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

[Ted Hoffman]

I'm going to nitpick some of this, but it's easier to embed thoughts in the post instead of split it out into however many quotes.

My own personal reading of the tea leaves is as follows. Apparently a big deal for the negotiation was the addition of NMC which Army has publicly stated he doesn't like giving and why he doesn't like giving them. Then he made exception for Petro because he is a special player. Except he admitted offered a partial NMC - not the full one AP wanted. Next thing we heard about was signing bonuses which again Army is not a fan of but again seems like he was willing to make an exception for AP. It is believed that the Blues final offer before FA began was 8x8 with signing bonuses and a limited NMC in the contracts later years. We don't know how much signing bonus got offered. $1 million per in the last 3 years would mean "I offered signing bonuses" but would be well off from an ask by AP of say $4.5M per year. Details are critical here.

Now I turn to watch Pietrangelo got from Vegas. His contract was 7x8.8 which means through the life of his contract he will not make as much as he would have if he accepted the Blues 8 year offer. (1) Compare it to 7 years, then think about adding a 1-year deal after. Would it be the same? (2) Look at what AP might get in a partial '20-21. Does that wash out any difference? He did get his full NMC through the length of the contract with VGKs so that is a boon for them. However, according the capfriendly this contract did not include bonuses of any kind. Long reported, the site isn't updated since it doesn't have the specifics. So to summarize, got his full NMC, will not make as much money as he could have with the Blues and his contract with Vegas is all salary which is subject to escrow.

Maybe the full NMC was the lynch pin of the whole negotiation, maybe not. When I see all this though I see only one thing, the relationship got contentious in St. Louis. I think that Pietrangelo saw himself as the most valuable piece of this team and his original ask a year ago was representative of that. Opinion. In AP's mind he should have been the #1 priority but instead he saw Schenn get signed first. Then he saw Faulk be brought in as insurance and suddenly he felt underappreciated and undervalued. Order of events are flipped, but you're omitting that AP was told they couldn't do an extension because of future uncertainty regarding '20-21 and if the CBA would be extended ... and then Armstrong inked those two deals. That raises questions on why Faulk and Schenn could get long-term contracts with all that uncertainty, but Pietrangelo - who'd been here his entire career vs. the two (2) combined years of Schenn and Faulk - couldn't. Negotiations got put on hold during the season and I think those feelings began to fester so that when Covid happened and the salary cap freeze came. I think that Pietrangelo came into these final negotiations with a chip on his shoulder and if he didn't get everything he wanted he was going to leave. I think a lot of what we saw in the last couple of weeks was theatre with both sides seemingly trying to put blame on the other side because both knew there wasn't going to be a deal.

To me blame goes to both sides. Army should have made Pietrangelo a bigger priority and AP should not have let personal emotions cloud his judgement. I think if Pietrangelo wanted to be in St. Louis still he would be in St. Louis, the contract he got from Vegas was arguable worse than the 8 year one the Blues offered. Opinion. I think a year of festering emotions and his souring relationship with Army was why he didn't re-sign with the Blues.

JR said in a Q&A a little while back that feelings between the two sides were clearly strained, and even if they did a deal and had a happy press conference and it was all smiles that it wasn't going to change the fact that there was resentment between them. I don't know how far back that extends; it might seriously go back to '13 when they tried doing a deal and it didn't get done until shortly after training camp started. It might involve other off-the-ice stuff. [I think there was a reference to something like that.] I don't doubt that played a role in how things went down, but I think even setting aside any of that prior to 7/1/19 there were clearly actions taken by both sides that pushed everything to the brink. Who's to blame for more of that, we'll find out and have to interpret accordingly.

 

[BlueKnight]

I'm going to nitpick some of this, but it's easier to embed thoughts in the post instead of split it out into however many quotes.


JR said in a Q&A a little while back that feelings between the two sides were clearly strained, and even if they did a deal and had a happy press conference and it was all smiles that it wasn't going to change the fact that there was resentment between them. I don't know how far back that extends; it might seriously go back to '13 when they tried doing a deal and it didn't get done until shortly after training camp started. It might involve other off-the-ice stuff. [I think there was a reference to something like that.] I don't doubt that played a role in how things went down, but I think even setting aside any of that prior to 7/1/19 there were clearly actions taken by both sides that pushed everything to the brink. Who's to blame for more of that, we'll find out and have to interpret accordingly.

