2016-17 Post-Mortem

[cardsfan04]

Doesn't have to be exactly Tavares. His name has been out there in trade rumors the past few years, so that's who I went with. I did read that the Islanders are offering him an 8 year extension though, so he might have been a bad exmaple.

There are other young forwards that would fit this mold though. Drouin is one, although who knows if he's actually available anymore. I'm struggling to come up with another off the top of my head, but I don't think this is an exhaustive list.

Cap might be tricky, but I think we have the trade ammunition to make something like this work if a team dangles something valuable at the draft. Schwartz, Fabbri, Stastny are all nice pieces, legit top 6 guys. But, if we could add another big time threat to go along with Tarasenko, Allen, and our defense, we'd instantly be legit Cup contenders. This is easier said than done obviously. Have to find a team willing to part with their guy. Have to offer enough to get them to do it. And, have to make it work with the Cap. I just think we are better equipped to do it this year than other years.

[Oaklandblue]

Doesn't have to be exactly Tavares. His name has been out there in trade rumors the past few years, so that's who I went with. I did read that the Islanders are offering him an 8 year extension though, so he might have been a bad exmaple.

There are other young forwards that would fit this mold though. Drouin is one, although who knows if he's actually available anymore. I'm struggling to come up with another off the top of my head, but I don't think this is an exhaustive list.

Cap might be tricky, but I think we have the trade ammunition to make something like this work if a team dangles something valuable at the draft. Schwartz, Fabbri, Stastny are all nice pieces, legit top 6 guys. But, if we could add another big time threat to go along with Tarasenko, Allen, and our defense, we'd instantly be legit Cup contenders. This is easier said than done obviously. Have to find a team willing to part with their guy. Have to offer enough to get them to do it. And, have to make it work with the Cap. I just think we are better equipped to do it this year than other years.

Wasn't there a rumor/source that claimed that there was a potential deal with Drouin for Shatt?

[cardsfan04]

Doesn't have to be exactly Tavares. His name has been out there in trade rumors the past few years, so that's who I went with. I did read that the Islanders are offering him an 8 year extension though, so he might have been a bad exmaple.

There are other young forwards that would fit this mold though. Drouin is one, although who knows if he's actually available anymore. I'm struggling to come up with another off the top of my head, but I don't think this is an exhaustive list.

Cap might be tricky, but I think we have the trade ammunition to make something like this work if a team dangles something valuable at the draft. Schwartz, Fabbri, Stastny are all nice pieces, legit top 6 guys. But, if we could add another big time threat to go along with Tarasenko, Allen, and our defense, we'd instantly be legit Cup contenders. This is easier said than done obviously. Have to find a team willing to part with their guy. Have to offer enough to get them to do it. And, have to make it work with the Cap. I just think we are better equipped to do it this year than other years.

Wasn't there a rumor/source that claimed that there was a potential deal with Drouin for Shatt?

Yeah, there have been a couple of times it sounded like a deal for him was imminent, but fell through. They were unhappy with him in Tampa for awhile which probably made it easier to trade him. But, not sure if that's still true or not. It seems relatively common that somebody worth having is rumored to be available though.

[theohall]

Out of curiosity, is there a playoff-only stats list like this? You got players like David Perron for instance who was really good in the regular season but is historically pathetic in the playoffs. Kind of curious if a playoff stats list would correlate differently to your list. Honestly, that's where we need help; we have no problem getting into the playoffs as it is. It's the later we need help with.

Not that shows free agents that way, at least not one I can find.

[theohall]

Doesn't have to be exactly Tavares. His name has been out there in trade rumors the past few years, so that's who I went with. I did read that the Islanders are offering him an 8 year extension though, so he might have been a bad exmaple.

There are other young forwards that would fit this mold though. Drouin is one, although who knows if he's actually available anymore. I'm struggling to come up with another off the top of my head, but I don't think this is an exhaustive list.

Cap might be tricky, but I think we have the trade ammunition to make something like this work if a team dangles something valuable at the draft. Schwartz, Fabbri, Stastny are all nice pieces, legit top 6 guys. But, if we could add another big time threat to go along with Tarasenko, Allen, and our defense, we'd instantly be legit Cup contenders. This is easier said than done obviously. Have to find a team willing to part with their guy. Have to offer enough to get them to do it. And, have to make it work with the Cap. I just think we are better equipped to do it this year than other years.

