Are the Blues Cursed?

[netboy65]

Unlike other participants on Blues Squawk, I don’t constantly rag on the team. But it doesn’t mean I approve of what’s going on. To enumerate:

1). Armstrong has NOT made many good decisions since the Cup team. I think he should have done more to keep Maroon. Should have negotiated better with Petro. Botched the Seattle expansion draft and lost both Dunn and Schwartz. Bad longterm contracts for Krug, Faulk, and Buchnevich. Misunderstood the importance of big mobile defensemen who can clear the D Zone.

2). Whoever in the front office OK’d not resigning John Kelly has no business in marketing. This was a total failure.

Hell, when you consider how cash strapped the Blues were in the 1980’s, Nutty Professor Ron Caron made better deals and got more out of nothing than Armstrong. Armstrong is riding the coattails of a Cinderella season in 2019.

This team isn’t cursed. It’s just not that talented and it’s not strong mentally.

1) Just what should have been done with Petro?
Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.
The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did.
The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk.
2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.

Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy

[Army's Mom]

Ever since the overtime loss to Winnipeg last year, you just know that even with a two-goal lead, once we get inside 5 minutes the Blues seem to panic. Six overtime loses this year, and the meltdown tonight just feel like a curse to me.

Once the opposing team pulls the goalie the whole atmosphere changes instantly.

It has got to be in their heads every night.

What do they need to do to get beyond this?

Opti

Kind of an odd time for this post. They did win, so that’s something

"Playing under a curse" is a mental thing, something that is in the players' and coach's head. So, despite the win last night, it still felt like a loss very similar to all the others. Definitely the Blues once again panicked and but for the disallowed goal could have been headed into overtime. Did the win feel like a "lifting of the curse" or simply a delay? What the Blues need is a win with 2 or three goals in the last minute, one where they go into the last minute with a 2-goal lead and end up winning by 4 or 5 goals. Then they need to go out and do it again. Only then will they get that Winnipeg game out of their heads.

Opti

That win did not feel like a loss like the others to me.

Rather, it was rather incredible really.

These two perspectives are the difference between being cursed and not. Its like the old saying: whether you believe you can or believe you can't, you are right.

Believe you aren't cursed and take the win.

[Army's Mom]

Unlike other participants on Blues Squawk, I don’t constantly rag on the team. But it doesn’t mean I approve of what’s going on. To enumerate:

1). Armstrong has NOT made many good decisions since the Cup team. I think he should have done more to keep Maroon. Should have negotiated better with Petro. Botched the Seattle expansion draft and lost both Dunn and Schwartz. Bad longterm contracts for Krug, Faulk, and Buchnevich. Misunderstood the importance of big mobile defensemen who can clear the D Zone.

2). Whoever in the front office OK’d not resigning John Kelly has no business in marketing. This was a total failure.

Hell, when you consider how cash strapped the Blues were in the 1980’s, Nutty Professor Ron Caron made better deals and got more out of nothing than Armstrong. Armstrong is riding the coattails of a Cinderella season in 2019.

This team isn’t cursed. It’s just not that talented and it’s not strong mentally.

1) Just what should have been done with Petro?
Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.
The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did.
The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk.
2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.

Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy

I dont think he should've offered full NMC or 50% bonus, but would a partial NMC and 30% bonus have been enough? Especially if he hadn't preemptively brought in a redundant fourth RHD? As much as I like Faulk, he was unnecessary at the time.

Maroon is exactly the sort of lockerroom presence you need to avoid the negativity. He wasnt holding Kyrou back.

The Seattle issue was failing to protect Dunn over Krug.

I think Army is a great GM, obviously. But he definitely made his share of mistakes post-Cup.

[netboy65]

Unlike other participants on Blues Squawk, I don’t constantly rag on the team. But it doesn’t mean I approve of what’s going on. To enumerate:

1). Armstrong has NOT made many good decisions since the Cup team. I think he should have done more to keep Maroon. Should have negotiated better with Petro. Botched the Seattle expansion draft and lost both Dunn and Schwartz. Bad longterm contracts for Krug, Faulk, and Buchnevich. Misunderstood the importance of big mobile defensemen who can clear the D Zone.

2). Whoever in the front office OK’d not resigning John Kelly has no business in marketing. This was a total failure.

Hell, when you consider how cash strapped the Blues were in the 1980’s, Nutty Professor Ron Caron made better deals and got more out of nothing than Armstrong. Armstrong is riding the coattails of a Cinderella season in 2019.

This team isn’t cursed. It’s just not that talented and it’s not strong mentally.

1) Just what should have been done with Petro?
Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.
The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did.
The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk.
2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.

Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy

I dont think he should've offered full NMC or 50% bonus, but would a partial NMC and 30% bonus have been enough? Especially if he hadn't preemptively brought in a redundant fourth RHD? As much as I like Faulk, he was unnecessary at the time.

Maroon is exactly the sort of lockerroom presence you need to avoid the negativity. He wasnt holding Kyrou back.

The Seattle issue was failing to protect Dunn over Krug.

I think Army is a great GM, obviously. But he definitely made his share of mistakes post-Cup.

