offseason so far

[ecbm]

At work now, but I am going to pull up points/game, goals/game, assists/game stuff, so instead of looking at entire season's as a single unit, actually see what a player's value is per game. Steen's overall numbers "per game" are pretty darn consistent

2013-14: 68 games, 33-29-62; .49gpg; .91ppg
2014-15: 74 games, 24-40-64; .32gpg; .86ppg
2015-16: 67 games, 17-35-52; .25gpg; .78ppg

Looks like steady decline to me. People have no trouble calling it like they see it with Stastny. Can they see it with Steen?

To be fair: one, it's clear that Steen was never healthy after his injury last year and two, that '13-14 season is an outlier over his entire career. Personally I thought paying him based on that was dubious, but he's been pretty good and at least the term was right.

I think you almost HAVE to make Berglund your third line center

It would be the crowning achievement of Army's summer to fail to bring in Sobotka. I'm guessing if he does come, it's Berglund-Sobotka-Perron.

But Army had absolute zero chance of getting Hall, as Shattenkirk would never, under any conditions, sign a contract extension to stay in Edmonton. So, how can we blame Army for failing to grab Hall? Can we blame him for not engineering a 3-team trade?

True. What I can and do blame him for is Perron being his backup move-as I've already said, it's nearly as absurd as the backup to signing Sobotka being to overpay Ott.

Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, I also blame him for not getting the read on Schwartz that he was going to arbitration.

[Robb_K]

At work now, but I am going to pull up points/game, goals/game, assists/game stuff, so instead of looking at entire season's as a single unit, actually see what a player's value is per game. Steen's overall numbers "per game" are pretty darn consistent

2013-14: 68 games, 33-29-62; .49gpg; .91ppg
2014-15: 74 games, 24-40-64; .32gpg; .86ppg
2015-16: 67 games, 17-35-52; .25gpg; .78ppg

Looks like steady decline to me. People have no trouble calling it like they see it with Stastny. Can they see it with Steen?

To be fair: one, it's clear that Steen was never healthy after his injury last year and two, that '13-14 season is an outlier over his entire career. Personally I thought paying him based on that was dubious, but he's been pretty good and at least the term was right.

I think you almost HAVE to make Berglund your third line center

It would be the crowning achievement of Army's summer to fail to bring in Sobotka. I'm guessing if he does come, it's Berglund-Sobotka-Perron.

But Army had absolute zero chance of getting Hall, as Shattenkirk would never, under any conditions, sign a contract extension to stay in Edmonton. So, how can we blame Army for failing to grab Hall? Can we blame him for not engineering a 3-team trade?

True. What I can and do blame him for is Perron being his backup move-as I've already said, it's nearly as absurd as the backup to signing Sobotka being to overpay Ott.

Oh, and while I'm thinking of it, I also blame him for not getting the read on Schwartz that he was going to arbitration.

Berglund-Sobotka-Perron would be an okay 3rd Line, for a puck possession team with a strong-skating defence, good team defence, adequate overall scoring and decent #1 goalie. A LOT will depend upon how well Allen plays. If he plays as well as he did before he was hurt last season, The Blues will be a playoff team, and might win a series or 2. If he's inconsistent, The Blues will be in some trouble.

[theohall]

Looking at NHLnumbers...

Blues Cap Space 8.086M

This is without counting Sobotka or signing Schwartz. If Sobotka (2.725) does join the team, the space drops to 5.361 - which precludes the Blues from signing Schwartz to a 6M per year deal unless something else happens (LTIR, trade, sending someone to the Wolves, buy-out, etc.)

Sobotka biting the Blues in the ass again.

[StL Dan]

Looking at NHLnumbers...

Blues Cap Space 8.086M

This is without counting Sobotka or signing Schwartz. If Sobotka (2.725) does join the team, the space drops to 5.361 - which precludes the Blues from signing Schwartz to a 6M per year deal unless something else happens (LTIR, trade, sending someone to the Wolves, buy-out, etc.)

Sobotka biting the Blues in the ass again.

So.....the NHL Instragram site is reporting the Blues and Sobotka have agree to and signed a contract today.

Is this being discussed on another thread?

[ecbm]

Looking at NHLnumbers...

Blues Cap Space 8.086M

This is without counting Sobotka or signing Schwartz. If Sobotka (2.725) does join the team, the space drops to 5.361 - which precludes the Blues from signing Schwartz to a 6M per year deal unless something else happens (LTIR, trade, sending someone to the Wolves, buy-out, etc.)

Sobotka biting the Blues in the ass again.

So.....the NHL Instragram site is reporting the Blues and Sobotka have agree to and signed a contract today.

Is this being discussed on another thread?

Haven't seen anything anywhere about this.

I'm having trouble thinking of a situation where the drama was so out of proportion to the transaction...

[StL Dan]

Looking at NHLnumbers...