Wasn't there a rumor/source that claimed that there was a potential deal with Drouin for Shatt?

Yeah, there have been a couple of times it sounded like a deal for him was imminent, but fell through. They were unhappy with him in Tampa for awhile which probably made it easier to trade him. But, not sure if that's still true or not. It seems relatively common that somebody worth having is rumored to be available though.

Tampa will likely not be able to sign all of their RFAs which makes guys like Tyler Johnson and Jonathan Drouin potentially available. It's a matter of what would we be willing to give up and it's likely high draft picks Tampa wants, because of the cap issues. Tampa can't take on salary if they can't afford to sign guys. I'd give up the #1 this season considering the weak draft.

Drouin, Palat, Johnson, Gabriel Dumont, Greg McKegg all RFA forwards - with Palat and Johnson in get paid situations being 26. McKegg will be cheap. Dumont will be cheap. Drouin is a wild-card. He played damn good this season and did so on the wing without complaining about not being a C and was outstanding on the PP. I don't see them moving Drouin, but more likely trying to move Johnson and/or Palat.

They also need to sign 2 d-men and a goalie.

21M in cap space for the Lightning.

Wouldn't be surprised if they pay Drouin and continue bringing guys up and letting them play. Their depth at C was seriously tested due to injuries this season, at one point playing a game without a C who was on the NHL roster to start the season - yes, they were playing their 7-10 centers in one game and won - which gives them more flexibility in moving those RFAs without making ridiculous demands - and the other GMs know this.

I wouldn't mind seeing Tyler Johnson on the Blues

[gaijin]

Doesn't have to be exactly Tavares. His name has been out there in trade rumors the past few years, so that's who I went with. I did read that the Islanders are offering him an 8 year extension though, so he might have been a bad exmaple.

There are other young forwards that would fit this mold though. Drouin is one, although who knows if he's actually available anymore. I'm struggling to come up with another off the top of my head, but I don't think this is an exhaustive list.

Cap might be tricky, but I think we have the trade ammunition to make something like this work if a team dangles something valuable at the draft. Schwartz, Fabbri, Stastny are all nice pieces, legit top 6 guys. But, if we could add another big time threat to go along with Tarasenko, Allen, and our defense, we'd instantly be legit Cup contenders. This is easier said than done obviously. Have to find a team willing to part with their guy. Have to offer enough to get them to do it. And, have to make it work with the Cap. I just think we are better equipped to do it this year than other years.

Wasn't there a rumor/source that claimed that there was a potential deal with Drouin for Shatt?

Yeah, there have been a couple of times it sounded like a deal for him was imminent, but fell through. They were unhappy with him in Tampa for awhile which probably made it easier to trade him. But, not sure if that's still true or not. It seems relatively common that somebody worth having is rumored to be available though.

Tampa was tossing around the idea of trading him since he was refusing to play under the terms of his contract at the time (or something like that). There were rumors of (roughly) Shattenkirk for Drouin, but most felt Shatty was too much to pay for someone with attitude problems, even if he did have good offensive potential. Too much risk to pull the trigger on that one.

[theohall]

Tampa was tossing around the idea of trading him since he was refusing to play under the terms of his contract at the time (or something like that). There were rumors of (roughly) Shattenkirk for Drouin, but most felt Shatty was too much to pay for someone with attitude problems, even if he did have good offensive potential. Too much risk to pull the trigger on that one.

You are off by a year. The trade almost happened this January when Tampa had injury issues on their back-end. Drouin was playing great at the time without any issues.

Last season (15-16) Yzerman was asking for Fabbri/Parayko and a #1 when Drouin was refusing to play.

[WaukeeBlues]

Tavares? Not in a billion years. The Islanders are a team on the upswing, they'd never trade him.

Only scenario I can see is if he more or less announced he was walking via free agency during the season (which will never happen based on public comments he's made; consummate professional by and large) and the Isles dealt him at the deadline.

Only other situation would be a revelation they weren't going to get a deal done and then trading him in the summer prior to July 1, 2018 to give a team exclusive negotiating rights for a hot minute. It's Stamkos all over again really.

I think Tyler Johnson would be a phenomenal pick up. I'd be a big fan of that at the right price.

