Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#51
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:12 am
Dave's a mess wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:58 am
This was from a Petro question in JR's recent mailbag:
One source said the Blues were offering a five-year deal that was closer to $7 million than $8 million.
The belief is that Pietrangelo is not happy with any of the offers he has received and he’s very disappointed in the way things have been handled.
Not looking great for the statue.
Never play poker with Army....
da.JPG
I don't know, I think historically there have been two different Armies. As a rival GM you needed to be afraid of "Trader Doug". As an agent you LOVED being in conversations with "Contract Doug". There have been obvious exceptions to both, but whenever I hear that the Blues have made a trade I get excited, and when I hear they've made a signing I gulp. I took a look at Army's UFA signings after I wrote the bulk of this, and there weren't as many scary contracts as I thought, but Lehtera, Faulk, Steen, Berglund etc have left there scars. Having said that, Trader Doug has a knack for making making the more egregious problems go away.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#52
Dave's a mess wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:30 am
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:12 am
Dave's a mess wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:58 am
This was from a Petro question in JR's recent mailbag:



Not looking great for the statue.
Never play poker with Army....
da.JPG
I don't know, I think historically there have been two different Armies. As a rival GM you needed to be afraid of "Trader Doug". As an agent you LOVED being in conversations with "Contract Doug". There have been obvious exceptions to both, but whenever I hear that the Blues have made a trade I get excited, and when I hear they've made a signing I gulp. I took a look at Army's UFA signings after I wrote the bulk of this, and there weren't as many scary contracts as I thought, but Lehtera, Faulk, Steen, Berglund etc have left there scars. Having said that, Trader Doug has a knack for making making the more egregious problems go away.
Army played the Backes deal exactly the way he should have... He tried to keep his captain and reward him for his long service, but Backes camp got greedy and opted to take a similar deal with one more year, and by the time he got his shot at the cup, he found himself picking splinters. I'm expecting that D.A. won't play this one any differently. Whoever the unnamed sources are that are leaking the $$$ and other details, aren't on the Blues side of the table. We know that for sure. If the agent tries to get the press involved, his client will probably wind up playing somewhere else. Petro has a comfort level here that he won't have elsewhere...He signs a long term Hi-$$$ deal somewhere, the expectations will be a whole lot different than here. He will probably wind up being someone else's Justin Faulk...or worse.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#53
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#54
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#55
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Hard to say. We know there was an offer on the table last offseason. Maybe it was a crappy offer, maybe it wasn't. Faulk and Schenn were quick to sign, maybe Petro is kicking himself. Certainly the pandemic/flat cap has crushed Petro and every UFA's leverage to varying extents.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#56
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Army must think the probability of keeping Petro here is less than 50%. He figured this a long time ago. There's just no other explanation.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#57
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:26 am
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.
I give Army credit, he plays hard ball in negotiations. He's judicious with money/cap. For the ownership we have here and how tight things are, I give Army a ton of credit with what he's accomplished here. To get us a Cup here in STL is nothing short of amazing, To me, it's all about results, and there's no doubt that Army has been the perfect GM here and I highly doubt that there is another GM out there that could of matched what he's accomplished here. Army just doesn't get enough praise IMO, but maybe that's a good thing.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#58
Honestly, how can a GM offer top dollar on a long-term deal in this environment? You could very well be looking at no fans in attendance for some, if not all, of next season. That is a massive uncertainty for a lot of teams in the NHL, including the (still) defending Stanley Cup champions.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#59
BillP. wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:31 pm
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:26 am
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.
I give Army credit, he plays hard ball in negotiations. He's judicious with money/cap. For the ownership we have here and how tight things are, I give Army a ton of credit with what he's accomplished here. To get us a Cup here in STL is nothing short of amazing, To me, it's all about results, and there's no doubt that Army has been the perfect GM here and I highly doubt that there is another GM out there that could of matched what he's accomplished here. Army just doesn't get enough praise IMO, but maybe that's a good thing.
Perfect as in the Hitchcock/Yeo disaster?
The trade for Halak?
Ryan Miller?
Extending Allen?
Extending Berglund?
Not trading Oshie after the Sochi/Oshie nonsense?
Trading Ben Bishop because we had Jarosuck Halot?
Not listening to Tarasenko about signing Artemi Panarin?

