Was Faulk to the Blues the most pointless and puzzling trade ever?

[Benedict Kovalchuk]

IMO the Bishop to LA trade was far more pointless and puzzling

 

[Davimir Tarablad]

Yeah it was comically dumb. Also being willing to overpay for guys like Faulk, Krug, Schenn and to a lesser extent Bozak and Scandella but not a player like Petro. Also not buying out Steen this summer pretty much signals that they're unwilling to max their roster for a cup run.

Steen is injured which prevents the Blues from buying him out.

 

[Drake1588]

It really seemed like the trust between the captain and the organization died with the acquisition. It was utterly baffling at the time unless Armstrong, in his heart of hearts, knew that he would never offer up what it was always going to take to ink Pietrangelo (full term, ample AAV, and full NMC protection).

 

[Merrrlin]

This trade was devastating to our cup winning roster. Armstrong’s ego grew too big after the cup victory, and once again tried to demonstrate that he thinks he’s the smartest guy in the room. Overpaid a bum that gobbled up valuable cap space and just let arguably the best defenseman in our franchise’s history walk. It’s incredibly frustrating and baffling.

Definitey not the best in St Louis’ history but the rest of the post is bang on.

 

[bleedgreen]

I’m not a Blues fan and not educated about them, but the whole chain of events makes me question whether the Blues ever really wanted to sign Petro to an 8 year contract of this size which obviously would play a role in Faulk. Everyone talked at the time that Faulk was insurance, but I wonder if it just wasn’t the plan the whole time. They wouldn’t trade Petro as he’s a too big a part of the team and they needed him for their playoff run.

As good as the guy is, I wouldn’t be upset about not signing that contract. The best of his career has likely already happened and at this point you’re just hoping he maintains for as long as possible. No matter what he does the Blues got his best imo.

 

[tarheelhockey]

just let arguably the best defenseman in our franchise’s history walk.

You guys have every right to be pissed, but... no.

 

[StlBill]

You guys have every right to be pissed, but... no.

Pronger is the only competition in my 35 years of watching/loving this team. Petro was on track to break nearly every defensive scoring stat/games played etc.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Pronger is the only competition in my 35 years of watching/loving this team. Petro was on track to break nearly every defensive scoring stat/games played etc.

No love for Al?

 

[StlBill]

No love for Al?

loved Al, but we got his “Vegas” years in this comparison.

 

[Kyle McMahon]

It's a good thing the Blues closed the deal in 2019. Because Armstrong seems to be drunk from the celebration ever since. Crazy how fast that roster went from Cup winner that wasn't even old to nothing special.

 

[Meob]

arguably the best defenseman in our franchise’s history walk

Uh... what? MacInnis? Pronger?

loved Al, but we got his “Vegas” years in this comparison.

Uh... what? MacInnis won a Norris in Stl and scored at a higher ppg than Pietrangelo during the dead puck era.

Pronger is the only competition in my 35 years of watching/loving this team

Uh... what? The only defensemen not named Orr to win a Hart. Could argue he's in the top 10 (or higher) defensemen all time. How is that a competition?

Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze what a bad take.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

loved Al, but we got his “Vegas” years in this comparison.

We should all be so lucky. All-time franchise leader in points and goals from the blueline, a Norris, 2 first team all-star selections, and 6 ASGs. I see what you're saying, but he's gotta' be in that conversation.

 

[JT Kreider]

IMO the Bishop to LA trade was far more pointless and puzzling

It didnt have any long term ramifications and the Kings were a playoff team with Quick coming off a major injury. It was so minor and irrelevant.

 

[biturbo19]

Not the most puzzling trade "ever", but it never made sense to me. I didn't understand what the Blues were doing there. They had Pietrangelo and Parayko as RHD, what on earth were they doing trading for another one? Faulk isn't like a "bolster your bottom pairing" sort of piece. Not at that cap number.

