Column: What if St. Louis had kept Alex Pietrangelo?

[DawgDad]

I wonder if it has occurred to Army yet that he let the one player go that he can never replace -- BECAUSE HIS TEAM WINS MORE MEANINGLESS GAMES IN MARCH AND APRIL THAN EVERY OTHER NHL TEAM.

And if you think that the replacing a RHD is impossibly costly, just wait until you see how hard it will ultimately be to find a 2C. Anybody remember the Kevin Hayes debacle?

ALL players are replaceable, in time. Edmonton won a Cup without Gretzky, Detroit won several without Howe, Pittsburgh won without Lemieux, Chicago won without Mikita, Montreal won without LaFleur, etc.

Do you not realize how ridiculous your post is?

Sure, the Oilers won without Gretzky, but they replaced his production with Klima and Joe Murphy. The Wings won with HOFers like Federov, Hull, Shanahan, Haskell. The Penguins replaced Lemieux with Sidney Crosby. It matters who the replacements are.

You think? I'm over 70 years old, I lived through the Cardinals and Blues down decade of the 70's, I've watched the Hawks and Big Red leave town (I was in Atlanta when the Rams left). I've witnessed Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Larry Wilson retire, Red Berenson, Garry Unger, Bernie Federko, and Chris Pronger get traded, Brett Hull walk in free agency. I've witnessed the Blues skip an entire draft. Down here, I've witnessed an entire hockey team (Thrashers) come and go. You have a point you want to make to me about replacements? I think not much of one.

[TAFKAP]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

[sdaltons]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

Absolutely. We wouldn't have Petro or Parayko right now. And more than likely some picks selected later in drafts from the years Petro was healthy.

[dhsux]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

Absolutely. We wouldn't have Petro or Parayko right now. And more than likely some picks selected later in drafts from the years Petro was healthy.

He was dreaming of 11M.

Josi woke him up. The better player killing his dreams. hahaha

Poor Doug had to deal with all of this but he was already gone.

[TAFKAP]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

Absolutely. We wouldn't have Petro or Parayko right now. And more than likely some picks selected later in drafts from the years Petro was healthy.

The only time I think he'd have made a difference for us was the '22 playoffs. A healthy and motivated Petro might have kept Kadri from falling on Binnington. Might have.

[Red7]

I wonder if it has occurred to Army yet that he let the one player go that he can never replace -- BECAUSE HIS TEAM WINS MORE MEANINGLESS GAMES IN MARCH AND APRIL THAN EVERY OTHER NHL TEAM.

And if you think that the replacing a RHD is impossibly costly, just wait until you see how hard it will ultimately be to find a 2C. Anybody remember the Kevin Hayes debacle?

ALL players are replaceable, in time. Edmonton won a Cup without Gretzky, Detroit won several without Howe, Pittsburgh won without Lemieux, Chicago won without Mikita, Montreal won without LaFleur, etc.

Do you not realize how ridiculous your post is?

Sure, the Oilers won without Gretzky, but they replaced his production with Klima and Joe Murphy. The Wings won with HOFers like Federov, Hull, Shanahan, Haskell. The Penguins replaced Lemieux with Sidney Crosby. It matters who the replacements are.

You think? I'm over 70 years old, I lived through the Cardinals and Blues down decade of the 70's, I've watched the Hawks and Big Red leave town (I was in Atlanta when the Rams left). I've witnessed Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Larry Wilson retire, Red Berenson, Garry Unger, Bernie Federko, and Chris Pronger get traded, Brett Hull walk in free agency. I've witnessed the Blues skip an entire draft. Down here, I've witnessed an entire hockey team (Thrashers) come and go. You have a point you want to make to me about replacements? I think not much of one.

Just that WHO you bring in as replacements matter. You think Sid Abel was a good replacement for Scotty Bowman? That Eric Brewer was a good replacement for Chris Pronger? In the examples you gave, the replacements (though some were DECADES later) were difference makers. To this point, the Blues have failed to adequately replace Pietrangelo and not only have their attempts failed, but they’ve damaged/handicapped the team. Again, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as bad as their failure to replace him.