[gaijin]

Tampa was tossing around the idea of trading him since he was refusing to play under the terms of his contract at the time (or something like that). There were rumors of (roughly) Shattenkirk for Drouin, but most felt Shatty was too much to pay for someone with attitude problems, even if he did have good offensive potential. Too much risk to pull the trigger on that one.

You are off by a year. The trade almost happened this January when Tampa had injury issues on their back-end. Drouin was playing great at the time without any issues.

Last season (15-16) Yzerman was asking for Fabbri/Parayko and a #1 when Drouin was refusing to play.

Has it been that long already? Damn. I must be getting old or something.

[glen a richter]

Tyler Johnson would be a great addition... if we had the right coach for his size and style. It's been a long, long time since we had the right coach. I guess for the foreseeable future we have to just roll with whatever Yeo wants which speaks to me as a continuation of 1st or 2nd round exits. Maybe in 2031 when we're due for our next WCF appearance, we'll have the coach and player personnel necessary to get over the hump finally.

[WaukeeBlues]

Tyler Johnson would be a great addition... if we had the right coach for his size and style. It's been a long, long time since we had the right coach. I guess for the foreseeable future we have to just roll with whatever Yeo wants which speaks to me as a continuation of 1st or 2nd round exits. Maybe in 2031 when we're due for our next WCF appearance, we'll have the coach and player personnel necessary to get over the hump finally.

On an infinite timeline the Blues are guaranteed to win the Stanley Cup.

[theohall]

If anyone hears any Blues fan try to repeat the "transition" word Armstrong tried to claim this season was, ask them:
1) How many defenseman were transitioned from 15-16 to 16-17? The answer is none. The Blues had the same defensive corps until they traded Shattenkirk at the 16-17 trade deadline. This is not transition.
2)What changed in goal? Goaltending - the only transition was making Allen the hands down #1 which went through some struggles, so, yes, this could be called transition.
3) Forwards - who were the new Blues forwards to start the 16-17 season compared to 15-16? 2 players. TWO!!! - Perron and Yakupov. Replacing a 3rd liner with a 3rd liner and adding guy who can barely play while rolling out almost the same entire 15-16 players for 16-17 isn't transitioning. That's maintaining a status quo. Call ups due to injury are not transition (Barbashev, Agostino, Megan, etc).

So what was the transition? To a new style of more offensive play? Nope. Just went from a defensive-minded coach to another defensive-minded coach only with a different defensive system. So again, what was the transition??

If you want to see transition and see it done successfully, look at the Penguins. First, let's define transition. Making significant changes to your lineup. One consequence of transition is younger players, likely on entry level contracts, will play and they will have to learn by playing, which could impact making the playoffs. The Blues have done no such thing, not even close this season. Sure - Barbashev got called up late due to injury, but that's not transitioning. So why did I mention the Penguins? 5 of their current 13 forwards and 1 of their current defenseman are on entry level contracts. Most of them started playing last season due to the Penguins cap crunch. That's transitioning - not changing two players and keeping the same style head coach. And the Pens won the cup changing their depth players to younger guys, instead of trying to keep older veterans. They are on track to reach the Finals again. All while transitioning.

Chicago - 6 forwards and 4 defenseman were on entry level contracts. This is transition and it's part of why they lost in the playoffs. Transition isn't necessarily changing your top players, but changing your depth players and developing them - if necessary, at the NHL level which is where the 'Hawks are, because of cap constraints. Similar to the Penguins.

So why not actually transition, play the younger players, and use the cap space freed to improve the top end players on your roster vice continuing with a status quo roster? Unfortunately, the Blues have too many of the players from last season already under contract (13 forwards, 5 defenseman) and Armstrong is too loyal to guys already under contract. Don't expect to see any "transition" for 17-18 given the Blues past management actions. But you will keep hearing Armstrong say transition. Repeatedly saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true. Actions speak louder than words.

3 Blues players were on ELCs this season.
Fabbri on 15-16 roster
Parayko on 15-16 roster
and the traded for Sanford.

What transition??

[glen a richter]

I'm going to throw this out there and flame away if you want, but a nice 2 year solution to some of our offensive woes can be Ilya Kovalchuk. Buy out a bad contract here, lose a bad contract there in the expansion draft and you have the money to secure him on a 2 year contract.

[gaijin]

I'm going to throw this out there and flame away if you want, but a nice 2 year solution to some of our offensive woes can be Ilya Kovalchuk. Buy out a bad contract here, lose a bad contract there in the expansion draft and you have the money to secure him on a 2 year contract.

