Read the full transcript of our weekly Blues chat.
Matthew DeFranks: Good afternoon. The Blues just successfully offer sheeted Philip Broberg and Dylan Holloway, and there is less than a month until training camp begins. Let's get to some questions.
Barry-Blues Fan in Orlando: Happy Wednesday Matt, thanks for the chat. When was the last time we had good news coming from the Blues in August? Do you think these types of offer sheets, targeting mid-level players rather than stars, will become more common place? These offer sheets hit the sweet spot where we got two very good players at minimal cost. Very sneaky and smart move for Army to catch the Oilers in a bad spot. Hey, why join the Marines or the Air Force when the ARMY is flying high right now?
Matthew DeFranks: You've got a good point, and those are the most likely offer sheets to be worth the risk, honestly. For the top-end guys like Seider, Raymond and Harley, those RFA deals were already going to be high, so there's little reason for the current team to match them. Just think about Sebastian Aho's deal back in 2019.
But for those mid-tier players, you know you won't have to give up a first-round pick. You know you'll have to overpay to get them because that's what the market necessitates. But they also have a greater chance of being undervalued assets.
Now, will it be worth it in the end? We'll see. I'm not sure Carolina loves how it turned out with Jesperi Kotkaniemi.
Barry-Blues Fan in Orlando: Matt, with all the signings and offer sheets are the Blues loading up to have enough assets to offer a package in a trade to get Brady Tkuchuk?
Matthew DeFranks: I don't think that's how I view these moves. Sure, the Blues have gone after and acquired younger talent in their early-20s. But they're also down to just three picks next summer: 1st, 5th and 6th. They've used a lot of their draft capital, a lot of their cap space, and a lot of their roster space.
I understand why Brady Tkachuk is of interest given his style of play and his hometown, but sometimes moves are just moves.
Tylerg: Matty D, we appreciate the coverage on the offer sheet situation this past week. I imagine you’ll get inundated with Holloway/Broberg questions, so let me ask this: Assuming the roster is now set and we don’t see any significant injuries in camp or the preseason, what does the starting lineup look like against Seattle on 10/8 in your opinion? Thanks my dude!
Matthew DeFranks: There's a million ways Drew Bannister could go with this. There's a lot of "middle-six" type pieces that could slot on different lines, and a steep dropoff after the elite guys like Thomas, Kyrou and Buchnevich.
So let's give this a shot.
Buchnevich-Thomas-Kyrou
I know there's an argument to split them up to deepen the lineup, and that's a very valid one that we saw later in the season. But I think you've got to see if you need help further down before splitting up one of the best lines in the league, at times.
Holloway-Schenn-Neighbours
Buchnevich could be the 2C for the season opener, and the Blues have talked about him playing center enough this summer that it may actually happen. But for now, let's put together a line that'll be heavy to play against with some jam. Obviously, we know Schenn at 2C isn't going to fly on a Cup contending team, but the Blues aren't that.
Saad-Faksa-Joseph
A little speed on the wings, a little scoring punch, and some defensive responsibility. Not the best third line, but it's a third line.
Toropchenko-Sundqvist-Texier
We'll see if Sundqvist is indeed ready for Opening Day in Seattle, but I think the other two guys are in the lineup.
That leaves Kapanen as a scratch.
On defense, we'll try Broberg-Parayko up top.
Armstrong mentioned that they viewed Broberg as a top-four left-handed defenseman. So in that scenario, he's either taking Leddy's job or ... Suter's job? Given his style of play (long, tall, rangy, elite skater, good stick), you wonder if he's the Jay Bouwmeester look-a-like that can again play with Colton Parayko.
More than the other combinations that I'm just throwing together now, I have no idea how the bottom two pairs will look, but I'll guess Suter-Faulk and Leddy-Kessel.
That does leave Perunovich and Joseph as scratches, and would mean waiving MacEachern, Walker and Tucker. I do worry about power play production in this scenario (in which Krug is injured and Perunovich isn't in the lineup).
This alignment also doesn't allow for Dvorsky, Bolduc or Dean to make the roster. Doesn't mean that they can't be called up later.
