LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
What team has had just "A couple years of top 10 picks"? Please name the team you want to see Blues management follow?
The Blues are currently trying to follow Dallas, LA, and Washington. This is what you do to not be a black hole for a decade.
LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
You're not alone in this thinking but you'll be shouted down by shills.
Last edited by Blue Sabbath on 26 Jan 2025 15:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
What decent future asset?
We didn’t give up a top prospect or a first. A second is a 50/50 prop at best, and even if it worked out, how long before that guy is even here?
Do you advocate trading all our draft picks in rounds 2-7? Might as well according to your spin.
LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
What team has had just "A couple years of top 10 picks"? Please name the team you want to see Blues management follow?
The Blues are currently trying to follow Dallas, LA, and Washington. This is what you do to not be a black hole for a decade.
LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
You're not alone in this thinking but you'll be shouted down by shills.
I can't help it you're too stupid to realize that what you want isn't possible. If you want to watch The Bad News Bears of Hockey for a decade you go ahead and blow it up. Conor Bedard looks great with the Hawks, maybe they make the playoffs this decade.
If we could trade off all the veterans, be a top 10 drafting team one year, win the lottery and get a top 3 the next, within 2 years make the playoffs and within 3 more be a contender, I'd say go for it. NOT ONE SINGLE NHL HAS DONE IT. NOT ONE. I'd encourage you to expound on your plan and provide examples, please
Understanding reality is not being a shill. Sorry, not sorry.
There are 32 teams in the league, the Blues aren't due for another Cup until 2050. Ponder that for a moment. It took the Blues 50 years to win a Cup but in that time we got to see a lot of enjoyable hockey and great players.
I'd rather watch Fowler on defense than not. The Blues don't have to win a Cup or challenge for one to hold me as a fan. Should they be trying to improve the team? Yes. I've seen the team in a lot worse shape than it is now, and I endured the Thrashers as my home town team. I know how to be patient.
LGB73 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 13:37 pm
Fowler was a mistake. Not that he doesn't make the Blues better because he does. He just wasn't going to get us into the playoffs. So we've given up a decent future asset but more importantly stops us from getting better talent in this year's draft and a lighting bolt of a chance of a top 3 pick.
Ownership needs to get serious about rebuilding
This middle road is the path to longer term pain than accepting a couple years of top 10 picks.
What the Fowler move did was allow them to move Suter down the pairings and become a mentor and partner for Tucker. The improvement has been quite noticeable. The alternative was a struggling Kessel paired with Tucker. I doubt that does anything positive for either of them.
Fowler has been very good as a Blue. Ducks are retaining salary. The Blues could trade him at the deadline and get a 2nd back. He is also signed for next year, so the same circumstances would apply if the Blues keep him for next year. Not seeing much downside unless he gets hurt or his play deteriorates.
son_of_foolsgold wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 08:25 am
I told most of you fools what a stupid move it was to waste future assets on Fowler. Ever since that 1000th game ceremony
he has been terrible, and he hasn't prevented the Blues from falling hopelessly out of the playoff picture.
So tell me, do you regret it now? Army should.
There is no regret for that trade at all.
Would you rather be sending out Kessel or Perunovich for the amount of minutes that Fowler has logged since getting here. I know I wouldn't, and to my knowledge Fowler has put up a decent amount of goals and points since getting here as well.
Fowler is signed also through next season on a decent contract with what the Ducks are picking up.
If the OP were serious about valuing futures, and not just trying to be a miserable troll, they'd understand that Fowler is worth way more than what Army paid. That means if the Blues decide they're not a playoff team this year, they can sell him for more precious futures than they paid.
Army saw Anaheim in a pickle and took full advantage, paying pennies on the dollar. If Army puts Fowler on the market this deadline, a first isn't out of the question - which defender rumored to be on the market would you rather add as a contender? Provorov?
You def are the new form nut-hugger. Predictable, sanctimonious and dumb as rocks.
What's the going rate on a defender with 1 year remaining at 4M cap hit who plays 22 min a night of plus hockey on a team with a minus goal differential, and 13pts in 20 games?
Do you seriously think Army couldn't get a 2nd back if he put Fowler on the market today?
Again, which defender would make a bigger impact at the deadline?
Sudsy 11 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 16:53 pm
Fowler has been very good as a Blue. Ducks are retaining salary. The Blues could trade him at the deadline and get a 2nd back. He is also signed for next year, so the same circumstances would apply if the Blues keep him for next year. Not seeing much downside unless he gets hurt or his play deteriorates.
You and DawgDad get it.
And for those who want to blow up the roster, you apparently did not live through the Davidson years.
son_of_foolsgold wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 08:25 am
I told most of you fools what a stupid move it was to waste future assets on Fowler. Ever since that 1000th game ceremony
he has been terrible, and he hasn't prevented the Blues from falling hopelessly out of the playoff picture.
So tell me, do you regret it now? Army should.
There is no regret for that trade at all.
Would you rather be sending out Kessel or Perunovich for the amount of minutes that Fowler has logged since getting here. I know I wouldn't, and to my knowledge Fowler has put up a decent amount of goals and points since getting here as well.
Fowler is signed also through next season on a decent contract with what the Ducks are picking up.
If the OP were serious about valuing futures, and not just trying to be a miserable troll, they'd understand that Fowler is worth way more than what Army paid. That means if the Blues decide they're not a playoff team this year, they can sell him for more precious futures than they paid.
Army saw Anaheim in a pickle and took full advantage, paying pennies on the dollar. If Army puts Fowler on the market this deadline, a first isn't out of the question - which defender rumored to be on the market would you rather add as a contender? Provorov?
You def are the new form nut-hugger. Predictable, sanctimonious and dumb as rocks.
What's the going rate on a defender with 1 year remaining at 4M cap hit who plays 22 min a night of plus hockey on a team with a minus goal differential, and 13pts in 20 games?
Hasn’t played a playoff game in 7-8 years. He’s not getting a 1st. They should keep him and try and move Faulk in summer…if anything
Sudsy 11 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 16:53 pm
Fowler has been very good as a Blue. Ducks are retaining salary. The Blues could trade him at the deadline and get a 2nd back. He is also signed for next year, so the same circumstances would apply if the Blues keep him for next year. Not seeing much downside unless he gets hurt or his play deteriorates.
You and DawgDad get it.
And for those who want to blow up the roster, you apparently did not live through the Davidson years.
I agree w you on Fowler. But living through the Davidson years got us the building blocks for the eventual Cup. It’s almost a necessity to get a few top picks and then it takes a few years for them to mature. The current strategy in all likelihood will lead to prolonged mediocrity
Sudsy 11 wrote: ↑26 Jan 2025 16:53 pm
Fowler has been very good as a Blue. Ducks are retaining salary. The Blues could trade him at the deadline and get a 2nd back. He is also signed for next year, so the same circumstances would apply if the Blues keep him for next year. Not seeing much downside unless he gets hurt or his play deteriorates.
You and DawgDad get it.
And for those who want to blow up the roster, you apparently did not live through the Davidson years.
I agree w you on Fowler. But living through the Davidson years got us the building blocks for the eventual Cup. It’s almost a necessity to get a few top picks and then it takes a few years for them to mature. The current strategy in all likelihood will lead to prolonged mediocrity
Guys like McDavid, Barkov, Eichel, Nate … true studs….takes them many years…and heartbreaks.
But Dvorsky Jimmy and Thomas are gonna compete in 3 years.
