Page 1 of 2

Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 11:39 pm
by xbleed83bluex
The year after the lockout, when we REALLY sucked, would Pleu&co still have traded Pronger for Brewer if they knew MaGinnis was going to retire ahead of a time?

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:16 am
by section319
MaGinnis? Really?


And I really hope they wouldn't have done that.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:24 am
by philco_3
Yes they would have still traded Pronger cause they were told to cut the teams pay roll down. The previous owners only cared about one thing, $$$ and nothing else.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:24 am
by blues22
The Pronger trade wasn't motivated by a thought of we have Al. Though it wasn't official, I think that in their hearts, everyone knew that Al's career was over in '03. Bill "The real reason for Blues fans to boycott Wal-mart" Laurie put in the pressure to get rid of Pronger, because as a businessman, he's closer to being a "trophy" husband. I still hate that guy.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:30 am
by kodos
Yeah, Laurie sunk a ton of money into the team for a few years and traded away ever asset and pick the team had in an effort to WIN RIGHT NOW! Then he got bored with the team. Trading Pronger had nothing to do with the product on the ice. It was just about getting payroll down. He didn't want a massive long term contract on the books when he sold the team.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:35 am
by DaDitka
kodos wrote:Trading Pronger had nothing to do with the product on the ice. It was just about getting payroll down. He didn't want a massive long term contract on the books when he sold the team.
Exactly. I recall at one point while the team was for sale I believe I read the only non rookie contract that lasted beyond that year was the Jamal.

Still to this day I will never believe that we got the most we could get for Pronger.

My guess is we could have gotten a better package with established players but then we would have been taking more payroll back on which defeated Billie’s plan that had nothing to do with hockey.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:41 am
by ohio BLUES
blues22 wrote:The Pronger trade wasn't motivated by a thought of we have Al. Though it wasn't official, I think that in their hearts, everyone knew that Al's career was over in '03. Bill "The real reason for Blues fans to boycott Wal-mart" Laurie put in the pressure to get rid of Pronger, because as a businessman, he's closer to being a "trophy" husband. I still hate that guy.
I happened upon my copy of Note by Note last week, and it's sickening how many photos that bag is in, "just because." You look at all the photos and it's obvious that some assistant handed him a Blues jacket and hat right before the shutter was clicked. I remember the ovation he received when he first bought the team... because everyone pretty much thought it would be a good thing. :evil: :evil: :evil:

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:41 am
by kodos
He should have traded Pronger for a crapload of draft picks.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:06 am
by JPonder94
kodos wrote:He should have traded Pronger for anybody that wasn't Eric Brewer and Jeff Woywitka.
Phixed.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:13 am
by JWatt (formerly PMS)
ProngerBlues44 wrote:
kodos wrote:He should have traded Pronger for anybody that wasn't Eric Brewer and Jeff Woywitka.
Phixed.
Don't forget Doug Lynch.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 12:40 pm
by philco_3
JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:
ProngerBlues44 wrote:
kodos wrote:He should have traded Pronger for anybody that wasn't Eric Brewer and Jeff Woywitka.
Phixed.
Don't forget Doug Lynch.
Doug Lynch? The guy who sang 'The United States of Whatever' song?

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 3:50 pm
by Battra
The way I understood it was that Laurie directed Pleau to trade Pronger for NHL level talent. Had to have enough people to field the team.

05-06 was the first year of the salary capped and floored NHL. The Blues ownership/beancounting team of Laurie and Sauer didn't want to buy any players out, hence why Walt and Douggie's bloated contracts were still on the books.

There was a salary floor of I believe $30MM at the time. I could be very well mistaken on that one, since the cap/floor changes each season.

Laurie put a self imposed cap of $30MM, instead of the $40MM league cap. With Walt, Douggie, and Lalime essentially gobbling up nearly $20MM of that 30...they needed players. Gods that was a dark year.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:04 pm
by WaukeeBlues
As I remember it at the time, the Blues only "had the money" to hold on to two of the "big 4" of Demitra, Pronger, Tkachuk and Weight and management decided to hold on to Weight and Walt. But it saddened me Pronger was one of those to be given the boot. At least we kind of knew it was coming but it was a sad day. You can look up the thread from the day of the trade in the HOF, its still there.