Asking for a Friend: With the offer sheets behind him, does Armstrong take one of his many forward prospects and look to initiate a trade for another young defenseman? The Blues certainly could use another right shot defenseman prospect to add to this group of emerging talent. Justin Faulk's contract is winding down in a couple of years and Kessel seems to be a solid 3rd pairing option on the right side. Bringing in another young, near NHL ready right shot defensive prospect would seem to be the final move for this prospect pool in the near term.
Matthew DeFranks: It's a good idea, and one that Doug Armstrong has mentioned in the past. Usually, the questions have revolved around the Blues' lack of defensemen in the pipeline and glut of forwards, and he's basically always pointed to finding a trade partner like the Blues did in the Rundblad/Tarasenko deal.
I think the Blues would honestly look for Adam Jiricek to potentially be that answer on the right side in the long term, but they would ideally look to find someone that is three or four years older than Jiricek.
I know Broberg is slotted in on the left side in Ӱԭ, but it's also worth remembering that he played a lot of the right side in Edmonton.
I understand the other circumstances around Cutter Gauthier, but that trade including Jamie Drysdale was two teams dealing from positions of strength to address weaknesses.
Easy Ed - fan since '67: Well, Matt, in exchange for a second and third rounder, the get a pair of guys from slots where they seldom get to draft (#8, #14), who have been hardened in the playoff crucible, at an age where they can play in the NHL and get experience now. I watched the finals, and both looked really good to me, especially Holloway, (I wasn’t watching the defense closely). Every time Holloway stepped on the ice during the finals, I saw him speed through the other team great chances—plus he scored goals. Frankly, Broberg is a top-4 guy on the Blues RIGHT NOW, which is valuable—in fact, he’s better right now than all our bottom defensemen, excepting possibly Perunovich if he reached his best, which hasn't happened yet. I repeat, Blues are playoff bound THIS YEAR!
Matthew DeFranks: Yeah, it's a good move to strengthen the young core of this team. They've now got 10 first-rounders across the last six drafts. Obviously, the average team would have gotten six first-rounders in that same span. So they're stockpiling talent in the right age group that can hopefully shorten the length of the retool/rebuild.
Armstrong did say they viewed Holloway as a top-nine forward and Broberg as a top-four guy. So I'd expect that even if they are higher in the lineup (second line or top pair), maybe their minutes follow more closely to the roles Armstrong mentioned due to special teams, end of game situations, etc.
Easy Ed - fan since '67: Matt, in this forum it was inferred that my saying the Blues have a decent chance of making the playoffs this year (sans excessive injuries) is irrational--even while Army is still maneuvering. You cited as evidence that 67% of gamblers think the Blues won't make the playoffs. Well, I challenge any of those nay-bettors to a game of chess, because chess players don't need to gamble for REAL excitement (across the board), and a percentage of bettors are already suckers for the pro sports money machine. (Irrational? First, I don't drink or take drugs, okay? And at 77 I am productive writing books that get published in New York--easy? try it. Although, admittedly, 3.5 years ago I myself bet AGAINST the universally accepted recession-predicting economists, ha!) Blues naysayers weren't counting on a smart GM, who, with cap space, hooked the Oilers, with cap problems, out of top-level young prospects. Sure, the Blues have some worn tread on defense, plus Krug is uncertain. But Broberg will only get better, and if Suter has 85% left and he's not overused, he's still Top-4 or -5--nice insurance. Plus, their young forwards are bigger, faster, stronger, so TEAM defense could be much better this year. Just sayin': incidentally, "Easy Ed" may be a sarcastic misnomer.
Matthew DeFranks: I would still contend that the Blues roster is marginally better this year than last year, and the biggest question is whether the goaltending can again be elite. If the goalies are among the league's best again this season, the Blues will be in a good spot. If the goalies regress a little bit, we could be in for a similar result to last season.
I also think it's worth mentioning that the Blues view Holloway and Broberg as long-term projects, with Armstrong even saying that Broberg's progress won't be measured by what he does before Christmas. These guys are ones that have to grow into roles a bit.
