Utah looking for a young top 6 winger for their 4th OA

[seattleblue]

I do not have to think for more than half a second if Desnoyers is on the table for either Kyrou or for Bolduc + 19th overall (the latter would not be)

This "I'd rather build around Kyrou than Desnoyers" is purely knowing one entity and one entity is unknown. But that's not a good reason and in fact leads to the wrong decision. The idea the Blues could have Thomas Dvorsky and Desnoyers for the middle of their lineup, that is how you become a perennial contender. Do we not want to be perennial contenders? When you build elite backbones you become contenders. Be very strong at RD and scoring C with a high end 1G. Kyrou for the endlessness he has been discussed is not a backbone player. He is a complementary player. It is difficult to get backbone players all timed together.

[rbirules]

From an asset value standpoint, I could understand it but where the Blues are at, they need to be building the current roster, not taking away from it to gain another 17/18 yr old.

Bolduc + a prospect? I’d do that but Utah wouldn’t.

Kyrou was top-5 in the league in 5 on 5 goals, correct? I don’t think some fans truly appreciate what we’d be removing from our roster if we traded him away.

I, like many on here, respect your opinion, with that being said, I don't think you're considering the OP's entire post in this "thought exercise".

If you have a deal in place to sign Marner (to replace Kyrou), would you do this trade? It's not Kyrou for a top prospect/pick, it's Kyrou and his cap space for a top pick AND Marner. I think that changes the context considerably (it also makes it considerably less likely to happen).

I wouldn't move Faulk as we'd need a 2nd RHD (or at least until we have that replacement just like Marner for Kyrou) but you could move some lower level forwards (Texier and/or Joseph) and a LHD like Leddy to get any extra cap space needed for Marner.

[STL fan in MN]

From an asset value standpoint, I could understand it but where the Blues are at, they need to be building the current roster, not taking away from it to gain another 17/18 yr old.

Bolduc + a prospect? I’d do that but Utah wouldn’t.

Kyrou was top-5 in the league in 5 on 5 goals, correct? I don’t think some fans truly appreciate what we’d be removing from our roster if we traded him away.

I, like many on here, respect your opinion, with that being said, I don't think you're considering the OP's entire post in this "thought exercise".

If you have a deal in place to sign Marner (to replace Kyrou), would you do this trade? It's not Kyrou for a top prospect/pick, it's Kyrou and his cap space for a top pick AND Marner. I think that changes the context considerably (it also makes it considerably less likely to happen).

I wouldn't move Faulk as we'd need a 2nd RHD (or at least until we have that replacement just like Marner for Kyrou) but you could move some lower level forwards (Texier and/or Joseph) and a LHD like Leddy to get any extra cap space needed for Marner.

You’re right. My brain 100% skipped the Marner part of it because I have an absolutely no desire to add Marner for $13M, even in the scenario of Kyrou’s $8.125M coming off the books. There’s a few players I’d be willing to pay that much. Marner isn’t one of them. Also, I’d be downright shocked if STL was a place Marner would seriously consider. So yeah, my brain completely ignored the Marner aspect of it when I went to reply. But I’ll admit that some sort of corresponding move like that would make the idea make more sense.

For example, change Marner to a player I’d actual value and then the thought experiment becomes much more palatable. Especially if Desnoyers is still available at 4. I’d be hesitant to do this for Frondell. He’s very talented but he’s got a higher bust factor than I’d be comfortable with. That risk would likely make me say no to this sort of mega-deal. I’d probably take Hagens ahead of Frondell…but it’s close. Frondell has the higher top-end potential but I think Hagens has been overscouted at this point and his flaws are being picked apart too much. He’s still a (bleep) good player.

But in the end, none of this is happening so I’m not really going to give it much more thought than that lol.

[DawgDad]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

[rbirules]

From an asset value standpoint, I could understand it but where the Blues are at, they need to be building the current roster, not taking away from it to gain another 17/18 yr old.

Bolduc + a prospect? I’d do that but Utah wouldn’t.

