HockeyWriters: Blues regret trading Bolduc for Mailloux

[Russdv14]

6 points on 15 games for Bolduc but plus 1 …compared with about -12 for Mailloux. So Bolduc may be coming down to earth and we still need a big D right hander

[Harry S Deals]

6 points on 15 games for Bolduc but plus 1 …compared with about -12 for Mailloux. So Bolduc may be coming down to earth and we still need a big D right hander

Bolduc also has the benefit of being a really deep team esp at forward, in STL Bolduc would have been a healthy scratch by now, Bolduc is not that good 5v5 which has already plagued the Blues. Snuggerud today is a better hockey player than Bolduc, Neighbours, Holloway all better choices for STL.

[skilles]

6 points on 15 games for Bolduc but plus 1 …compared with about -12 for Mailloux. So Bolduc may be coming down to earth and we still need a big D right hander

Bolduc also has the benefit of being a really deep team esp at forward, in STL Bolduc would have been a healthy scratch by now, Bolduc is not that good 5v5 which has already plagued the Blues. Snuggerud today is a better hockey player than Bolduc, Neighbours, Holloway all better choices for STL.

lol my goodness you are bias.

[Absolut]

Too early to tell, but didn’t like it at the time. Bolduc has 1 pt in his last 7 games. An assist.

[ratonmono2]

Personally, I don't see anything about Mailloux that looks like an exceptional NHL d-man, but I have limited viewings. Bolduc looked like nothing special to me in limited action until he caught fire late last season. I think this is a trade in five years nobody even cares about as neither player is an important piece in the NHL. Just my take on it.

[MiamiLaw]

Personally, I don't see anything about Mailloux that looks like an exceptional NHL d-man, but I have limited viewings. Bolduc looked like nothing special to me in limited action until he caught fire late last season. I think this is a trade in five years nobody even cares about as neither player is an important piece in the NHL. Just my take on it.

Might be but the Blues absolutely took on the lions share of the risk.

[TheJackBurton]

I just don't get it with all the hate for this trade. We traded from a position of strength for a position of weakness. We traded a position that is easier to find for a position that is harder to find. The cost was a player that had more NHL experience for a player that still needs seasoning. It was never going to look good in year one. It may not pan out, but if it does it will in years 2, 3 and beyond. It's the same as trading a player for a draft pick except with a much shorter time frame.

I honestly don't know how you could not get it at this point that it was a bad trade.

RIGHT NOW it stands as an uneven trade.

The poster is talking about something very different than "right now".

[…] there needs to be a serious look at how we are evaluating d men around here and it needs addressed. Whoever we have doing that is doing a VERY poor job and whatever the process is it is in need of change.

Man. Isn’t that the truth. It’s been almost a decade of fumbling the bag on defense and its cost this organization a metric ton of prospects, money and time.

Pietrangelo- this horse has been beaten down so bad you can't even use it as filler in a McDonald's hamburger

Dunn- Kerbs brought it up, Miami and I have explained numerous times that there is no way Dunn should have been a Kraken. Seattle abused the rules to get 2 players from the Blues.

Mikkola- he was given multiple opportunities here to show who he was and was never anything special, was due for a larger raise, got traded to the Rangers and did nothing special. It was only when he went to Florida that he finally started to show something and it hasn't exactly been earth shattering there either.

Edmondson- how many teams has he been on now? He has issues and is becoming a one and done with teams.

Leddy- last year everyone wanted to give him away for a pair of old socks and now we are pining for him. Never stop being you.

Perunovich- what about him?

Krug- we signed a top left dman who was one of the best PP QBs in the league. It didn't work out because of injury that got aggravated and got significantly worse as it went on.

Mailloux- he is a work in progress we'll see how it turns out.

Who am I missing? I know there’s more.

Sure there is, just like there is for every single other team out there. Look at Gustav Forsling; Florida got him off waivers, waivers for Christ sake. He was an extremely average dman then something finally clicks for him there and all of a sudden he becomes one of the best defensive dmen in the league.