I asked JR in his Q&A about the relationship between Army and Petro. That was his answer to my question. I believe it that the negotiations got personal. I'm definitely curious to hear everything that went on

 

[Stealth JD]

Loaded question. We don’t know what it woulda taken. We just know he always wanted more.

Both options are too extreme for me, I find myself somewhere in the middle. I don't blame Pietrangelo for seeking security but I can also understand the perspective from Armstrong and the Blues FO. There wasn't enough compromise made on either side which unfortunately lead to Pietrangelo's departure.

It lands somewhere in the middle. Both sides played a game of chicken, and unfortunately for us, we lost when no one budged.

I didn't vote because the options seemed leading and don't really encompass what happened. This is for the most part how I feel.

I would have preferred a better range of voting options. Why are the options two extremes?

As a result, I am abstaining from the vote.

Additional options added, per feedback.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Something to keep in perspective when talking about the notion that Alex left money on the table in going to Vegas - and I'm not talking about "Nevada has no income tax" or any of that.

If '20-21 ends up being a partial year - say, we only play 60% of the full schedule - Pietrangelo would make $4.2M this season ($3 million signing bonus, 60% of the $2 million salary). Add on the other years, and you end up with $63.2 million that he'd get for that contract if he plays it all out.

If Armstrong was offering 8x8 but it was a flat $8 million every year and he was being really generous and offering $4 million in signing bonus, Pietrangelo would make $6.4 million this season + $56 million in the remaining years, for a total of $62.4 million received on that contract. If it was more like $7M salary + $1M signing bonus for '20-21, he'd get $5.2M this year and $61.2M total.

Hence: it's quite possible that Pietrangelo got a better deal from Vegas in terms of actual dollars he'll see on the contract and can still add to that with some 1-year contract after this one ends.

 

[TheDizee]

Very happy to move on.

I don't dislike him like I do for shattenkirk and oshie though. But he's really damaged his public image lately and let his true colors shine. Don't want phonies leading the team I watch, glad to see what ror can do as leader now. Won't miss him on the pp either

His best play was during that 2016 Hawks series imo, true elite dman that series.

 

[tfriede2]

I'm going to nitpick some of this, but it's easier to embed thoughts in the post instead of split it out into however many quotes.


JR said in a Q&A a little while back that feelings between the two sides were clearly strained, and even if they did a deal and had a happy press conference and it was all smiles that it wasn't going to change the fact that there was resentment between them. I don't know how far back that extends; it might seriously go back to '13 when they tried doing a deal and it didn't get done until shortly after training camp started. It might involve other off-the-ice stuff. [I think there was a reference to something like that.] I don't doubt that played a role in how things went down, but I think even setting aside any of that prior to 7/1/19 there were clearly actions taken by both sides that pushed everything to the brink. Who's to blame for more of that, we'll find out and have to interpret accordingly.

I recall JR saying that Petro disagreed with DA with respect to decisions that affected on-ice (I interpreted that to mean trades, signings etc) and was quite surprised that we didn’t hear more about that or that there wasn’t much discussion about it. But, I’d have to find what JR said, exactly.

 

[BlueKnight]

Very happy to move on.

I don't dislike him like I do for shattenkirk and oshie though. But he's really damaged his public image lately and let his true colors shine. Don't want phonies leading the team I watch, glad to see what ror can do as leader now. Won't miss him on the pp either

His best play was during that 2016 Hawks series imo, true elite dman that series.

I've never agreed with your opinions. I've always been a Pietrangelo fan. But after stuff today it's shown a different light on him and not a good one at that.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I recall JR saying that Petro disagreed with DA with respect to decisions that affected on-ice (I interpreted that to mean trades, signings etc) and was quite surprised that we didn’t hear more about that or that there wasn’t much discussion about it. But, I’d have to find what JR said, exactly.

Yeah, I can't find it right now. Since @Vollie27 said it was their question, hopefully they'll post a link.

I did look back in the (last?) mailbag, part 1. There's these few comments from JR:
"One source said the Blues were offering a five-year deal that was closer to $7 million than $8 million."
"Last month, I reported that Pietrangelo was asking for less than what Nashville paid Roman Josi ($9 million AAV), but the Blues hadn’t gone more than $8 million. The feeling is that the captain would settle somewhere in the middle."
"... multiple sources say that if Pietrangelo’s wife wasn’t from St. Louis, where the couple has started a family, he might have already told the Blues that he’s moving on."