Joe 99: Hello, thanks for the chats... OK, so along with the understandable hubub about the RFA signings of Holloway and Broberg, the Blues also traded a 2028 3rd round pick and a prospect to the Oilers for the dreaded "future considerations." That surely seems to be a peace offering, but only one media source even commented on this lopsided trade as such, and they did call it 'making peace.' What is your take on this? Does it really take the heat off the Blues for daring to go the RFA route with both the Oilers and the league in general?
Matthew DeFranks: The Fischer/2028 third trade was so that the Oilers did not match. Given the trades they executed over the weekend, Edmonton had the capability to match the offer sheets and keep the players. The threat was there, so the Blues had to sweeten the deal in order for there not to be a match.
This is Doug Armstrong's quote: "We worked to a point where he said ‘If that’s agreeable, we won’t match.’ Our goal was always to get the players and to have to add a little bit to the second and the third to reach our goal, we as an organization were willing to do that.”
Think of it like an expansion draft side deal with Vegas. "We won't take your player if you give us more assets ... " Same thing except Edmonton was threatening to retain Broberg and Holloway by matching.
Sctdog: Is it fair to expect Broberg to slot into Leddy’s spot this year, and in two years when both Leddy and Broberg’s deal are done he is the successor and 55’s partner as a shut down pair?
Matthew DeFranks: The Blues look at Broberg as a top-four, left-handed defenseman, which means he's taking the spot of either Leddy or Suter (assuming Krug is out). I think we all saw Leddy-Parayko had a good year last year, and it's worth wondering if they stick together this season. But just Broberg's style makes him seem like such a good fit with Parayko.
Sctdog: With neighbors last year does he now project as a 1-3 liner, at the beginning of the season there were some who projected him as a 3/4. If he can slot as a top 6 then the Blues aren’t as dependent on all of Bulduc, Dvorsky and Snuggerud panning out as top 6 players.
Matthew DeFranks: If Neighbours is able to replicate his production from last season (high shooting percentage!), he can be viewed as a bona fide top-six player. That's how he'll be played this season and I fully expect him to get a lot of offensive minutes and top power play usage.
Around this time last year, I did think he was a bottom-six guy mostly because I didn't see a lot of offensive skills that jumped out. But he goes to the hard areas, and that's worth something.
You're right, his emergence would make the Blues less dependent on those guys (not all prospects pan out, as we know), but those guys developing correctly would go a long way in changing the Blues from "a nice consistent playoff team" to "Stanley Cup contender."
Sctdog: do you see any D or F that you think may outperform development expectations? Stenberg seems like maybe he’s more than a 3rd line prospect.
Matthew DeFranks: I like Stenberg's game a lot. Involved in a lot of places, got some jam to his game, a little bit of a pest and a great play-maker to his teammates in the slot.
I wonder about his skating ability, but I think he reads the game well, even if his future might be more on the wing than at center.
I didn't get to watch much of Pekarcik last year, and I'm happy to be seeing more of him at Moncton this season. But his assist numbers and play-making ability is obvious. He might punch higher than his third-round selection.
AL: Do you think army tries to unload a player or two before camp starts?
Matthew DeFranks: Possible, but not necessary. I think he loves the idea of having a competitive camp, and that comes with having a bunch of bodies there.
AL: I'm guessing army doesn't make those offers unless he's pretty sure that Krug is LTIR, right?
Matthew DeFranks: It's a good bet, I would guess. Although I would also guess that Krug's availability was down on the list of considerations when chasing a 23-year-old defenseman. This affects this season, absolutely, but is more about the future.
One minor thing on Krug: the Blues don't have to put Krug on LTIR. Even with him on normal IR without cap relief, the Blues would be under the salary cap by $1-2 million. Teams using LTIR can't accrue cap space and would be subject to performance bonus overages, which the Blues could face depending on how many games Ryan Suter plays this season.
Chris: Any speculation on what the club will be doing with it's excess of one way contracts, bury them in the AHL or should we expect some trade activity?
Matthew DeFranks: Right now, I'm expecting them just to be waived to the AHL. Maybe as we progress later in camp, perhaps the Blues explore a trade. But Armstrong has mentioned multiple times that he likes the competition the bodies will bring to camp. (Also mentioned Zack Bolduc by name a few times, which can't be an accident.)