Dmen and goaltenders are a completely different breed and there's no telling when the light bulb moment will happen or if it ever will happen. You can only wait so many years before the salary cap takes effect and makes it an issue like it did with Mikkola. You don't think Army wouldn't have loved to keep Mikkola around another 2-3 seasons to see if he could turn it around? Of course he would have, but when you don't do anything of significance to justify the raise you are about to get its best to get something for him instead of letting him walk.

[Army's Mom]

Personally, I don't see anything about Mailloux that looks like an exceptional NHL d-man, but I have limited viewings. Bolduc looked like nothing special to me in limited action until he caught fire late last season. I think this is a trade in five years nobody even cares about as neither player is an important piece in the NHL. Just my take on it.

Might be but the Blues absolutely took on the lions share of the risk.

Did they, really?

Montreal traded a greener prospect at a more valuable position for a guy who is playing third line minutes and pacing for 20g and 35 pts.

Having Bolduc wouldn't make this team any less frustrating (unless he's actually the secret Kyrou whisperer we thought Holloway was last year)

[ratonmono2]

Personally, I don't see anything about Mailloux that looks like an exceptional NHL d-man, but I have limited viewings. Bolduc looked like nothing special to me in limited action until he caught fire late last season. I think this is a trade in five years nobody even cares about as neither player is an important piece in the NHL. Just my take on it.

Might be but the Blues absolutely took on the lions share of the risk.

Sure. I don't shy away from risk at all, for me it's not a matter of risk. I just question the target in this case. What is scouting seeing in this Mailloux kid that we all seem to be missing?

[Stlcardsblues]

I just don't get it with all the hate for this trade. We traded from a position of strength for a position of weakness. We traded a position that is easier to find for a position that is harder to find. The cost was a player that had more NHL experience for a player that still needs seasoning. It was never going to look good in year one. It may not pan out, but if it does it will in years 2, 3 and beyond. It's the same as trading a player for a draft pick except with a much shorter time frame.

Time will tell if it was a good trade or not, can’t be judged yet.

People blasted the Pronger from Hartford trade. People wanted to run Vince Dunn out of town. People turned on Erik Johnson. What I have watched is people have no patience for young D to develop here, as such we keep overpaying contract wise for veterans with far less upside.

[Mr.Snuggleupagus]

I bet Steen wouldn't have made that dumb deal if he was in charge.

[a smell of green grass]

I bet Steen wouldn't have made that dumb deal if he was in charge.

I don't know, man. Good players don't necessarily make good GMs, and wasn't Steen in the room when Army made the deal? Further, I think that Army has dug this franchise into such a big hole, we will need an experienced mastermind to get us out of it. Steen will be over-matched.

[HighStick]

I am tired of Army trying to push the offensive d man narrative. I don't like small Defensemen. D men should be large, aggressive and good at defense.

[icon]

I just don't get it with all the hate for this trade. We traded from a position of strength for a position of weakness. We traded a position that is easier to find for a position that is harder to find. The cost was a player that had more NHL experience for a player that still needs seasoning. It was never going to look good in year one. It may not pan out, but if it does it will in years 2, 3 and beyond. It's the same as trading a player for a draft pick except with a much shorter time frame.

I honestly don't know how you could not get it at this point that it was a bad trade.

We don’t know the full story of why the trade was made, I don’t buy for a second the reason that we were given.

So do you have a suspicion about Bolduc Pierre?

Pretty sure it was the Winnipeg series. Bolduc was beyond terrible but what happened behind the scenes, I don’t know

Yep, I think Bolduc got in Monty's dog house in that series. And he was never going to get out.

[BobbyOrr]

Way to early to be making these judgments on Mailloux.

Heard the same [nonsense] on Pronger when that trade happened.
It takes longer for D to develop, give it time for now.
If this team didn't stink it up like we have this season, so far,
this would just be learning time for Malloux...

[Harry S Deals]

Way to early to be making these judgments on Mailloux.

Heard the same [nonsense] on Pronger when that trade happened.
It takes longer for D to develop, give it time for now.
If this team didn't stink it up like we have this season, so far,
this would just be learning time for Malloux...

I could go back and re post the myriad of "prospect gurus" here telling me Jiricek was a busted pick at 18 yrs old. Now at 19 he's

16 5g 12 17 17 +13


Gotta give younger players esp D as you time and patience