[Red7]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

Absolutely. We wouldn't have Petro or Parayko right now. And more than likely some picks selected later in drafts from the years Petro was healthy.

The only time I think he'd have made a difference for us was the '22 playoffs. A healthy and motivated Petro might have kept Kadri from falling on Binnington. Might have.

Perhaps with Pietrangelo, they have a better regular season and a better seed instead of facing the Avs in the first round. That being said, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as impactful as their failure to adequately replace him.

[DawgDad]

I wonder if it has occurred to Army yet that he let the one player go that he can never replace -- BECAUSE HIS TEAM WINS MORE MEANINGLESS GAMES IN MARCH AND APRIL THAN EVERY OTHER NHL TEAM.

And if you think that the replacing a RHD is impossibly costly, just wait until you see how hard it will ultimately be to find a 2C. Anybody remember the Kevin Hayes debacle?

ALL players are replaceable, in time. Edmonton won a Cup without Gretzky, Detroit won several without Howe, Pittsburgh won without Lemieux, Chicago won without Mikita, Montreal won without LaFleur, etc.

Do you not realize how ridiculous your post is?

Sure, the Oilers won without Gretzky, but they replaced his production with Klima and Joe Murphy. The Wings won with HOFers like Federov, Hull, Shanahan, Haskell. The Penguins replaced Lemieux with Sidney Crosby. It matters who the replacements are.

You think? I'm over 70 years old, I lived through the Cardinals and Blues down decade of the 70's, I've watched the Hawks and Big Red leave town (I was in Atlanta when the Rams left). I've witnessed Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Larry Wilson retire, Red Berenson, Garry Unger, Bernie Federko, and Chris Pronger get traded, Brett Hull walk in free agency. I've witnessed the Blues skip an entire draft. Down here, I've witnessed an entire hockey team (Thrashers) come and go. You have a point you want to make to me about replacements? I think not much of one.

Just that WHO you bring in as replacements matter. You think Sid Abel was a good replacement for Scotty Bowman? That Eric Brewer was a good replacement for Chris Pronger? In the examples you gave, the replacements (though some were DECADES later) were difference makers. To this point, the Blues have failed to adequately replace Pietrangelo and not only have their attempts failed, but they’ve damaged/handicapped the team. Again, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as bad as their failure to replace him.

One technical point, the CBA, not the Blues, allowed Pietrangelo to walk. No one can force a free agent to sign a contract.

It's pretty rare that a great player is "replaced" by another player. It's a team sport, someone else plays that position and the team dynamic shifts, the "how they get things done on the ice" changes. A pretty good argument could be made that Fowler last season was bringing game on the left side similar to what Pietrangelo previously brought on the right side. Army signed Krug in belief he would bring offense and competent defense but after 21-22 he fell apart. It wasn't just Pietrangelo, the team has transitioned away from JBo AND his "replacement" Scandella, Edmundson, Dunn, Gunnarsson, Bortuzzo. It's now a different unit from the Cup team barring Parayko, and it's going to change a lot more over the next few seasons as the older guys age out or move on. They are WAY beyond any focus on replacing Pietrangelo, that is merely fodder for backward focused fan commentary.

[Red7]

I wonder if it has occurred to Army yet that he let the one player go that he can never replace -- BECAUSE HIS TEAM WINS MORE MEANINGLESS GAMES IN MARCH AND APRIL THAN EVERY OTHER NHL TEAM.

And if you think that the replacing a RHD is impossibly costly, just wait until you see how hard it will ultimately be to find a 2C. Anybody remember the Kevin Hayes debacle?

ALL players are replaceable, in time. Edmonton won a Cup without Gretzky, Detroit won several without Howe, Pittsburgh won without Lemieux, Chicago won without Mikita, Montreal won without LaFleur, etc.

Do you not realize how ridiculous your post is?

Sure, the Oilers won without Gretzky, but they replaced his production with Klima and Joe Murphy. The Wings won with HOFers like Federov, Hull, Shanahan, Haskell. The Penguins replaced Lemieux with Sidney Crosby. It matters who the replacements are.