It looks especially silly why you consider that they did indeed lose Pietrangelo...but at the same time, we've seen so many contracts extending that long into a career go completely belly up. Pietrangelo is unquestionably one of the top defencemen in the NHL right now. But 3 years from now? Time can move fast. Sometimes it does...sometimes it doesn't. It's huge risk to take on, and tie your franchise to.

So if they got the sense Pietrangelo was going to market at that point because they were just never going to be willing to go 8 years on a guy that old (which is totally reasonable)...sure, make a trade from a point of leverage where people think you have more than you do. I guess. But Faulk is a massive downgrade from Petro.

The hanging your balls out there play on that, would've been...trading Pietrangelo at the deadline. But i think other GMs probably got the same sense, and weren't into the price it'd cost for a rental. Especially with the contract term it'd take to re-sign him, even if they could.

The biggest miss, is the value they sacrificed in trading Edmundson who was worth something better than Faulk this year, and then signing Faulk to that extension that they're now tied to.

But nobody knew covid was gonna impact things the way it did at that point. Seat of the pants GM'ing seems hard.

 

[Voight]

Not the most puzzling trade "ever", but it never made sense to me. I didn't understand what the Blues were doing there. They had Pietrangelo and Parayko as RHD, what on earth were they doing trading for another one? Faulk isn't like a "bolster your bottom pairing" sort of piece. Not at that cap number.

It looks especially silly why you consider that they did indeed lose Pietrangelo...but at the same time, we've seen so many contracts extending that long into a career go completely belly up. Pietrangelo is unquestionably one of the top defencemen in the NHL right now. But 3 years from now? Time can move fast. Sometimes it does...sometimes it doesn't. It's huge risk to take on, and tie your franchise to.

So if they got the sense Pietrangelo was going to market at that point because they were just never going to be willing to go 8 years on a guy that old (which is totally reasonable)...sure, make a trade from a point of leverage where people think you have more than you do. I guess. But Faulk is a massive downgrade from Petro.

The hanging your balls out there play on that, would've been...trading Pietrangelo at the deadline. But i think other GMs probably got the same sense, and weren't into the price it'd cost for a rental. Especially with the contract term it'd take to re-sign him, even if they could.

The biggest miss, is the value they sacrificed in trading Edmundson who was worth something better than Faulk this year, and then signing Faulk to that extension that they're now tied to.

But nobody knew covid was gonna impact things the way it did at that point. Seat of the pants GM'ing seems hard.

My guess is they knew they didnt want to pay 8 million+ for Pietrangelo, so worst case you add Faulk as an insurance plan and then if you make another cup run, either Piets signs for the number you want (likely if they win back to back) or at worst he leaves and you walk away with 2 cups / 1 cup and another finals run

 

[JT Kreider]

My guess is they knew they didnt want to pay 8 million+ for Pietrangelo, so worst case you add Faulk as an insurance plan and then if you make another cup run, either Piets signs for the number you want (likely if they win back to back) or at worst he leaves and you walk away with 2 cups / 1 cup and another finals run

or they could have just applied this logic to Faulk

 

[rumrokh]

The biggest miss, is the value they sacrificed in trading Edmundson who was worth something better than Faulk this year, and then signing Faulk to that extension that they're now tied to.

Strongly disagree. Edmundson had lost the trust of the coaching staff and rightly so. They played him against slower teams in the playoffs, but he looked worse and worse until they cut his minutes and benched him against Boston. Faulk wasn't what they hoped for in the first half of the season, but he was still a significant step up from Edmundson, who continues to be a #5 d-man. Regardless of Faulk's contract or any other perceived oddities about the trade, the Blues got good value for Edmundson.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I’m not a Blues fan and not educated about them, but the whole chain of events makes me question whether the Blues ever really wanted to sign Petro to an 8 year contract of this size which obviously would play a role in Faulk. Everyone talked at the time that Faulk was insurance, but I wonder if it just wasn’t the plan the whole time. They wouldn’t trade Petro as he’s a too big a part of the team and they needed him for their playoff run.