And then I started chasing it back and realized I could quickly go down a rabbit hole, and I've got a meeting at 2:00pm that I need to prep for at some point - but there was this from August:
" The Blues and Pietrangelo’s agent, Don Meehan of Newport Sports Mangement Inc., have had minimal conversations going back to last summer. ... Armstrong and Meehan have kept it close to the vest, but NHL sources say they have exchanged numbers. The belief is that Pietrangelo asked for less than the eight-year, $72.5 million deal ($9.06 million average annual value) signed by Nashville’s Roman Josi in October and the Blues haven’t gone higher than $8 million AAV."

And this remark, which seems to fly in the face of what was subsequently reported:
“Trust me, we wanted to try and sign Alex back last July,” Armstrong said Wednesday. “But you can’t do anything and hope to do one thing.”

 

[HighNote]

In order to answer this question, I'd need to know what happened before the trade for Faulk. That's where this all starts for me.

 

[The Electrician]

I don't think Armstrong ever intended to re-sign Alex Pietrangelo. The deal DA offered Alex was one he knew Alex would turn down. Everything Doug has said that runs contrary to that is PR damage control that he has to say to appease the sentimental masses.

I was going to quote you and switch the names around with a hearty "FTFY", but I'm too lazy.

Oh, and why aren't you at your post?

 

[President Skroob]

They let their MVP leave and they used his money on a worse player that doesn’t really fit. They didn’t even get the second best d-man that moved this free agency period IMO.

Only thing to like is that they tried to replace the offensive production. They forgot the defensive side, though, and wasted most of the available money in doing so.

we let O’Reilly leave? As for the poll, a deal was never going to happen. Petro made a deal with Vegas before free agency.

 

[Zezel’s Pretzels]

Krug's our guy now and I will always support those wearing the Note. And I think DA has earned some benefit of the doubt, even with the Faulk deal. If things seriously degrade after two more years (post-expansion draft and two seasons' sample size with the new core), then I think DA will be fired. But I'm optimistic for the future overall.

 

[blues80]

we let O’Reilly leave? As for the poll, a deal was never going to happen. Petro made a deal with Vegas before free agency.

It's been petro way before O'Reilly got here

 

[President Skroob]

It's been petro way before O'Reilly got here

And it was only after O’Reilly got here that we saw results. Weird.

 

[67Blues]

Also, with Nevada tax free, Petro receives an approximate $600k more a year, so for the Blues to match, we are looking at ~$9.4m/yr. And when a team like Toronto who is known to throw huge contracts with signing bonuses and NMCs and state that they weren’t even close in the negotiations makes you wonder.

You sir went straight to the heart of the problem. It was always about money. They even just reported that on the local news at noon saying that the lack of taxes pushed the deal to one that the Blues couldn't justify. If they had given him an equivalent cash contract, this place would have been in full meltdown.

Those who don't don the Blue Note are the enemy. Check them into the front row when the season starts.

 

[Ranksu]

Blues Fan: Bad Decision - $8.XM/yr with Full NMC should have been a no brainer


1) my employer would not give me what I've deserved, me even taking less money in table, but I would want security for my whole career when this project is done.
2) I've my contract closed next year, these are my details what I want to include my next contract. Employer doesn't agree my demands, ok, lets talk about this next summer?
3) employer fill almost right away that open spot for lesser worker and who'll take less term (which ofc he doesn't deserve) - I would be furious,how dare him to do that for me, how I've been here from start.
4) Next summer has come and employer try to hardball me yet again and not give me security what I ask, why I am even talking to this with him anymore?
5) employer aquire another lesser worker, now they are doing duo work to get it done my work loath. Clearly my employer doesn't want me back.

 

[Blues0307]

Blues fan first, then of individual players. Hope Petro does well but can't wait to eliminate his team from the playoffs.

To me a contract of $8 million x 8 years is too rich for any player. Vegas now has nearly 25% of their payroll tied up in two players - Petro and Stone - for the next five years.

How in the world is that going to work?

While it might be too rich in your opinion, that's the going rate for top players. In fact, they usually get much more than that.