He's gotten us something no other previous GM has been able to - a Stanley cup. Which is the most amazing feeling in the world.

But to suggest Army has been PERFECT is ludicrous...he's been...efficient
Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#60
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:26 am
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.
Faulk is nowhere near Petros league though. Petro is a stud number 1 D. Faulk is nowhere near worth 6.5. Let alone what he’s gonna look like at 34. Petros game will age just fine. It’s a misplay by Army if we added Faulk and let Petro leave bottom line.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#61
Ozzies09tc wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:55 pm
BillP. wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:31 pm
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:26 am


Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.
I give Army credit, he plays hard ball in negotiations. He's judicious with money/cap. For the ownership we have here and how tight things are, I give Army a ton of credit with what he's accomplished here. To get us a Cup here in STL is nothing short of amazing, To me, it's all about results, and there's no doubt that Army has been the perfect GM here and I highly doubt that there is another GM out there that could of matched what he's accomplished here. Army just doesn't get enough praise IMO, but maybe that's a good thing.
Perfect as in the Hitchcock/Yeo disaster?
The trade for Halak?
Ryan Miller?
Extending Allen?
Extending Berglund?
Not trading Oshie after the Sochi/Oshie nonsense?
Trading Ben Bishop because we had Jarosuck Halot?
Not listening to Tarasenko about signing Artemi Panarin?

He's gotten us something no other previous GM has been able to - a Stanley cup. Which is the most amazing feeling in the world.

But to suggest Army has been PERFECT is ludicrous...he's been...efficient
To me, it’s all about results. If we were still Cup-less, no argument from me. But we got our Cup and the team is still in a strong position to contend for the next few years. Overall, in the big picture, the results are there. Was there bumps? Sure. And I voiced my discontent several times. But Army dug himself out of a whole in 2 years and got us a Cup. Furthermore, he did this his way, in a very patient, methodical manner. This is his style and he’s never veered from it during his tenure here. Never any panic, knee jerk reactions from him. He does things his way in a consistent manner and I give him credit for that.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#62
if i'm army and i see the quote that petro's wife is the only reason he's still talking, my offer goes down. he passes on that and it goes down further. if you don't want to be here, don't let the door hit you on the way out, i don't care who you are.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#63
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 9:22 pm
Turk Sanderson wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:26 am
ratonmono wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:04 am
Army gets a pass because the cup, but damn he has handled this Petro situation horribly thus far from what I can see. You have no issues adding Faulk for longterm but balk at 8 years for the fucking captain who helped seal the deal on a championship playing huge minutes? I just don't get it.
Faulk is 28 years old and his price is 6.5 per year 'till he's 34... Petro is already 30 years old. How many years would you go? Vova and O'Reilly make 7.5 Schenn and Faulk 6.5 ... and they will all be 34 or under when their deals are up. I doubt that Army breaks his 7.5 ceiling or goes past 36 with Petro.
Faulk is nowhere near Petros league though. Petro is a stud number 1 D. Faulk is nowhere near worth 6.5. Let alone what he’s gonna look like at 34. Petros game will age just fine. It’s a misplay by Army if we added Faulk and let Petro leave bottom line.
Misplay??? That is like replacing your GOODYEAR'S with cat turds and expecting to win the Indy 500.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#64
The more I hear about it the more I think Petro's gone. Kind of a bummer in terms of short term window, but I kind of feel like there are going to be a lot of players available this year via trade that might not be in a normal offseason. If Petro does go I imagine there might be a roster reshaping that moves in a bit of a different direction, though still working on winning now.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#65
You can't really draw any conclusions from any of the information available to the public to this point. Army will say nothing of substance right up until the point where Petro signs, either with us or with another team. That's just the way he operates. There is about a 99.9% that any information making its way to the media is either baseless speculation presented as "sourced" for clicks or leaked to the media by Petro's agent for leverage in negotiations.