There's the rub in the bold. I'm fairly certain those things won't happen, so it's hard to even bring myself to speculate on bringing in big offensive names. I think it is much more likely that management waits for Fabbri to come back, then voila our offense looks great.

But Kovalchuk? Sure, I'd take a flyer. Depends on what kind of contract he is looking for. Do the Devils still own his rights? Could be pretty expensive if we had to trade for his negotiating rights and then try to sign him to a contract after that.

[WaukeeBlues]

I'm going to throw this out there and flame away if you want, but a nice 2 year solution to some of our offensive woes can be Ilya Kovalchuk. Buy out a bad contract here, lose a bad contract there in the expansion draft and you have the money to secure him on a 2 year contract.

There's the rub in the bold. I'm fairly certain those things won't happen, so it's hard to even bring myself to speculate on bringing in big offensive names. I think it is much more likely that management waits for Fabbri to come back, then voila our offense looks great.

But Kovalchuk? Sure, I'd take a flyer. Depends on what kind of contract he is looking for. Do the Devils still own his rights? Could be pretty expensive if we had to trade for his negotiating rights and then try to sign him to a contract after that.

It has to be a sign and trade. Devils, I'm sure, would want to sign a short term, low cap hit contract because obviously they won't be able to move it if they don't.

Devils still own his rights and they have to sign him in order for the NHL door to open at all.

The market for him, I would imagine, is pretty low. He's 35 right? I would take a flyer on him for a lower round pick but not a whole lot more than that.

[cardsfan04]

If anyone hears any Blues fan try to repeat the "transition" word Armstrong tried to claim this season was, ask them:
1) How many defenseman were transitioned from 15-16 to 16-17? The answer is none. The Blues had the same defensive corps until they traded Shattenkirk at the 16-17 trade deadline. This is not transition.
2)What changed in goal? Goaltending - the only transition was making Allen the hands down #1 which went through some struggles, so, yes, this could be called transition.
3) Forwards - who were the new Blues forwards to start the 16-17 season compared to 15-16? 2 players. TWO!!! - Perron and Yakupov. Replacing a 3rd liner with a 3rd liner and adding guy who can barely play while rolling out almost the same entire 15-16 players for 16-17 isn't transitioning. That's maintaining a status quo. Call ups due to injury are not transition (Barbashev, Agostino, Megan, etc).

So what was the transition? To a new style of more offensive play? Nope. Just went from a defensive-minded coach to another defensive-minded coach only with a different defensive system. So again, what was the transition??

If you want to see transition and see it done successfully, look at the Penguins. First, let's define transition. Making significant changes to your lineup. One consequence of transition is younger players, likely on entry level contracts, will play and they will have to learn by playing, which could impact making the playoffs. The Blues have done no such thing, not even close this season. Sure - Barbashev got called up late due to injury, but that's not transitioning. So why did I mention the Penguins? 5 of their current 13 forwards and 1 of their current defenseman are on entry level contracts. Most of them started playing last season due to the Penguins cap crunch. That's transitioning - not changing two players and keeping the same style head coach. And the Pens won the cup changing their depth players to younger guys, instead of trying to keep older veterans. They are on track to reach the Finals again. All while transitioning.

Chicago - 6 forwards and 4 defenseman were on entry level contracts. This is transition and it's part of why they lost in the playoffs. Transition isn't necessarily changing your top players, but changing your depth players and developing them - if necessary, at the NHL level which is where the 'Hawks are, because of cap constraints. Similar to the Penguins.

So why not actually transition, play the younger players, and use the cap space freed to improve the top end players on your roster vice continuing with a status quo roster? Unfortunately, the Blues have too many of the players from last season already under contract (13 forwards, 5 defenseman) and Armstrong is too loyal to guys already under contract. Don't expect to see any "transition" for 17-18 given the Blues past management actions. But you will keep hearing Armstrong say transition. Repeatedly saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it true. Actions speak louder than words.

3 Blues players were on ELCs this season.
Fabbri on 15-16 roster
Parayko on 15-16 roster
and the traded for Sanford.

What transition??

This is kinda semantics I guess, but I've called it a transition year since before the season. We lost our captain, starting goalie, and one of the veteran leaders in Brouwer. It's a fair point that we didn't have a ton of roster turnover, but the ones we did have were fairly substantial.