Blues Cap Space 8.086M

This is without counting Sobotka or signing Schwartz. If Sobotka (2.725) does join the team, the space drops to 5.361 - which precludes the Blues from signing Schwartz to a 6M per year deal unless something else happens (LTIR, trade, sending someone to the Wolves, buy-out, etc.)

Sobotka biting the Blues in the ass again.

So.....the NHL Instragram site is reporting the Blues and Sobotka have agree to and signed a contract today.

Is this being discussed on another thread?

Haven't seen anything anywhere about this.

I'm having trouble thinking of a situation where the drama was so out of proportion to the transaction...

I misspoke. The nhlbythenumbers Instagram site reported it. Not the official NHL Instagram site.

He's on a one year deal worth 2.725M and will be a UFA after this season.

[ecbm]

Still seeing no mention of this anywhere else.

Part of the confusion is that one can state what his contract would/will be, should/if he signs with the Blues-1 year, $2.725M as determined at arbitration. But from what I see, he hasn't signed yet.

[Oaklandblue]

3.957~ is our current cap space and yes this does not include Boat.

If we sign and do not trade/package Boat's rights, he's $2.725M, leaving us $1.237m capspace. At this point, I'd rather we packaged him with Shatt and maybe someone else and get a respectable forward back to try and replace Backes even if it's a few players/depth move at worst.

[ecbm]

Just my opinion: I really don't think it's Backes that's perceived as needing replacing. Given his regular season production last term, he was the 3rd line center and Boat will fill that role just fine. It's Brouwer as a scoring winger that needs replacing but even that is really a long-term need as it only becomes a problem in two seasons if Steen isn't extended. It looks fairly set to me that the top 6 will be S-T-L and Steen-Stastny-Fabbri. I'd love to see Lehtera improved upon but I really don't see that as being the FO's plan right now. The focus seems to be on acquiring a scoring winger, and a young one.

[cardsfan04]

I don't think this was "the" reason we traded Elliott, but I believe we'd be over the cap had we kept Elliott (assuming Sobotka does in fact come back). I know that it's allowed in the offseason, but what's the impact on day 1 of the regular season?

[Toasted Oates]

Just my opinion: I really don't think it's Backes that's perceived as needing replacing. Given his regular season production last term, he was the 3rd line center and Boat will fill that role just fine.

Sobotka is not scoring 20+ goals and he's not playing 19+ minutes a game. He's not going to be on the top power play unit either. So I disagree that he can fill Backes' role. He may lead the team in faceoff % and "atta boys" from the coach, though.

[ecbm]

I don't think this was "the" reason we traded Elliott, but I believe we'd be over the cap had we kept Elliott (assuming Sobotka does in fact come back). I know that it's allowed in the offseason, but what's the impact on day 1 of the regular season?

You're forgetting Hutton-his hit is $1.125M and Elliott's is $2.5M. Keeping Elliot and not signing Hutton means you need $1.375M in space. Easy to find the difference of $140K, especially considering that in that scenario you don't need to give Allen such a lucrative extension. Once the decision was made to let Brouwer & Backes walk the Blues had tons of flexibility for next season-admittedly, not so much the one after that.

Just my opinion: I really don't think it's Backes that's perceived as needing replacing. Given his regular season production last term, he was the 3rd line center and Boat will fill that role just fine.

Sobotka is not scoring 20+ goals and he's not playing 19+ minutes a game. He's not going to be on the top power play unit either. So I disagree that he can fill Backes' role. He may lead the team in faceoff % and "atta boys" from the coach, though.

I don't disagree about goal production-I think the FO/Hitchcock is counting on bounce back years from Steen (likely in a full season with walk year motivation), Stastny (possible) and maybe even Lehtera (I doubt it). I dare say you can count on Boat for 17 minutes. The real problems there are Lehtera and the 4th line-any improvement there and those 2 minutes are easy enough to find. I'm not saying I think this is the best plan but I do think it's the Blues' plan as of now. Personally I would have moved Fabbri back to center...then again, I wouldn't have given Lehtera that extension either. But what the hell do I know?

[ecbm]

Gotta keep in mind: whoever replaces Backes doesn't have to be a Backes clone. He just has to fill the role Backes projected to realistically: third line center with good faceoff numbers and lots of hits.

[cardsfan04]

I don't think this was "the" reason we traded Elliott, but I believe we'd be over the cap had we kept Elliott (assuming Sobotka does in fact come back). I know that it's allowed in the offseason, but what's the impact on day 1 of the regular season?

You're forgetting Hutton-his hit is $1.125M and Elliott's is $2.5M. Keeping Elliot and not signing Hutton means you need $1.375M in space. Easy to find the difference of $140K, especially considering that in that scenario you don't need to give Allen such a lucrative extension. Once the decision was made to let Brouwer & Backes walk the Blues had tons of flexibility for next season-admittedly, not so much the one after that.

NHL Numbers says we currently have $2.736M in cap space and that doesn't count Sobotka's $2.725M. I confuse myself looking at cap stuff a lot, so I might be missing something obvious. But, with Elliott instead of Hutton, wouldn't we be over the cap by almost exactly the difference in Elliott's and Hutton's cap hits?