We will eventually know in the next few weeks whether Petro is Stamkos, Tavares or something in between. Stamkos was always going back to Tampa, he just wanted to make sure he was taken care of. Tavares was always going to Toronto if they were willing to make him a reasonable offer. Petro may be one of those extremes or, more likely, he may just be keeping all of his options open.

I think the only thing you can say for sure is that if he isn't re-signed by the time the free agent frenzy starts the prospect of him returning will be pretty bleak. At this point, know one really knows for sure how this is going to play out, maybe not even Army and Petro, so take anything you read or hear that isn't a direct quote from one of those two with a HUGE block of salt.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#66
T.C. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:31 am
if i'm army and i see the quote that petro's wife is the only reason he's still talking, my offer goes down. he passes on that and it goes down further. if you don't want to be here, don't let the door hit you on the way out, i don't care who you are.
This team needs Petro more than Petro needs the Blues. Can't let pride force you into a bad decision. The Blues window immediately closes if Petro walks. That's a simple fact.
Just a Klim Kostin fan account

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#67
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am
T.C. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:31 am
if i'm army and i see the quote that petro's wife is the only reason he's still talking, my offer goes down. he passes on that and it goes down further. if you don't want to be here, don't let the door hit you on the way out, i don't care who you are.
This team needs Petro more than Petro needs the Blues. Can't let pride force you into a bad decision. The Blues window immediately closes if Petro walks. That's a simple fact.
No way, I disagree. Window does not close if Petro walks. Would you have guessed the Blues would be leading the West in points during season without Tarasenko? I'm going to guess no.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#68
BillP. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:38 pm
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am
T.C. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:31 am
if i'm army and i see the quote that petro's wife is the only reason he's still talking, my offer goes down. he passes on that and it goes down further. if you don't want to be here, don't let the door hit you on the way out, i don't care who you are.
This team needs Petro more than Petro needs the Blues. Can't let pride force you into a bad decision. The Blues window immediately closes if Petro walks. That's a simple fact.
No way, I disagree. Window does not close if Petro walks. Would you have guessed the Blues would be leading the West in points during season without Tarasenko? I'm going to guess no.
Petro is far more valuable to this team than Tarasenko, that seems to have already been known.

The Blues have depth at forward that allow them to absorb the loss of Tarasenko. They have Parayko on defense and then a bunch of 3rd pairing guys.

The Blues are a playoff team without Petro, but a legit stanley cup contender? Nah. Add to that, who even knows if you'll have Tarasenko next year and what version of him shows up.
Just a Klim Kostin fan account

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#69
BillP. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:38 pm
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am
T.C. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 4:31 am
if i'm army and i see the quote that petro's wife is the only reason he's still talking, my offer goes down. he passes on that and it goes down further. if you don't want to be here, don't let the door hit you on the way out, i don't care who you are.
This team needs Petro more than Petro needs the Blues. Can't let pride force you into a bad decision. The Blues window immediately closes if Petro walks. That's a simple fact.
No way, I disagree. Window does not close if Petro walks. Would you have guessed the Blues would be leading the West in points during season without Tarasenko? I'm going to guess no.
The success of the team without Tarasenko doesn't tell you much about the value of Petro. It certainly doesn't inform you that they'll be successful without Tarasenko for months AND without Petro. The Blues can keep their window open next year without Petro, sure, but only if Armstrong is busy and makes some strong additions with that cap space.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#70
Petro was turning into SHIT before Berube took over. If Berube gets canned in the next couple years, it's buyer beware on Petro. Berube brought the best out of Petro. Would that carry over without the Chief? I wouldn't bet on it. Just sayin..............