The problem with losing a player like Petro is that you just closed the Cup window on your own team. Army should've had this wrapped up a year ago by prioritizing this signing over any other and budging from his stubborn stance of not believing any player should receive a full NMC and signing bonuses. Petro's asks were no more than what every other elite player has asked for in the recent past. But instead, Army decided to sign Faulk to an insane deal and moved on to signing other players on top of it. All in all, Army played this really poorly and it'll cost the team.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Letting Pie walk is just Bluesy af and follows a long, long line of Bluesy choices, a good number of which led to Cups for -other- teams. We got a Cup and could have toiled the roster for a shot at a few more before Pie’s skills fell off a cliff... if they do.

I don’t get why most people want a team to be able to compete, me, it’s about winning the Cup and nothing else. If you fail, look at why, correct the issues, go at it again and again and once you win, solidify the core and add -around it-. That’s how dynasties are made and it’s apparent that Army (and a lot of fans) doesn’t think like that, especially spent to the cap. And that irks me to no end.

 

[blues80]

And it was only after O’Reilly got here that we saw results. Weird.

U ever listen to oreillys exit interview in buffalo?

 

[BlueKnight]

My thought's. I agree, Pietrangelo should get what he deserves. Army handled that poorly. But with the way Petro and his camp handed thing and Petro himself just a couple of weeks ago was basically pleading the Blues to sign him. And found out to day it was all just a bold faced lie. It doesn't sit well with me. I believe Newport has their hands up Petro's a** and it's destroying his Blues image. Both sides handled this very poorly more so on Newport. And Army saw and cut Petro loose.

 

[President Skroob]

U ever listen to oreillys exit interview in buffalo?

It’s called honesty. It’s refreshing to hear from a leader.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

The 2nd and last choice, for me, are kind of the same.

 

[Prosaic]

My thought's. I agree, Pietrangelo should get what he deserves. Army handled that poorly. But with the way Petro and his camp handed thing and Petro himself just a couple of weeks ago was basically pleading the Blues to sign him. And found out to day it was all just a bold faced lie. It doesn't sit well with me. I believe Newport has their hands up Petro's a** and it's destroying his Blues image. Both sides handled this very poorly more so on Newport. And Army saw and cut Petro loose.

How was it a lie?

He's not going to sign with another team, which was well within his right, and then talk about how he never wanted to sign there.

It's entirely true that he wanted to stay in STL, but also desired a specific contract structure, including a full NMC along with a decent portion of the contract in signing bonuses.

The Blues final offer had a partial NMC at some point in the later years, as well as a limited number of years including signing bonuses.

Vegas offered a full NMC throughout the contract's term and $35M worth of signing bonuses throughout the deal. Which is what he wanted from the start.

He never led anyone on. He was more than open to staying. Armstrong decided to go another direction. Me, and a few others believe that was the wrong direction for a multitude of reasons. Whether you agree or not, is up to you.

If Army truly does have an issue with Newport, and is adamantly against giving out NMC's and signing bonuses, then the Blues will have a lot of trouble acquiring and retaining high-end talent. Because, as seen with Petro, if we don't offer it, someone will. So I sincerely hope this philosophy changes because like Bergeron, I firmly believe O'Rielly is gonna be one hell of a player into his mid-to-late 30's and his past negotiations certainly weren't the prettiest. He's also a Newport client.

 

[Brian39]

It is a complete and total failure.

Petro is a Cup winner, an Olympic gold medalist, a 3 time end-of-season all star, and a consensus top 10 D man in the NHL. He finished 4th in Norris voting this season, has three total top 5 Norris voting finishes, has played the 6th most minutes of all NHL D men in the last 5 years, was 6th in points among D men this year and was 3rd in goals. He is 30 and every model/comparable player history suggests that he will be elite for 3ish years, a top pairing guy for 2ish years and then regress somewhere between top 4 and "serviceable" for the remainder. His Vegas contract is the 13th highest value contract among active NHL D men. 9 D men who signed deals under the current CBA will make more total dollars than Petro will on this deal.

Failing to find common ground on an offer that beats what Vegas ultimately landed him for is a massive loss for the organization. We had 15+ months to negotiate a new deal, held the advantage of being the only team who could offer an 8th year and the advantage of being the only city he has lived in as an adult. We also had 4 days after he hit UFA to stay in touch and work on a contract that he would prefer to Vegas' offer. Despite all those advantages, we failed to retain a top 10 NHL D man who ultimately accepted a non-top-10 NHL D man contract. That is a complete and total failure.

