Let's Go Blues

Tossing this nugget out there because I know Yzerman was chatting it up with Armstrong recently. I know Drouin has played like utter shit during his limited time in the NHL but he's also not a favorite of Jon Cooper for whatever reason. The talent is obviously there, you don't get to be a #3 overall pick by winning rock, paper, scissors. Think he'd manage to squeeze in and contribute right away?

some pansy with 6 career NHL goals requesting a trade?

Thanks, no.

Paajarvi was a 10th overall pick. Sometimes draft position is meaningless.

theohall wrote:Paajarvi was a 10th overall pick. Sometimes draft position is meaningless.

Usually...#3 overall and #10 overall are light years apart in talent. Usually.

Ummm....newp.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/01/08/wou ... er=ya5nbcs

cprice12 wrote:

theohall wrote:Paajarvi was a 10th overall pick. Sometimes draft position is meaningless.

Usually...#3 overall and #10 overall are light years apart in talent. Usually.

Same class, sure. From one to the next? Not necessarily. Drafts vary wildly in depth.

dmiles2186 wrote:Ummm....newp.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/01/08/wou ... er=ya5nbcs

One more piece of support for my thesis: Shattenkirk is currently the most underrated player in the league. A 26-year-old #1 currently making $4.3M/yearm (for those keeping score at home, that's only $700K more than Berglund ). Apparently, those grow on trees.

Of all the players in this squad, I only consider Tarasenko more untradeable.

…GM Doug Armstrong will soon be faced with a difficult decision regarding defenseman Kevin Shattenkirk. Multiple sources have said Shattenkirk’s name is in play on the trade front, not because the Blues don’t like him, but because they probably can’t afford to keep him when his contract runs out after next season.

I (Franking) swear, if they retain Bouwmeester, Ott & Berglund with their collective $11.7 cap hit and move Shattenkirk for space I'll be done with this team for a while. O God grant: should this season end in anything other than a trip to the finals, that Armstrong will no longer be around to perpetrate that sort of (Frank) up on this club.

ecbm wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

theohall wrote:Paajarvi was a 10th overall pick. Sometimes draft position is meaningless.

Usually...#3 overall and #10 overall are light years apart in talent. Usually.

Same class, sure. From one to the next? Not necessarily. Drafts vary wildly in depth.

My point was meant to counter the implication that Paajarvi's draft position was simlilar to Drouin's and that Paajarvi isn't working out as well as had hoped and he was a high pick too. But in fact, the #10 overall pick never has the expectations of a #3 pick. Ever.

So it's not really the same.

However, what theohall said about "sometimes draft position is meaningles"...yes, that is true. There are busts that are high picks and there are diamonds in the rough that are late picks. That's in any sport though. And in hockey, generally speaking of course, you're getting a pretty damn good player in the top 3, and anything outside the top 5 on most years is a bit of a crap shoot...and at #10, you simply don't get anything close to the level of a #3 pick.

But, with that said...I'd love for the Blues to get Drouin. He's only 20...and he's a highly skilled and highly talented player. If you could trade Rattie OR Jaskin and a pick to get him, I'd do it...but Tampa wouldn't do that. They'd likely want a player like Fabbri or Schwartz, which I would not do...and that would only happen if we were in seller mode or wanted to avoid a hefty upcoming contract with them or something.

dmiles2186 wrote:Ummm....newp.

http://nhl.nbcsports.com/2016/01/08/wou ... er=ya5nbcs

One more piece of support for my thesis: Shattenkirk is currently the most underrated player in the league. A 26-year-old #1 currently making $4.3M/yearm (for those keeping score at home, that's only $700K more than Berglund ). Apparently, those grow on trees.

Of all the players in this squad, I only consider Tarasenko more untradeable.

We can't/won't move Shattenkirk for Drouin. That would be insane, and anyone suggesting we do so isn't paying attention to anything. If Yzerman asks for Shatty, Army needs to laugh and walk away. Shattenkirk is extremely productive and he doesn't make that much $$. No reason to move him unless we get blown away with an offer.

Tampa is in an unenviable position here. They're almost being forced to trade Drouin, but they really can't take on much salary as they are about at the cap. So a team wanting to dump a salary to rebuild with youth would be out of the question, so they need to move similar salary for similar salary, or ask the trade partner to eat some salary, or Tampa would want prospect and/or picks...which is why Rattie & a pick come to mind. Would it have to be a 1st Rd. pick? Probably..at least that's what they'll be asking for since Drouin is very highly touted, he just hasn't gotten on track in the NHL yet...but he is NHL ready.

There is also Barbashev, who will likely come up in talks. He flat out tore up the Q last year (95 pts. in 57 games) and is in his first year with the Wolves this year...and doing ok, 17 pts. in 27 games. If they moved him for Drouin, I'd be sad because I am kind of excited about him...but I'm drooling over Drouin right now...so...