[ecbm]

I don't think this was "the" reason we traded Elliott, but I believe we'd be over the cap had we kept Elliott (assuming Sobotka does in fact come back). I know that it's allowed in the offseason, but what's the impact on day 1 of the regular season?

You're forgetting Hutton-his hit is $1.125M and Elliott's is $2.5M. Keeping Elliot and not signing Hutton means you need $1.375M in space. Easy to find the difference of $140K, especially considering that in that scenario you don't need to give Allen such a lucrative extension. Once the decision was made to let Brouwer & Backes walk the Blues had tons of flexibility for next season-admittedly, not so much the one after that.

NHL Numbers says we currently have $2.736M in cap space and that doesn't count Sobotka's $2.725M. I confuse myself looking at cap stuff a lot, so I might be missing something obvious. But, with Elliott instead of Hutton, wouldn't we be over the cap by almost exactly the difference in Elliott's and Hutton's cap hits?

I'm accepting as true:

3.957~ is our current cap space and yes this does not include Boat.If we sign and do not trade/package Boat's rights, he's $2.725M, leaving us $1.237m capspace.

So it comes down to:

$1.237M left after signing Boat + $1.125M from Hutton = $2.362M. Elliott's hit is $2.5M. So if the Blues just gave Pajaarvi $500K instead of $700K-or do the obvious thing and not sign him at all-it's accounted for. And/or you give Allen a lesser contract and/or you do something slightly different with the 4th line and/or you try to trade a guy like Berglund and let Rattie play. Many options, all quite doable. They just weren't in Armstrong's plans.

[cardsfan04]

I don't think this was "the" reason we traded Elliott, but I believe we'd be over the cap had we kept Elliott (assuming Sobotka does in fact come back). I know that it's allowed in the offseason, but what's the impact on day 1 of the regular season?

You're forgetting Hutton-his hit is $1.125M and Elliott's is $2.5M. Keeping Elliot and not signing Hutton means you need $1.375M in space. Easy to find the difference of $140K, especially considering that in that scenario you don't need to give Allen such a lucrative extension. Once the decision was made to let Brouwer & Backes walk the Blues had tons of flexibility for next season-admittedly, not so much the one after that.

NHL Numbers says we currently have $2.736M in cap space and that doesn't count Sobotka's $2.725M. I confuse myself looking at cap stuff a lot, so I might be missing something obvious. But, with Elliott instead of Hutton, wouldn't we be over the cap by almost exactly the difference in Elliott's and Hutton's cap hits?

I'm accepting as true:

3.957~ is our current cap space and yes this does not include Boat.If we sign and do not trade/package Boat's rights, he's $2.725M, leaving us $1.237m capspace.

So it comes down to:

$1.237M left after signing Boat + $1.125M from Hutton = $2.362M. Elliott's hit is $2.5M. So if the Blues just gave Pajaarvi $500K instead of $700K-or do the obvious thing and not sign him at all-it's accounted for. And/or you give Allen a lesser contract and/or you do something slightly different with the 4th line and/or you try to trade a guy like Berglund and let Rattie play. Many options, all quite doable. They just weren't in Armstrong's plans.

Oh, I gotcha. I was going on the $2.7 figure. If $3.9 is the accurate one, then my point doesn't make any sense. I'm not entirely sure which one is accurate.

[theohall]

Where is that 3.9 number coming from?

NHL Numbers 2.736 with Sobotka not counted, yet. Boats is going to be 2.725.

General Fanager doesn't show "cap hit" but player salaries for each player which aren't the same as the cap hit. NHLNumbers is more accurate in terms of showing each player's cap hit and salary. And even using General Fanager, there still isn't 3.9 left under the cap.

[theohall]

In addition, I've been looking up this no-movement vs no-trade clause stuff.

The Blues have ZERO players with a no-movement clause which means everyone on the roster is eligible for exposure in the expansion draft, including Bouwmeester unless he's signed an addendum to his contract since Feb 2016, unless the Blues protect them.

[Oaklandblue]

Where is that 3.9 number coming from?

Funny you didn't find it. I literally searched it out in like ten seconds. Since I'm the one to quote it:

https://www.capfriendly.com/teams/blues

[Oaklandblue]

In addition, I've been looking up this no-movement vs no-trade clause stuff.

The Blues have ZERO players with a no-movement clause which means everyone on the roster is eligible for exposure in the expansion draft, including Bouwmeester unless he's signed an addendum to his contract since Feb 2016, unless the Blues protect them.

This may prove to be genius given how close we are spent to the Cap. An expansion claiming one of our top guys unprotected will need to taken on a big contract, which opens up capspace so we can actually afford to sign someone to replace them. Figure we would protect Pie, Schwartz, Tank, Parayko, Fabbri, Allen and so forth we would have a core to build from and signing one or two big ticket forwards would become pretty easy and be a blessing in disguise.