As good as the guy is, I wouldn’t be upset about not signing that contract. The best of his career has likely already happened and at this point you’re just hoping he maintains for as long as possible. No matter what he does the Blues got his best imo.

It's evident the Blues were willing to pay up....to a point. The NMC and bonus structure were the deal breakers here, not the $$$. Circling back to Faulk, yeah it was a head scratcher why they extended him so quickly but the assumption has to be it was insurance for the inevitable breakdown between the Blues and the Petro camp. Armstrong could have stood pat and played a game of chicken until the very end but what would have been the result? As it stands the Blues have added Faulk and Krug. Not Petro replacements but part of what remains a very good top six.

 

[Mickey Marner]

Hard to say without knowing what goes on behind closed doors, but Pietrangelo at 8.8 is a much better investment than Faulk & Krug at 13 for the same duration. Even with the NMC, there are decent odds that Pietrangelo is still a positive impact player in 2026-27. I expect at least one of Faulk/Krug will have been bought out by then for sheer incompetency, which also partially nullifies any cap/salary savings that they individually offer.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Pronger is the only competition in my 35 years of watching/loving this team. Petro was on track to break nearly every defensive scoring stat/games played etc.

I mean... Pronger won the dang Hart Trophy. AP is an excellent defenseman at the peak of his powers, but he's not THAT good.

 

[weastern bias]

It didnt have any long term ramifications and the Kings were a playoff team with Quick coming off a major injury. It was so minor and irrelevant.

Didn't Tampa draft Cernak with the pick from the Bishop trade?

 

[Falco Lombardi]

It’s only puzzling if you don’t know Doug Armstrong’s notorious stubbornness.

He was never going to treat the star player like a star player. He knew he wouldn’t give Petro the NMC he wanted and thus set up his replacement.

 

[JT Kreider]

Didn't Tampa draft Cernak with the pick from the Bishop trade?

True, but I dont like to value trades like that. As a matter of fact Oilers fans so adamantly denied that "they didn't trade Reinhart for Barzal" that I think its HF canon now.

 

[Voight]

It's evident the Blues were willing to pay up....to a point. The NMC and bonus structure were the deal breakers here, not the $$$. Circling back to Faulk, yeah it was a head scratcher why they extended him so quickly but the assumption has to be it was insurance for the inevitable breakdown between the Blues and the Petro camp. Armstrong could have stood pat and played a game of chicken until the very end but what would have been the result? As it stands the Blues have added Faulk and Krug. Not Petro replacements but part of what remains a very good top six.

I think Armstrong knew from the start he wouldnt go higher than the 7.7/year he offered (or maybe 8) and hoped Piets would either agree to a "hometown discount" or walk and the team would be fine. My guess is he wanted to lock Faulk in just to prevent him from reaching free agency (trading assets for him as an insurance policy only for him to walk 10 months later would have been an absolute disaster).

Essentially, they had a feeling they would lose him and acted a little quick. Once free agency hit, they knew he was gone and jumped on Krug.

 

[bleedgreen]

It's evident the Blues were willing to pay up....to a point. The NMC and bonus structure were the deal breakers here, not the $$$. Circling back to Faulk, yeah it was a head scratcher why they extended him so quickly but the assumption has to be it was insurance for the inevitable breakdown between the Blues and the Petro camp. Armstrong could have stood pat and played a game of chicken until the very end but what would have been the result? As it stands the Blues have added Faulk and Krug. Not Petro replacements but part of what remains a very good top six.

And in the end that’s my point. They’re still a good team that’s got a solid defensive group. One guy doesn’t make a team great, they’ll survive the loss of Petro. Losing Petro and JBo in the same year hurts but having both Faulk and Krug softens the blow a bit. Faulk is better than he looked this year.

Even if it does hurt them short term, I don’t think he’s worth the contract. They’re better off reinvesting in the team. He wanted the biggest payday he could get, as is his right. Wish him well, thanks for the service and move on. You won the cup.