The reason I've called it a transition is less about the amount of roster turnover than (my perceived) change of direction of the team. For several years there was talk of having two cores. There was the Backes/Steen, etc. veteran core. Then, there was the core of younger guys like Tarasenko, Schwartz, Pietro, Allen, etc. I saw this year as the change from two cores to one, younger core.

[theohall]

The reason I've called it a transition is less about the amount of roster turnover than (my perceived) change of direction of the team. For several years there was talk of having two cores. There was the Backes/Steen, etc. veteran core. Then, there was the core of younger guys like Tarasenko, Schwartz, Pietro, Allen, etc. I saw this year as the change from two cores to one, younger core.

Unfortunately, Steen and the majority of older veterans who have been here for years are still here and still not getting it done. Sure - changed Captains and #1 goalie.

Did the style of play change significantly?
Did the team really get any faster?
Is there more offense from the team which always seems to be the issue in the playoffs?
Did the Blues bring in a coach to incorporate speed or is he a stifle the opponent with defense coach - like Hitchcock?
Is there significant new talent on the roster?

None of that is transition. Naming a new captain and promoting a goalie, but playing the same game with an almost entirely identical roster is not really transition. It's just plugging in different players already part of the team into the same system in new roles.

Brouwer being on this team for 1 year is massively over-valued. Having a guy for 1 year and saying your transitioning from him??? Seriously???? The problem is coaches not using players still on the team in the same role. Unfortunately, our head coach, while asst coach running the PP, eliminated that play from the power play. Just watch some games comparing last year to this year.

Was there some transition? Yes, away from the 15-16 team which generated more offense to a more defensive minded team which has been status quo since 2010.

[cardsfan04]

The reason I've called it a transition is less about the amount of roster turnover than (my perceived) change of direction of the team. For several years there was talk of having two cores. There was the Backes/Steen, etc. veteran core. Then, there was the core of younger guys like Tarasenko, Schwartz, Pietro, Allen, etc. I saw this year as the change from two cores to one, younger core.

Unfortunately, Steen and the majority of older veterans who have been here for years are still here and still not getting it done. Sure - changed Captains and #1 goalie.

Did the style of play change significantly?
Did the team really get any faster?
Is there more offense from the team which always seems to be the issue in the playoffs?
Did the Blues bring in a coach to incorporate speed or is he a stifle the opponent with defense coach - like Hitchcock?
Is there significant new talent on the roster?

None of that is transition. Naming a new captain and promoting a goalie, but playing the same game with an almost entirely identical roster is not really transition. It's just plugging in different players already part of the team into the same system in new roles.

I hear where you're coming from. There are parts of it that didn't change as drastically as I expected (speed, for one). But, I think a decade from now, when people look at the evolution of our roster, they'll point to this year as one of the bigger shifts. Letting your captain walk and trading your starting goalie are rather significant changes. I disagree that most of the old core is still here though. Backes is gone. Oshie is gone. Elliott is gone. Berglund is here and Perron is back if he counts. When we talk about the main guys today, it's Tarasenko (new core), Parayko (new core), Pietro (new core), Fabbri (new core), Schwartz (new core), Allen (new core).

[not_a_wings_fan]

This team exceeded my expectations coming into the season.

The team has done nothing to get younger, faster, and more skilled so I have no expectations that they will be anything other than a good regular season team and a playoff footnote.

I think it would be worth the Blues' time to NOT protect some of the forwards in the expansion draft and hope LV takes a contract off our hands.

Short of that, I don't think there's any other good option to dump some of the contracts we carry right now for guys that aren't good enough to be top six forwards on a SC team, but are being asked to carry that weight year in and year out.

I hate (HATE) that we signed Perron, and I think he's a big part of our failures this season. The sooner we can dump that candy ass bitch the happier I will be.

The back end is good... the pipes are acceptable... the forwards are not good enough, not fast enough, and not skilled enough as a group to compete for a championship.

I would fully support a complete rebuild.

[glen a richter]

Not fast enough is the key three words. This team is slow as franking molasses and it shows in the playoffs when teams have plenty of time to game plan for a seven game series.

So much time was spent putting together a great group of defensemen, with more to come in Walman, Dunn and Schmaltz, and that's all well and good, but after our top 6, it's just a steaming bucket of shit.