Blueston]

8x8 is 64 million vs 61 million

He seems to have been focused on AAV. That is where bragging rights are.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

I can nitpick a number of details in this, but I think the general theme of your post - that Armstrong knew at some point he wasn't signing Pietrangelo, and that the other signings were ... I won't say it's intentional until we see something that conclusively says yes, Armstrong really had no intention of signing Pietrangelo to a contract, but I've said and will continue to say that those those moves were not accidental.

 

[tfriede2]

The more and more time passes and I ponder this situation, the more I realize that DA never had any intention to sign Pietrangelo.

The Blues win the cup, Pietrangelo wants to start talking about an extension. DA promptly suggests they wait.

Just before the season, he acquires and extends Faulk to ensure he's here for 8 years. He is paying a premium for a player that plays the same position as Alex Pietrangelo. Why? Who knows, Faulk had been regressing for years.

Faulk, as anyone who did their research might expect, struggles mightily. One, because he's been declining for 3 years. Two, because the only way he produces is by being spoon-fed PP minutes, which, he couldn't even maintain on the Blues because they had three better options. Furthermore, all statistical models project his contract as one of the bottom five contracts in the league. Will Seattle, a team with a massive analytics department, just pluck him without the Blues paying a high price? I don't buy it.

On top of that, he allocates significant cap to Schenn & Scandella. One player who has also been declining for three years, and a replacement level defensemen.

So now we reach negotiations. DA isn't completely null and void of logic. He knows, a defensemen of Pietrangelo's caliber is going to demand signing bonuses and movement control. He low-balled, offered a partial NMC in the later years, and minimal signing bonuses. So naturally, Pietrangelo walks. When he walks, he gets exactly what he demanded, which was fair and deserved, because he's an elite defensemen.

DA then rushed and panicked to sign Krug. Krug, like Faulk, requires significant PP minutes to have any success because his 5on5 play can be described as mediocre at best. Krug, like Faulk, has now been declining in performance for a few seasons. Krug, also requires significant sheltering to not be liable. Is Krug better than Faulk? Certainly. But is the gap between Faulk and Krug smaller than the gap between Krug and Petro? Absolutely.

People often point to the 'what if DA knew Petro wouldn't sign and that's why he got Faulk.' But, one, that doesn't justify making a terrible trade for a meh player and signing him to a huge contract. Two, have you not considered that DA had no intention of signing Petro to begin with? He certainly had no intention of it before the 2019-20 season started, based on the evidence.

I wouldn't lambast DA if he made a rather astute trade and brought in young, relatively cheap talent to fill the need on D, with the potential to develop into a legit player, while promoting Parayko to the #1D spot. Then the argument of not wanting players into their late 30's on expensive contracts is well followed.

Instead, two PP specialists into their late 30's? Marco Scandella for 4 years? Schenn, who plays a physical game, for 8 years?

Just seems like, for whatever reason, they didn't want Petro apart of the organization going forward.

35 and 36 is not late 30s. If DA never had any intention of signing Petro, then how could he have panicked in signing Krug? Panic suggests a plan that went awry, although your assertion suggests that DA panicked even though what transpired with Petro was expected and went as planned - that doesn’t make sense. And he signed Krug before Petro signed with Vegas, not after.

 

[MissouriMook]

Sounds like you figured out Armstrong’s diabolical plan. Way to go!

He’s always been on a mission to destroy this team. And he would have gotten away with it if it hadn’t been for that meddling Cup!

 

[Rabid Ranger]

It's clear to me that Armstrong had a strong inkling that there was going to be a stalemate between he and Petro's camp. He budged a little but not in a meaningful way. As a result he took steps to provide a measure of insurance (the Faulk and Krug deals). Retaining Petro was of course the preferred option, but having two top four d-mean in their prime signed to long term deals is a decent backup plan.

Put it this way, I don't see Vegas' team defense being any better than the Blues' over the next five years.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Put it this way, I don't see Vegas's team defense being any better than the Blues' over the next five years.

I wouldn't disagree with that, but I'd also say that over the next 5 years this team is going to trend toward the 7-10 group in the West and be solidly out of the top-4 within 3 years.