Kyrou was top-5 in the league in 5 on 5 goals, correct? I don’t think some fans truly appreciate what we’d be removing from our roster if we traded him away.

I, like many on here, respect your opinion, with that being said, I don't think you're considering the OP's entire post in this "thought exercise".

If you have a deal in place to sign Marner (to replace Kyrou), would you do this trade? It's not Kyrou for a top prospect/pick, it's Kyrou and his cap space for a top pick AND Marner. I think that changes the context considerably (it also makes it considerably less likely to happen).

I wouldn't move Faulk as we'd need a 2nd RHD (or at least until we have that replacement just like Marner for Kyrou) but you could move some lower level forwards (Texier and/or Joseph) and a LHD like Leddy to get any extra cap space needed for Marner.

You’re right. My brain 100% skipped the Marner part of it because I have an absolutely no desire to add Marner for $13M, even in the scenario of Kyrou’s $8.125M coming off the books. There’s a few players I’d be willing to pay that much. Marner isn’t one of them. Also, I’d be downright shocked if STL was a place Marner would seriously consider. So yeah, my brain completely ignored the Marner aspect of it when I went to reply. But I’ll admit that some sort of corresponding move like that would make the idea make more sense.

For example, change Marner to a player I’d actual value and then the thought experiment becomes much more palatable. Especially if Desnoyers is still available at 4. I’d be hesitant to do this for Frondell. He’s very talented but he’s got a higher bust factor than I’d be comfortable with. That risk would likely make me say no to this sort of mega-deal. I’d probably take Hagens ahead of Frondell…but it’s close. Frondell has the higher top-end potential but I think Hagens has been overscouted at this point and his flaws are being picked apart too much. He’s still a (bleep) good player.

But in the end, none of this is happening so I’m not really going to give it much more thought than that lol.

Thanks for your reply. It's a longshot thought exercise, but I do think using the cap space from Kyrou leaving to acquire a replacement (Marner or whomever) changes the calculus a bit, if the right player is available.

Thanks again.

[theograce]

From an asset value standpoint, I could understand it but where the Blues are at, they need to be building the current roster, not taking away from it to gain another 17/18 yr old.

Bolduc + a prospect? I’d do that but Utah wouldn’t.

Kyrou was top-5 in the league in 5 on 5 goals, correct? I don’t think some fans truly appreciate what we’d be removing from our roster if we traded him away.

This is right. Plus he scores in big games…that’s very hard to do even for the best.

[theograce]

Trading Kyrou for future would be like trading a prime Tarasenko for future when the Blues were starting to get good.

[seattleblue]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

I would trade Kyrou for Schaefer, Misa or Desnoyers without a second's hesitation, yes. The edge that I have on you is I know about all of the players but you only know about Kyrou.

[skilles]

I also ignored the Marner part as that would be a whole different conversation and not who I would spend the money on but there a lot of factors to consider in what seems like something that is somewhat realistic which is trading Kyrou for the #4 pick. A trade like that changes the landscape entirely not just for the future but right now.

All the sudden you have all kinds of cap space and crazy center prospect depth.

[STL fan in MN]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

I would trade Kyrou for Schaefer, Misa or Desnoyers without a second's hesitation, yes. The edge that I have on you is I know about all of the players but you only know about Kyrou.

True, but we also have to admit there is a bust risk to prospects. For example, I think Schaefer is going to be great but he did only play 17 games this season (19 of you want to count the 1.5 WJC games he played). So we didn’t really get to see how he’d do later in the season, in the OHL playoffs etc. And picking d-men #1 overall hasn’t gone great a lot of the time.

That said, those 3 would be 3 I would risk it on too…but it would be a risk.

[seattleblue]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

I would trade Kyrou for Schaefer, Misa or Desnoyers without a second's hesitation, yes. The edge that I have on you is I know about all of the players but you only know about Kyrou.