Easy Ed - fan since '67: Matt, like your lines. Holloway is good enough for top 6 now, from what I've seen. How good is forward Joseph? Also, do you think Bromberg is ready for top pair with Parayko? Your projecting him as a Bouwmeister-like d is an interesting thought. Also, that's a pretty good fourth line. Just sayin'.
Matthew DeFranks: Mathieu Joseph has a little bit of offense to him, but I wouldn't count on that being his calling card. He's a speed and effort guy that can help on the PK and on defense. Do I think Broberg is ready for the top pair? Probably not, but the Blues want some of the younger guys to grow into roles and that may be one of them.
Easy Ed - fan since '67: Matt, I wouldn't worry about next year's draft. The Blues have 10 young first rounders, three in the top fifteen, and a bunch of 2nd and 3rd rounders waiting in the wings. Their futures look loaded, if a fair percentage work out.
Matthew DeFranks: Good point. It's the same point Doug Armstrong mentioned in explaining the Kevin Hayes trade, which he had to re-do to get that pick back, incidentally.
On the bigger scale, I wonder if the use of draft picks to acquire players, the use of cap space signals the next part of this Blues retool. The desire to acquire draft assets seems to be gone.
Of course, it was really only around at the 2023 deadline.
john: was the Fischer trade a sweetener (bribe?) for the Oilers to not match the Broberg contract?
Matthew DeFranks: That's exactly what it was. The Oilers threatened to match (not sure if it was Holloway, Broberg or both), and the Blues sent more assets to ensure that didn't happen.
Matt L: I often hear many pundits/reporters talking about how terrible it is to be in the “mushy middle” - too good to get top draft picks but not good enough to really have a shot at winning. To me, it seems like the blues strategy is to stay in the mushy middle while collecting as many 1st round picks as possible and allowing bad contracts to older players to expire and not sending out assets to get rid of them. Theoretically, if you can already be in the middle when Dvorsky, Lindstein, Snuggerud, Jiricek start to be ready to make an impact, you could move from the middle to being a contender. Is that your read of what Army is trying to pull off and if so what do you think about it? Thanks.
Matthew DeFranks: I think the criticism of the "mushy middle" is more about teams that don't seem to have a plan out of that predicament. I've covered two of those teams before in Florida and Dallas. The Panthers had to change GMs, and the Stars just had to draft better than any other team in the mid-first and second rounds.
The Blues and Doug Armstrong have their plan to escape the mushy middle, and have executed the early stages of it so far by acquiring young talent.
I think the Blues' plan has always been about reducing the "downturn" and they understand that teams don't just go from the basement to the top without going through the middle first.
Jackson: I'm well versed in baseball, but not hockey. Could you explain the whole "offer sheet" deal and why it was a big/shocking deal (Armstrong saying he would've done it if the gm was his mother).
Matthew DeFranks: I'll try to do my best. So if I still understand baseball, there's six years of club control (not accounting for service time manipulation). Part of that is pre-arb, and then the arbitration eligible years. The NHL has a similar setup with players on entry-level contracts, and then becoming restricted free agents. The main difference between the sports is that RFAs in hockey can negotiate and sign with other teams, like in the NBA.
It doesn't happen often, but RFAs can choose to sign an offer sheet with another team, and then their current team has the right to match the offer sheet. So the RFAs have some freedom, but their current team has the last word, hence "restricted."
During the cap era, there's been a lot fewer offer sheets. One reason could be that money now more closely impacted the on-ice product with the cap in place. Another that's been speculated is that offer sheets piss off other GMs and would ruin relationships or open up a team to revenge.
That's the code that Armstrong was mentioning yesterday that he doesn't believe exists. So that's where the shock and awe came from around the hockey world.
Matt L: Are the Blues over the cap of having 50 guys under contract? If so, when do they need to have that resolved?
Matthew DeFranks: Currently, the Blues have 53 contracts signed. That doesn't count a presumed deal for Nikita Alexandrov that would put them at 54 (although at this point, he would probably be destined for the AHL anyway).