Teh Arkives are teh awesum.

There's not a single doubt in my mind that the Blues should've gotten a pick or two or three. You gotta remember though that the perception of Brewer at the time was a top 4 dman up and coming. It was considered a solid asset to be getting. Granted he was no Hart/Norris winner but it was a guy who could step in right away and that hurt the prospect of getting any picks. Still could've happened though- just look at what he was sold for the last 2 times he was traded.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:12 pm
by SIU LAW
Laurie told Pleau to just let Pronger go to free agency for nothing. NOTHING.

Pleau fought to qualify Pronger so they could at least get something for him.

What packages Pleau was offered and what he was allowed to take (in terms of salary) I don’t know. Whether Pleau personally blew the chance for another package of players/picks, I don’t know.

Laurie’s lawyer buddy played a big hand in all this as well.

Interesting tidbit: When I was running my blog, I had someone close to the Pronger situation tell me all sorts of stories surrounding the Pronger ordeal (and about the sale of the Blues -- the Pronger situation had pass by then). His position to know things was confirmed by a member of the St. Louis sports media. He told me that Keenan flat out tampered with Pronger during the ordeal. He wanted Pronger in Florida BAD. The two teams never pulled off a deal though.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:26 pm
by kodos
As smart as it sounded to qualify Pronger and get something... this team would have been better off with the nothing.

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:27 pm
by SIU LAW
kodos wrote:As smart as it sounded to qualify Pronger and get something... this team would have been better off with the nothing.
:lol:

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Thu Nov 05, 2009 4:30 pm
by WaukeeBlues
kodos wrote:As smart as it sounded to qualify Pronger and get something... this team would have been better off with the nothing.
Hey now, we DID get first overall in 05-06 after all. If you're going to end up at the same place anyway might as well have some new blood out there doing it :P

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Fri Nov 06, 2009 2:44 pm
by not_a_wings_fan
SIU LAW wrote:Interesting tidbit: When I was running my blog, I had someone close to the Pronger situation tell me all sorts of stories surrounding the Pronger ordeal (and about the sale of the Blues -- the Pronger situation had pass by then). His position to know things was confirmed by a member of the St. Louis sports media. He told me that Keenan flat out tampered with Pronger during the ordeal. He wanted Pronger in Florida BAD. The two teams never pulled off a deal though.
Mother Franker.

You are telling me we should have gotten back our 5 first round picks for that deal? Who gives a shit if we had to take Sally Brewer if we got 5 first round picks out of the tampering.

If I wasn't pissed about that trade before, I sure as hell am now that you shared that little gem.

:lol:

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 1:27 am
by xbleed83bluex
WaukeeBlues wrote:As I remember it at the time, the Blues only "had the money" to hold on to two of the "big 4" of Demitra, Pronger, Tkachuk and Weight and management decided to hold on to Weight and Walt. But it saddened me Pronger was one of those to be given the boot. At least we kind of knew it was coming but it was a sad day. You can look up the thread from the day of the trade in the HOF, its still there.
Yeah I heard that. But, if the Blues knew Macinnis would retire, could we could have afforded to hold onto one more of those guys? Say...Pronger?

Re: Would we have still traded Pronger if...

Posted: Sun Nov 08, 2009 4:23 pm
by WaukeeBlues
xbleed83bluex wrote:
WaukeeBlues wrote:As I remember it at the time, the Blues only "had the money" to hold on to two of the "big 4" of Demitra, Pronger, Tkachuk and Weight and management decided to hold on to Weight and Walt. But it saddened me Pronger was one of those to be given the boot. At least we kind of knew it was coming but it was a sad day. You can look up the thread from the day of the trade in the HOF, its still there.
Yeah I heard that. But, if the Blues knew Macinnis would retire, could we could have afforded to hold onto one more of those guys? Say...Pronger?
His contract would have been on the books the longest cause IIRC, he wanted a long term extension. Laurie was burning the books.

It was just a calculated move. They figured we'd get some defensive players for Pronger and the offense would take a hit with Demitra leaving as it was (I think he was a foregone conclusion, never really debated that he was leaving) so yea. I still think we should've gotten at least one first rounder out of it.