If Tampa is looking for defense, then Edmundson would be about even money for him. But, again, it would take Edmundson and then some to get Drouin...Mabye Edmundson, Rattie and a pick. But then you are kind of clearing out the cupboard and thinning out your franchise depth a bit. I'm not sure I would do that...but based on the number of teams rumored to be interested means it might take a lot to get him. Rattie doesn't seem to have a place here, so he seems like a no brainer to put in a package deal. And I don't think swapping out Edmundson for Bortuzzo would be enough to get Drouin. I don't think Bortuzzo has much trade value at all, but Edmundson does.

ecbm wrote:

…GM Doug Armstrong will soon be faced with a difficult decision regarding defenseman Kevin Shattenkirk. Multiple sources have said Shattenkirk’s name is in play on the trade front, not because the Blues don’t like him, but because they probably can’t afford to keep him when his contract runs out after next season.

I (Franking) swear, if they retain Bouwmeester, Ott & Berglund with their collective $11.7 cap hit and move Shattenkirk for space I'll be done with this team for a while. O God grant: should this season end in anything other than a trip to the finals, that Armstrong will no longer be around to perpetrate that sort of (Frank) up on this club.

Ott is a UFA after this season, so his $2.6 million will be off the books.

We'd be much better off getting as much as we can for Petro. He's not quite as good as everyone thinks he is, and I think we could get far better than fair market return for him.

Throwing this out there...

Rattie, Petro, Bortuzzo & a 1st Rd. pick to Tampa Bay for Drouin, Stamkos & a 3rd Rd. pick.

Of course, this wold have to be a sign and trade deal. I don't want Stamkos as a rental...unless it's at the deadline and we don't have to give up much (yeah right).

Saw on the twittersphere Fabbri and/or Shatty for Drouin... hell franking no to that shit! I'd do Jaskin + Rattie or Lindbohm and a mid round pick.

glen a richter wrote:Saw on the twittersphere Fabbri and/or Shatty for Drouin... hell franking no to that shit! I'd do Jaskin + Rattie or Lindbohm and a mid round pick.

To me, if Shatty is involved, there better be another player or two in the mix. Drouin is not that good.

I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

cardsfan04 wrote:I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

Maybe not Parayko? Dude is going to be the best d-man this team has had in ages and you'd maybe not offer him? If they're trading Parayko we better be talking about Hedman and Stamkos.

glen a richter wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

Maybe not Parayko? Dude is going to be the best d-man this team has had in ages and you'd maybe not offer him? If they're trading Parayko we better be talking about Hedman and Stamkos.

I'm just not as high on him yet as a lot of others. He's had a really good first 40 games to his career, and I don't want to take that away from him. There's a ton to be happy about. But Jackman won the Calder, and while he's had a solid career I don't think he ever lived up to the bar that his rookie campaign set. I think it's too early to crown Parayko as a top pairing defensemen.

cardsfan04 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

Maybe not Parayko? Dude is going to be the best d-man this team has had in ages and you'd maybe not offer him? If they're trading Parayko we better be talking about Hedman and Stamkos.

I'm just not as high on him yet as a lot of others. He's had a really good first 40 games to his career, and I don't want to take that away from him. There's a ton to be happy about. But Jackman won the Calder, and while he's had a solid career I don't think he ever lived up to the bar that his rookie campaign set. I think it's too early to crown Parayko as a top pairing defensemen.

I understand the caution, but at the same time, Jackman fell victim to the entire league reconstructing their rules right after his breakout rookie campaign. And the changes they made directly impacted his game. What Parayko possesses that Jackman didn't was pure puck moving ability, and BOMB of a shot. Not to mention, he's so calm under pressure and rarely makes a mistake in his own zone (which is something Jax fell victim to quite often). I love Jax, we all love Jax, but Parayko is more well rounded now than Jackman was at his peak, in my opinion. But you are right, that could always change. You see guys like Tyler Myers that look unstoppable as rookies and then disappear.

dmiles2186 wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

Maybe not Parayko? Dude is going to be the best d-man this team has had in ages and you'd maybe not offer him? If they're trading Parayko we better be talking about Hedman and Stamkos.

I'm just not as high on him yet as a lot of others. He's had a really good first 40 games to his career, and I don't want to take that away from him. There's a ton to be happy about. But Jackman won the Calder, and while he's had a solid career I don't think he ever lived up to the bar that his rookie campaign set. I think it's too early to crown Parayko as a top pairing defensemen.

I understand the caution, but at the same time, Jackman fell victim to the entire league reconstructing their rules right after his breakout rookie campaign. And the changes they made directly impacted his game. What Parayko possesses that Jackman didn't was pure puck moving ability, and BOMB of a shot. Not to mention, he's so calm under pressure and rarely makes a mistake in his own zone (which is something Jax fell victim to quite often). I love Jax, we all love Jax, but Parayko is more well rounded now than Jackman was at his peak, in my opinion. But you are right, that could always change. You see guys like Tyler Myers that look unstoppable as rookies and then disappear.