But teenagers signed to contracts that are playing junior hockey or in Europe don't count toward the limit. So that means Stenberg, Lindstein, Pekarcik, Stancl and Jiricek don't count. Maybe even Dvorsky if the Blues send him back to the OHL, but I don't think that option does him any good.
So that would put them under the 50 contract limit.
Matt L: Do you know if the Blues had any interest in Laine? I remember seeing him score 5 goals against the Blues once - think it was the early part of 18-19. He was one of the more exciting you scorers the league has had in a long time for his first couple years. I hope he can get things back on track.
Matthew DeFranks: I don't know if they were interested. But his profile isn't the type of player they've gone after. He's a little bit older, more expensive and a bit of a question mark right now.
Matt L: Any thoughts on Preds goalie prospect Askarov asking for a trade? I’m usually all for young guys doing what’s best for them and their futures, but c’mon man, you haven’t even played a game and you’re asking for a trade? Win the backup job, prove you’re a legit nhl goalie and then ask for your trade.
Matthew DeFranks: Yeah, I mean he can ask all he wants, but he doesn't really have any leverage in this situation.
Russian players already have little leverage when they're drafted since teams retain their rights in perpetuity. (Unlike college players who can be free agents after four years, or junior players after two.) And then unless offer sheets are more common in the coming years, his options are to either play in the AHL or presumably the KHL.
Nashville holds the cards, and has no reason to rush a trade unless it's worried about asset devaluation in the meantime.
Matt L: Hypothetically, could the blues trade Kapanen and retain half his salary? In other words, can you get a player for a cap hit less than the minimum salary?
Matthew DeFranks: Absolutely. And teams can sometimes do this themselves. Think about two-year contracts for league minimum salaries. In 2022-23 minimum was $750k and in 2023-24 it was $775k. So a two-year deal across those two years would have a cap hit of $762.5k, below the league minimum in 2023-24
Reggie Dunlop: Do Samuel Johannesson or Marcus Sylvegard have any chance of making the club out of camp or are they Springfield bound?
Matthew DeFranks: I would say an outside chance, but I expect them to be in Springfield and then to serve as organizational depth from there. During the season, they might be a choice to recall instead of disrupting the rhythm of prospects.
Easy Ed - fan since '67: Matt, too bad about having to give up Fischer, but the two former Oilers can play now. I think Fischer will be good, but they drafted those other two defensemen ahead of him. With Bromberg and the others, their pipeline is no longer depleted so terribly. Also, you have to give Army big time credit for the execution of his plan. The pipeline has a bunch of talent developing. Look, Army kept us in contention for a long time, so I think he knows his stuff. Picking Steen and sticking around to advise him will probably work out well, too. I haven't felt this optimistic since they acquired O'Reilly and those other guys. Blues make the playoffs this year!
Matthew DeFranks: Yeah, this has been a good summer for Alexander Steen to watch and learn. A lot of unique situations given the offer sheets, the Buchnevich extension, the salary dump, the draft.
This is what Armstrong had to say about Steen's involvement with the offer sheets: “I would say that it was more of a learning experience for him. Obviously, Tim Taylor, Ryan Miller, Alex and I, when we discussed this plan, I kept him involved in every aspect of it. So he can learn on the thought process, why it might work, why it might not work, how we go about doing it. I asked Alex’s opinion on it, but I think right now, in situations like this, this is all new to him. I think he used this as a great learning experience.”
GoThunder: I really like everything the Blues have done, but still worry about teams pushing them around. Braydon Schenn can't fight every night. Who else stands up?
Matthew DeFranks: They've got a decent amount of guys that can play a hard game, but that doesn't mean they're dropping the mitts. Dylan Holloway plays physical, but he only has two fights (both against Vince Dunn!).
Radek Faksa can chuck them every now and then. Neighbours is willing. Walker and Tucker both do, even if they could spent time in the minors.
Bryan C: All Cardinal fans have the Blues. It is so bad, being a Cardinal right now the birds on the bat and hat are turning blue. Please tell us changes are on the way.
Matthew DeFranks: I can't speak for the Cardinals side of things, but the Blues are very apparent in their desire to change things around.
We're gone pretty quiet now, so we'll call it there. Have a good week, everyone. Hockey will be here sooner than we think.
-
-
-
-
-
-