You think? I'm over 70 years old, I lived through the Cardinals and Blues down decade of the 70's, I've watched the Hawks and Big Red leave town (I was in Atlanta when the Rams left). I've witnessed Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Larry Wilson retire, Red Berenson, Garry Unger, Bernie Federko, and Chris Pronger get traded, Brett Hull walk in free agency. I've witnessed the Blues skip an entire draft. Down here, I've witnessed an entire hockey team (Thrashers) come and go. You have a point you want to make to me about replacements? I think not much of one.

Just that WHO you bring in as replacements matter. You think Sid Abel was a good replacement for Scotty Bowman? That Eric Brewer was a good replacement for Chris Pronger? In the examples you gave, the replacements (though some were DECADES later) were difference makers. To this point, the Blues have failed to adequately replace Pietrangelo and not only have their attempts failed, but they’ve damaged/handicapped the team. Again, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as bad as their failure to replace him.

One technical point, the CBA, not the Blues, allowed Pietrangelo to walk. No one can force a free agent to sign a contract.

It's pretty rare that a great player is "replaced" by another player. It's a team sport, someone else plays that position and the team dynamic shifts, the "how they get things done on the ice" changes. A pretty good argument could be made that Fowler last season was bringing game on the left side similar to what Pietrangelo previously brought on the right side. Army signed Krug in belief he would bring offense and competent defense but after 21-22 he fell apart. It wasn't just Pietrangelo, the team has transitioned away from JBo AND his "replacement" Scandella, Edmundson, Dunn, Gunnarsson, Bortuzzo. It's now a different unit from the Cup team barring Parayko, and it's going to change a lot more over the next few seasons as the older guys age out or move on. They are WAY beyond any focus on replacing Pietrangelo, that is merely fodder for backward focused fan commentary.

Wait a minute! You said previously that no player is irreplaceable and now you say seldom is a great player replaced. Which is it? BTW, Edmundson was gone before Jaybo went down. Gunnarsson was NEVER seen as his replacement and we all know what happened with Scandella. Krug has never lived up to the deal and you’re right, Fowler did match Pietrangelo’s 24-25 play. And, yes, the Blues did let Pietrangelo walk when they didn’t meet the requirements to keep him.

[Red7]

The wild card though was Parayko. In the last half of 2019 and through the playoffs, he was the Blues’ best defenseman. He was a beast. He played to his size and appeared to finally becoming the player we all knew was in there. He was winning 3 on 1 puck battles. He was clearing the crease. He was playing the body like never before. Unfortunately, Parayko has never played that way again on a consistent basis. If he had, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

[Old_Goat]

I wonder if it has occurred to Army yet that he let the one player go that he can never replace -- BECAUSE HIS TEAM WINS MORE MEANINGLESS GAMES IN MARCH AND APRIL THAN EVERY OTHER NHL TEAM.

And if you think that the replacing a RHD is impossibly costly, just wait until you see how hard it will ultimately be to find a 2C. Anybody remember the Kevin Hayes debacle?

ALL players are replaceable, in time. Edmonton won a Cup without Gretzky, Detroit won several without Howe, Pittsburgh won without Lemieux, Chicago won without Mikita, Montreal won without LaFleur, etc.

Do you not realize how ridiculous your post is?

Sure, the Oilers won without Gretzky, but they replaced his production with Klima and Joe Murphy. The Wings won with HOFers like Federov, Hull, Shanahan, Haskell. The Penguins replaced Lemieux with Sidney Crosby. It matters who the replacements are.

You think? I'm over 70 years old, I lived through the Cardinals and Blues down decade of the 70's, I've watched the Hawks and Big Red leave town (I was in Atlanta when the Rams left). I've witnessed Stan Musial, Bob Gibson, Lou Brock, Larry Wilson retire, Red Berenson, Garry Unger, Bernie Federko, and Chris Pronger get traded, Brett Hull walk in free agency. I've witnessed the Blues skip an entire draft. Down here, I've witnessed an entire hockey team (Thrashers) come and go. You have a point you want to make to me about replacements? I think not much of one.