Yeah, that's true of Jackman for sure. He wasn't the best comparison, just the most convenient (Blues DMan that had a good rookie year, but was never great). I think Parayko will be much better than Jackman and I'm not predicting him to fall off or anything. I just think the half-season sample size from him is part of the equation when determining his tradability.

Draft position doesn't matter. We drafted Cam Barker #3 overall and he was a total bust. Jack Skille was the #7 overall and was a bust as well and now just a journeyman. You guys had a #1 overall bust in 2006 with Eric Johnson. No team is immune but top ten picks in the first round that bust really look bad for an organization. The sad part of this Drouin thing is that the Blackhawks are trying to get him - we have a need for a left wing. We're reportedly offering up Dano in return - we're not impressed with him either (he was another high draft pick) and we got him for Saad.

I think the only thing "bust" about Johnson was his failure to pan out for the Blues, which is largely attributable to his unfortunate drunken golf cart incident. He's turned into a pretty good d-man for the Avs and we got Shattenkirk for him, so it worked out both ways. When I think of bust I think of Alexandre Daigle, I think about Darko Milicic or whoever that dude was the Pistons took with the #2 pick and he averaged about .2 points/game and I think of Ryan Leaf. Johnson wasn't a bust. Drouin may yet turn into not a bust... maybe a different coach will help. I don't think Hitchcock will help him at all but I wouldn't be against them trying and then replacing Hitch anyway after the season. Drouin still has time to blossom, if he could be had cheap it's worth a look. If he could be had only for Fabbri or Shatty or both then no thanks, Tampa.

cardsfan04 wrote:

glen a richter wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:I saw that they're looking for a young cost-controlled player like Fabbri and not a player about to get a big raise like Shattenkirk. "Young for young" is how they phrased it. I wouldn't trade Fabbri for him. I would do pretty much any prospect below him other than maybe Binnington though. Maybe not Parayko either.

Maybe not Parayko? Dude is going to be the best d-man this team has had in ages and you'd maybe not offer him? If they're trading Parayko we better be talking about Hedman and Stamkos.

I'm just not as high on him yet as a lot of others. He's had a really good first 40 games to his career, and I don't want to take that away from him. There's a ton to be happy about. But Jackman won the Calder, and while he's had a solid career I don't think he ever lived up to the bar that his rookie campaign set. I think it's too early to crown Parayko as a top pairing defensemen.

Parayko hasn't just been good, he has been great.
I'd say he has easily been our best defenseman this year. And it's not just a matter of him playing solid hockey, he has a certain swagger about him on the ice...like he is playing on another level. He is big, he has a long reach, he is quick, his vision is outstanding, his offensive instincts are extremely good, and he doesn't take many penalties. He reminds me a lot of Pronger in some ways.

He just has that look about him...that this isn't some flash in the pan streak he is on. He has been good everywhere...d-zone, neutral zone, o-zone. I can't say enough good things about him. He is the one who should be making $7 million per...not Petro.

On the podcast, I was complaining that he wasn't getting enough PP time, he wasn't getting enough time at the end of games when trailing, and he wasn't getting enough OT time...and that is starting to change. Now he just needs to get into the shootout when it goes 6 or 7 shooters deep. I don't think Jaskin or Brouwer should be in the shootout over Parayko...even though Brouwer scored the other night.

I know he has only played half a season in his career...but there is a LOT to be excited about with him.

cprice12 wrote:Parayko hasn't just been good, he has been great.
I'd say he has easily been our best defenseman this year. And it's not just a matter of him playing solid hockey, he has a certain swagger about him on the ice...like he is playing on another level. He is big, he has a long reach, he is quick, his vision is outstanding, his offensive instincts are extremely good, and he doesn't take many penalties. He reminds me a lot of Pronger in some ways.

He just has that look about him...that this isn't some flash in the pan streak he is on. He has been good everywhere...d-zone, neutral zone, o-zone. I can't say enough good things about him. He is the one who should be making $7 million per...not Petro.

On the podcast, I was complaining that he wasn't getting enough PP time, he wasn't getting enough time at the end of games when trailing, and he wasn't getting enough OT time...and that is starting to change. Now he just needs to get into the shootout when it goes 6 or 7 shooters deep. I don't think Jaskin or Brouwer should be in the shootout over Parayko...even though Brouwer scored the other night.

I know he has only played half a season in his career...but there is a LOT to be excited about with him.

++. IMO, He is better than Pronger in that he doesn't take the dumb slashing penalties and his passing is superior, IMO. While Pronger was great defensively, I don't recall him making pinpoint passes from deep in his own zone to the opposing blueline. Of course, that would have been illegal then.