True, but we also have to admit there is a bust risk to prospects. For example, I think Schaefer is going to be great but he did only play 17 games this season (19 of you want to count the 1.5 WJC games he played). So we didn’t really get to see how he’d do later in the season, in the OHL playoffs etc. And picking d-men #1 overall hasn’t gone great a lot of the time.

That said, those 3 would be 3 I would risk it on too…but it would be a risk.

It would be, but the odious logic of "#1 overall = [pick someone who was drafted #1 & didn't pan out that they are a perennial all-star]" was what I was reacting to. (as if this Kyrou is a perennial all star, he is not.)

[zamadoo]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

I would trade Kyrou for Schaefer, Misa or Desnoyers without a second's hesitation, yes. The edge that I have on you is I know about all of the players but you only know about Kyrou.

I agree with your above post and the point here that I also somewhat tried to iterate, which is that we are not doing the trading or drafting - if Army and Co. feel they can get the player they want at #4, I'd be pleased if they made the trade, and I also think Utah won't receive a better offer than Kyrou.

[STL fan in MN]

Raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for the #1 overall. OK, now raise your hand if you'd trade Kyrou for a player who becomes Lafreniere today, after waiting 5 years.

Is your hand still up?

I would trade Kyrou for Schaefer, Misa or Desnoyers without a second's hesitation, yes. The edge that I have on you is I know about all of the players but you only know about Kyrou.

True, but we also have to admit there is a bust risk to prospects. For example, I think Schaefer is going to be great but he did only play 17 games this season (19 of you want to count the 1.5 WJC games he played). So we didn’t really get to see how he’d do later in the season, in the OHL playoffs etc. And picking d-men #1 overall hasn’t gone great a lot of the time.

That said, those 3 would be 3 I would risk it on too…but it would be a risk.

It would be, but the odious logic of "#1 overall = [pick someone who was drafted #1 & didn't pan out that they are a perennial all-star]" was what I was reacting to. (as if this Kyrou is a perennial all star, he is not.)

Agreed.

[MikoTython]

Trading Kyrou for future would be like trading a prime Tarasenko for future when the Blues were starting to get good.

I agree w/ you. If we expect Dvorsky to shape in as a 2C in 1-2, all we really need is a bridge or even stand pat (Dean ? Kaskimaki ?), sign our RFAs, maybe next year worry about the 2RD (lots of defense in the pipeline), keeping the roster young, burning in Snuggs, and whoever can stick on the roster from the AHL, waiving/trading the bottom six folks as needed. Build for the long haul.

Kyrou gets a rough ride in this place. I don't get it. He should, though, be hitting the weight room, adding some mass. I don't think we've seen his best yet.

I'm just a homer poster, but the strides the team made this year make me adverse to doing a whole lot of expensive jiggling, until we see what we have with what we have.

[callitwhatyouwant]

They would probably ask for Snuggy for the 4th overall pick, maybe even Holloway.

If you could do it for either Kyrou (straight across) or Bolduc (Blues add a bit) as the main winger piece then I would be 100% interested. I would want Desnoyers then Frondell then Hagens, and one of Desnoyers or Frondell would be automatically available since Schaefer and Misa will be the first two picks.

Bolduc being a young guy who proved he could get to 20 (19) means that he is worth somewhere in the top 15. I think outside of top 5, any proven young player is almost always going to fetch 6-20 picks depending on how much they showed off. Reason being is that GM's will take proven now over 2 years out every day of the week. Bolduc has too much value to trade unless someone came in wanting a tear down of their org and needed to get really young.

Just based off draft pick value chart which is always subjective but gives an idea, Pick 1 1000 pick 2 720 pick 3 600 pick pick 4 520 pick 5 484

Bolduc would definitely be worth some value within 6-10. As for this year, we don't have any 2nd's so hard to bump up into top 5 area. But its pretty easy to get to 4, just those top 3 picks are coveted.

[theograce]

Kyrou gets a rough ride in this place. I don't get it. He should, though, be hitting the weight room, adding some mass. I don't think we've seen his best yet.

What’s funny to me is it’s a lot of the same people who thought Tarasenko was some sort of complete star player.