Just that WHO you bring in as replacements matter. You think Sid Abel was a good replacement for Scotty Bowman? That Eric Brewer was a good replacement for Chris Pronger? In the examples you gave, the replacements (though some were DECADES later) were difference makers. To this point, the Blues have failed to adequately replace Pietrangelo and not only have their attempts failed, but they’ve damaged/handicapped the team. Again, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as bad as their failure to replace him.

One technical point, the CBA, not the Blues, allowed Pietrangelo to walk. No one can force a free agent to sign a contract.

It's pretty rare that a great player is "replaced" by another player. It's a team sport, someone else plays that position and the team dynamic shifts, the "how they get things done on the ice" changes. A pretty good argument could be made that Fowler last season was bringing game on the left side similar to what Pietrangelo previously brought on the right side. Army signed Krug in belief he would bring offense and competent defense but after 21-22 he fell apart. It wasn't just Pietrangelo, the team has transitioned away from JBo AND his "replacement" Scandella, Edmundson, Dunn, Gunnarsson, Bortuzzo. It's now a different unit from the Cup team barring Parayko, and it's going to change a lot more over the next few seasons as the older guys age out or move on. They are WAY beyond any focus on replacing Pietrangelo, that is merely fodder for backward focused fan commentary.

Wait a minute! You said previously that no player is irreplaceable and now you say seldom is a great player replaced. Which is it? BTW, Edmundson was gone before Jaybo went down. Gunnarsson was NEVER seen as his replacement and we all know what happened with Scandella. Krug has never lived up to the deal and you’re right, Fowler did match Pietrangelo’s 24-25 play. And, yes, the Blues did let Pietrangelo walk when they didn’t meet the requirements to keep him.

Let's don't forget there were a few years where Kevin Shattenkirk was considered a more reliable and impactful D-man on the team than Petrangelo. It's not like there was unbounded enthusiasm for Petrangelo at the time. And since so much focus is on the Monday Morning Quarterbacking one could argue that the Blues could have, would have been better off drafting one of Erik Karlsson, John Carlson, Tyler Meyers in that same draft year rather than Petrangelo.

[Harry S Deals]

False premise. The NMC wasn't the hang-up, it was reportedly the amount and structure of the bonus payments in a time of great uncertainty. In the end it was Pietrangelo who turned down the offer from the Blues, as was his right. He was not the Blues player to be "kept", he was a UFA.

This type of stuff is what gives journalism today a bad reputation.

$1 million in Salary, $7.8 million in annual signing bonuses, ouchey

[TheJackBurton]

The writer hits the nail on the head on several points: 1) Losing Petro was a major blunder. 2) Armstrong's attempts to replace him were ultimate failures. 3) Even if Petro had been retained the retool we're seeing would have still occured, but would have only been delayed.

What wasn't said was the near simultaneous loss Jay Bouwmeester and Army's flailing attempts to replace him too. Yet even with his loss St. Louis still had a shot to repeat in the COVID interrupted season, but we all know what happened with certain team leaders not being prepared to play leading into the bubble. The whole Pietrangelo Era will go down as one of extremes, from winning the Cup to mailing it in, with a war of egos between he and Doug Armstong as the backdrop. Memories so thick you have to brush them away.

---------------------------------------


What if St. Louis had kept Alex Pietrangelo?

By Joe DeMarini
July 19, 2025

- clip -

Losing Pietrangelo hit the Blues' defense corps hard, and Armstrong scrambled to find a solution--two solutions, in fact. Armstrong signed Torey Krug and Justin Faulk to matching seven-year, $45.5-million contracts that each carried cap hits of $6.5 million and included no-trade protections throughout: full No-Trade Clauses for the first five years, and Modified NTCs for the final two. Faulk and Krug never lived up to their contracts, with Krug's career likely over due to injury as well, and neither player could replace what Pietrangelo brought to the lineup.