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#71
BillP. wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:55 pm
Petro was turning into SHIT before Berube took over. If Berube gets canned in the next couple years, it's buyer beware on Petro. Berube brought the best out of Petro. Would that carry over without the Chief? I wouldn't bet on it. Just sayin..............
I like Petro and hope he stays, but there is definitely some truth in what you say, Bill. Petro sucked the first part of the 2018/19 season, and also had an injury. More importantly, Petro was pretty brutal in the first 2 rounds of the playoffs, and the early part of round 3. He finally found his game and was much better as the Sharks series progressed, and he was good in the Final series. There is so much misinformation in that other shit forum that people forget that Petro really struggled at times during the Cup season, including the playoffs. This past season? He seemed much more concerned about offense.....maybe trying to pad the stats before free agency.

Again, I like him, and I definitely hope he stays a Blue.....but he is not a superstar.

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#72
BillP. wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:01 pm
Ozzies09tc wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:55 pm
BillP. wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:31 pm


I give Army credit, he plays hard ball in negotiations. He's judicious with money/cap. For the ownership we have here and how tight things are, I give Army a ton of credit with what he's accomplished here. To get us a Cup here in STL is nothing short of amazing, To me, it's all about results, and there's no doubt that Army has been the perfect GM here and I highly doubt that there is another GM out there that could of matched what he's accomplished here. Army just doesn't get enough praise IMO, but maybe that's a good thing.
Perfect as in the Hitchcock/Yeo disaster?
The trade for Halak?
Ryan Miller?
Extending Allen?
Extending Berglund?
Not trading Oshie after the Sochi/Oshie nonsense?
Trading Ben Bishop because we had Jarosuck Halot?
Not listening to Tarasenko about signing Artemi Panarin?

He's gotten us something no other previous GM has been able to - a Stanley cup. Which is the most amazing feeling in the world.

But to suggest Army has been PERFECT is ludicrous...he's been...efficient
To me, it’s all about results. If we were still Cup-less, no argument from me. But we got our Cup and the team is still in a strong position to contend for the next few years. Overall, in the big picture, the results are there. Was there bumps? Sure. And I voiced my discontent several times. But Army dug himself out of a whole in 2 years and got us a Cup. Furthermore, he did this his way, in a very patient, methodical manner. This is his style and he’s never veered from it during his tenure here. Never any panic, knee jerk reactions from him. He does things his way in a consistent manner and I give him credit for that.
Totally respect that response.
Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#73
Dread_Pirate_Westley wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am

This team needs Petro more than Petro needs the Blues. Can't let pride force you into a bad decision. The Blues window immediately closes if Petro walks. That's a simple fact.
I said the same thing about Tavares and the Islanders...
Listen, strange women lyin' in ponds distributin' swords is no basis for a system of government!

Re: Pietrangelo Free Agency Talk

#75
Ozzies09tc wrote:
Thu Sep 10, 2020 7:10 pm
BillP. wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:01 pm
Ozzies09tc wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 7:55 pm


Perfect as in the Hitchcock/Yeo disaster?
The trade for Halak?
Ryan Miller?
Extending Allen?
Extending Berglund?
Not trading Oshie after the Sochi/Oshie nonsense?
Trading Ben Bishop because we had Jarosuck Halot?
Not listening to Tarasenko about signing Artemi Panarin?

He's gotten us something no other previous GM has been able to - a Stanley cup. Which is the most amazing feeling in the world.

But to suggest Army has been PERFECT is ludicrous...he's been...efficient
To me, it’s all about results. If we were still Cup-less, no argument from me. But we got our Cup and the team is still in a strong position to contend for the next few years. Overall, in the big picture, the results are there. Was there bumps? Sure. And I voiced my discontent several times. But Army dug himself out of a whole in 2 years and got us a Cup. Furthermore, he did this his way, in a very patient, methodical manner. This is his style and he’s never veered from it during his tenure here. Never any panic, knee jerk reactions from him. He does things his way in a consistent manner and I give him credit for that.
Totally respect that response.
Thanks Oz!