The fact that Elliotte Friedman believes that negotiations got personal is extremely troubling. The fact that we are organizationally unwilling to offer a full NMC to anyone is extremely troubling for upcoming Parayko negotiations and the eventual ROR negotiation. The fact that we prioritized acquiring and extending Faulk more highly than Petro is somewhat troubling (the unexpected flat cap greatly magnified the consequences of this decision, which was defensible at the time).

The roster is worse today than it has been at any point over the last 2 seasons. We had 3 D men who played more than 17 minutes a night on our Cup run. Two of them are gone. Eddy was our 4th most used D man on the Cup run. He is gone. Those 3 players were replaced with Faulk, Krug and Scandella for a combined $16.25M against the cap. We haven't upgraded any of the bottom 5-7 D. The D has gotten noticeably worse, smaller, cost assets to acquire and isn't any cheaper than it would have been if we had simply paid our players market value.

We have made our team worse because we weren't willing to match or beat an offer that is noticeably less than what consensus top 10 NHL D men are worth. Our issue is reportedly an unwillingness to give up roster flexibility 5+ years down the road, yet in the last year we have given out an 8 year deal to a 29 year old, a 7 year deal to a 29 year old and a 7 year deal to a 28 year old. All of those contracts have full NTCs for the first 5 years and a 15 team no trade list for the remaining years. While each individual contract has more flexibility than a single contract with a NMC, there is objectively less flexibility in having 2 or 3 of those deals than there is a single player with a NMC.

The totality of Army's blue line construction leaves the group worse than it was last June. The totality of Army's roster construction is spending more money on that blue line right now than it could/would have been by simply leaving it intact last summer and giving guys market value (including Petro at $9M AAV). The totality of Army's roster construction sees two difficult-to-impossible to move contracts instead of simply giving one near-impossible to move contract to Petro. The totality of Army's roster construction has reduced the roster flexibility over the next 4 years by locking in two 7 year contracts and one 4 year contract. All of this has been done in the name of increasing roster flexibility 5+ years down the line, yet we have $13M locked into the blue line with 15 team no-trade clauses in years 5-7. So at best your flexibility compared to just having one NMC in years 5-8 is a wash.

The blueline got worse and we have no greater overall roster flexibility than we would have if we had given Petro a contract that beats the offer he got from Vegas. We had 15+ months to reach such an agreement with him and failed to do so. The Petro negotiation and the surrounding/resulting roster decisions was a complete and total failure.

We are spending $21.775 on a top 4 of:

Krug-Parayko
Scandella-Faulk

This top 4 group costs $770k less:

Eddy-Petro
Scandella-Parayko

We gave up a former 1st round pick 1 year removed from the draft in order to build that first group. Additionally, that first group blocks Dunn from reaching his ceiling while the bottom group would have given him opportunities to be utilized to his strengths. The top group has two 7 year contracts with full NTCs in the first 5 years and 15 team no trade lists for years 6-7. The bottom group has one guy with a full NMC and one guy with a 4 year 10 team no trade list. Fun fact, last year Eddy finished the year just 1 even strength point behind Krug. They tied in even strength goals.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

Very happy to move on.

I don't dislike him like I do for shattenkirk and oshie though. But he's really damaged his public image lately and let his true colors shine. Don't want phonies leading the team I watch, glad to see what ror can do as leader now. Won't miss him on the pp either

His best play was during that 2016 Hawks series imo, true elite dman that series.

Agreed. We cannot have this type of mentality on the team. It is weak and greedy.

THEN AGAIN, there are market demands that, oftentimes, must be met, no matter what.

Regarding the Pujols situation, the market forced him to take the larger package.

The market for star players in any team sport will demand that the star player take the highest bid.

I’ve often ruminated how much the players’ unions in the major leagues influence negotiations.

Union representatives will ALWAYS support the highest bidder as to maximize income for its players.

The market was set for Pujols. The Cardinals were unwilling to match the market demand, so they let Pujols walk.

Of course there is the fact that Pujols was starting to physically deteriorate, but I posit that market demand and players’ unions wishes/requirements play a major factor.

And then of course there is the major difference between MLB’s uncapped salaries and the other three major leagues being capped. But the relativity is the same.