It was a colossal fumble to let Pietrangelo walk over an NMC--trade protections Armstrong wound up giving to two lesser players to try and replace Pietrangelo; it was a total mismanagement of the cap and the beginning of a downward spiral the Blues are only just now pulling themselves out of.

What if the Blues had kept Pietrangelo, though? Re-signed him, and not made the blunder of handing out matching albatross contracts to both Krug and Faulk. On the one hand, the Blues likely would've remained a more competitive team through the early 2020s: even with the departures of Ryan O'Reilly and Vladimir Tarasenko, the Blues' forward group has remained strong as Jordan Kyrou and Robert Thomas have emerged as true top-line talents. With Pietrangelo on the backend, they would've had a rock-solid No. 1 defenseman and could've filled out the rest of the blue line in other ways. Would that have been a true Cup-contending team? Maybe not, but the 2018-19 team that did win didn't fit the mold, either.

https://bleedinblue.com/what-if-st-loui ... k0f9gtk193

No I can't agree with that we didn't replace Petro. Faulk has more than covered for a majority of what Petro brought and for less money. Is he as good as Petro? No, but he outscored him in 22 and only feel short by 4 points in 23. For 14 million less over the time of the contract I'll take it.

The scrambling was trying to replace Jaybo as that was completely unexpected.

I do agree though if we keep Petro, we are likely at the point of bottoming out with no Petro, no Parayko (he would have been traded had we retained Petro) and no prospects on the right side.

Petro going to Vegas sped up the retool and also forced us to address the right side which we have done.

[TheJackBurton]

Faulk was a good signing at the time.
Don't underestimate the sad loss of Bouwmeister...and to think for so many years too many people were wrongfully all over his case.
At least we have a few D prospects with promise whom are not midgets.

Bouwmeister’s loss was tragic and hurt…in 2020. He had, maybe, another year left. There had been some question about his return for 19-20, much less beyond and he was considering retirement. Then came the good news/bad news of Marco Scandella. Scandella came in and played impressively that led to a disastrous 4 year extension.

Where are you getting that information from? I hadn't heard anything about him looking to retire. Hell with his surgery finally fixing his hip, he looked like he could of played another 5 or 6 seasons. He was still skating as smooth as ever.

[TheJackBurton]

Man, that deal would have been a boat anchor. Remember, he wasn't signing here for less than Josi+. He wanted 9.5 x 8 years. So we'd have him on LTIR for 3 more seasons. 3 of the last 5 seasons, he's had less than 35 points. That would have been awful, because it probably costs us Parayko to keep him.

Absolutely. We wouldn't have Petro or Parayko right now. And more than likely some picks selected later in drafts from the years Petro was healthy.

The only time I think he'd have made a difference for us was the '22 playoffs. A healthy and motivated Petro might have kept Kadri from falling on Binnington. Might have.

Perhaps with Pietrangelo, they have a better regular season and a better seed instead of facing the Avs in the first round. That being said, allowing Pietrangelo to walk wasn’t as impactful as their failure to adequately replace him.

They were facing the Avs no matter what. It was a second round matchup, not the first. The only position where they wouldn't have faced the Avs in the second round would have been the 1st wild card and they weren't going to finish that low.

[callitwhatyouwant]

The wild card though was Parayko. In the last half of 2019 and through the playoffs, he was the Blues’ best defenseman. He was a beast. He played to his size and appeared to finally becoming the player we all knew was in there. He was winning 3 on 1 puck battles. He was clearing the crease. He was playing the body like never before. Unfortunately, Parayko has never played that way again on a consistent basis. If he had, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

Parayko for the past 2 seasons has been the superior player over Petro. Now that we know Petro is probably done, we see why that might be happening. Faulk also had a couple seasons where he was performing better than Petro. Anyone who lumps Faulk in with the Krug contract isn't debating in good faith. Faulk was our best defensemen until 2 seasons ago. Parayko is now playing up to the level we all hoped he would.

This is old news and tired out. As Silky Johnson would say, this argument is like Aghanistan, Bombed out and Depleted. Player Haters Ball. Hate Hate Hate Hate Hate