Let's Go Blues

I have mixed feelings on it. This feels like a possible sell high spot (although that does require interest from other teams which may or may not exist). That AAV is pretty awesome though if he can play like he has the past few months.

cardsfan04 wrote:I have mixed feelings on it. This feels like a possible sell high spot (although that does require interest from other teams which may or may not exist). That AAV is pretty awesome though if he can play like he has the past few months.

Please tell me that it doesn't include a no trade clause.

Mixed as well.

He's clearly settled into a solid 3rd line player/fringe bottom 2nd line NHL player. You need those types. They're typically cheaper keeping them around the organ-eye-zation on extensions than signing them via free agency, etc.

Fear I have is he performs during contract years then friggen coasts.

Positive is that, unless my math is wrong, we have an AAV of $3.85 which is barely more than the $3.7 he's making currently and is very manageable.

But 5 years is a long time.

history will be the judge of this one.

tjk002 wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:I have mixed feelings on it. This feels like a possible sell high spot (although that does require interest from other teams which may or may not exist). That AAV is pretty awesome though if he can play like he has the past few months.

Please tell me that it doesn't include a no trade clause.

Partial NTC. Not sure the details of it though. I'm not real worried about this part of it though. Only way that bites us is if we have a trade with one of the teams he can block and then he blocks it. If he plays well, we won't want to trade him. If we want to trade him, the NTC won't be why the deal is bad.

I fall into the mixed feelings camp as well. He hasn't hit 20 goals in 6 years (although some of those have been injury-shortened seasons), but he likely will this year. $3.85 mil seems high to me, but not excessive. Especially as it is essentially what he was already making. Like Waukee said, history will be the judge on this one. The fact that we aren't upset upfront at these terms means it is probably pretty reasonable.

It will be interesting to see if his play continues at the same recent pace now that he has his new contract.

Goddamn it.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

That's not a bad signing for that number. It actually makes him more tradeable with the knowledge he won't be a UFA and has reasonable salary.

I'd like to think this signing is a prelude to a trade such as the one STG was floating on twitter regarding Logan Brown, but I know better. This is because Army is a dumb douche who expects different results. I'm looking forward to 4.5 years of mediocrity followed by a burst of excellence in time for the next contract.

So this year we will retain Berglund, lose Shattenkirk for nothing and still not win a Cup because the freaking Metropolitan is stacked. Army has to go.

glen a richter wrote:I'd like to think this signing is a prelude to a trade such as the one STG was floating on twitter regarding Logan Brown, but I know better. This is because Army is a dumb douche who expects different results. I'm looking forward to 4.5 years of mediocrity followed by a burst of excellence in time for the next contract.

So this year we will retain Berglund, lose Shattenkirk for nothing and still not win a Cup because the freaking Metropolitan is stacked. Army has to go.

This may turn out to be more accurate than any of us feared.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/what-we-le ... 47323.html

But you know what would help them afford Shattenkirk — who in fact is fourth in the League in all-situations points per 60 over the past two seasons, behind only Burns, Hedman, and Hamilton — going forward?

If the middle of their lineup wasn’t glutted with wastes of money like Berglund.

Short version:
-Too much money, way too long of a contract for Berglund
-Way too much money for Lehtera
-Too much/too long of a contract for Steen
-Boneheaded move to trade Elliott and award Allen with a huge contract
-As a result of too many fat contracts for middling players, can't resign Shattenkirk
-Armstrong is teh dumb

In summary:

So when it comes to the Blues, you can expect one thing above all others: Armstrong will not properly assess your quality before deciding how to deal with your contract situation. That seems like something to which you can set your watch.

It also seems like a big problem for the team going forward.

I agree 95%- the only contrary evidence (conveniently not mentioned in the article) is Tarasenko's contract, which if he continues to be a 35-40 goal scorer, will turn out be a bargain.

gaijin wrote:http://sports.yahoo.com/news/what-we-le ... 47323.html

Two flaws in this article -

1) He is evaluating defenseman solely on their offensive production. Claiming Pietrangelo is the Blues 3rd best defenseman behind Shattenkirk and Parayko? Shattenkirk sucks at actually playing in his own end and defending, but that's never mentioned.

2) Shattenkirk isn't re-signing with the Blues anyway, because he wants to go play where he wants to and this is the only real chance he has at that while in the prime of his career. One can talk about cap space and all that crap, but if the player wants to play in Boston or New York, regardless, St Louis isn't Boston or New York.

Short version:
1 Too much money, way too long of a contract for Berglund
2 Way too much money for Lehtera
3 Too much/too long of a contract for Steen
4 Boneheaded move to trade Elliott and award Allen with a huge contract
5 As a result of too many fat contracts for middling players, can't resign Shattenkirk
6 Armstrong is teh dumb

1 Term - probably. Money - not necessarily when looking at the market and 3rd line centers
2 True
3 Probably true
4 BS - What are Elliott's #s? And what happened when Elliott was handed the #1 job for the Flames? Elliott is a head case as a #1 who only plays well when challenged by the other goaltender. You don't pay two goaltenders #1 money. And Allen has improved when the team actually stopped playing like total crap defensively in front of him. Last night could have been far worse if Allen hadn't kept them in the game the 1st two periods.
5 BS - Blues couldn't re-sign Shattenkirk regardless of money. He wants to play somewhere of his choosing and that isn't going to be St Louis
6 True