You had just signed Krug and you’re going to leave him unprotected?
Maroon wanted more than the one year he ended up getting cause no one else had interest either.

[HighStick]

Yes this is the John Kelly curse. Bad karma all season long because of the way they handled the JK situation.
Heartless organizations deserve heartless outcomes.
It'll workout next year.

[Cahokanut]

[quote=netboy65


"1) Just what should have been done with Petro?"

”"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" '"" "" "" "
He could of at least negotiated with Petro. Acted like he was valued. Army didn't move a bit. Because Army didn't want him back. The history being revisioned is you protraying like Army did all he could.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


”Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
If Maroon was replaced by anyone it would be one of the fourth liners that stayed or came around. Like Brouwer, Sunny, Del Rose, Mac Mac, Walker, Blais, Bozak
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "'" "" "" "" "" "


”The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did."
" '''"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
None of their shenanigans has anything to do with Army not wanting to re-sign Dunn. Which he didn't.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


"The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk."
" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "
Not hindsight for me or any of the other negative posters who [defecated] on that signing from the beginning. Army liked Krug. That's all that mattered. Also not the same as Faulk. Faulk was what Army believe would replace what Petro brought. The trade also took care of the Edmondson problem. As Army didn't want to give him money either.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "


”2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
Kelly had a lot to do with the product being sold. While you not reckoning that is fine. But management should 100% understand.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

”Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy”

Army really hasn't been very good at all. Even with all the revisioned history.

[netboy65]

[quote=netboy65


"1) Just what should have been done with Petro?"

”"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" '"" "" "" "
He could of at least negotiated with Petro. Acted like he was valued. Army didn't move a bit. Because Army didn't want him back. The history being revisioned is you protraying like Army did all he could.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


”Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
If Maroon was replaced by anyone it would be one of the fourth liners that stayed or came around. Like Brouwer, Sunny, Del Rose, Mac Mac, Walker, Blais, Bozak
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "'" "" "" "" "" "


”The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did."
" '''"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
None of their shenanigans has anything to do with Army not wanting to re-sign Dunn. Which he didn't.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


"The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk."
" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "
Not hindsight for me or any of the other negative posters who [defecated] on that signing from the beginning. Army liked Krug. That's all that mattered. Also not the same as Faulk. Faulk was what Army believe would replace what Petro brought. The trade also took care of the Edmondson problem. As Army didn't want to give him money either.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "


”2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
Kelly had a lot to do with the product being sold. While you not reckoning that is fine. But management should 100% understand.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

”Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy”

Army really hasn't been very good at all. Even with all the revisioned history.

He did negotiate, but the NMC was the main sticking point not the money. You either get one or you don’t.
Negotiate what with Dunn? He was under contract.
Krug was not a Petro replacement, Parayko was. Krug was to replace some of the lost offense.
Faulk was not the Petro replacement, he was insurance in case Petro left. Had he signed, we’d still have kept both.
Think what you want about the Kelly decision, I’m saying that wasn’t an Army decision in the slightest so irrelevant to this post.

[Army's Mom]

[quote=netboy65


"1) Just what should have been done with Petro?"

”"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" '"" "" "" "
He could of at least negotiated with Petro. Acted like he was valued. Army didn't move a bit. Because Army didn't want him back. The history being revisioned is you protraying like Army did all he could.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


”Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
If Maroon was replaced by anyone it would be one of the fourth liners that stayed or came around. Like Brouwer, Sunny, Del Rose, Mac Mac, Walker, Blais, Bozak
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "'" "" "" "" "" "


”The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did."
" '''"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
None of their shenanigans has anything to do with Army not wanting to re-sign Dunn. Which he didn't.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


"The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk."
" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "
Not hindsight for me or any of the other negative posters who [defecated] on that signing from the beginning. Army liked Krug. That's all that mattered. Also not the same as Faulk. Faulk was what Army believe would replace what Petro brought. The trade also took care of the Edmondson problem. As Army didn't want to give him money either.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "


”2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
Kelly had a lot to do with the product being sold. While you not reckoning that is fine. But management should 100% understand.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

”Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy”

Army really hasn't been very good at all. Even with all the revisioned history.

He did negotiate, but the NMC was the main sticking point not the money. You either get one or you don't.

That's just not true.

At the time, JR and others reported it was full NMC and bonus structure. Petro was one of the first to push for guaranteed bonuses that exceeded 50% (when an additional work stoppage over COVID was likely).

Many of us pointed out at the time that the Blues likely couldn't afford to pay guaranteed bonuses if the league had to shut down.

A few years ago, Army admitted he had been willing to budge on the NMC.

It was the bonus structure that was the bigger stumbling block.

And, more to your point, Army admitted at that time that he should have handled it differently.

[TAFKAP]

[quote=netboy65


"1) Just what should have been done with Petro?"

”"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" '"" "" "" "
He could of at least negotiated with Petro. Acted like he was valued. Army didn't move a bit. Because Army didn't want him back. The history being revisioned is you protraying like Army did all he could.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


”Maroon was let go for young forwards, Kyrou I believe, plus I think Maroon initially wanted more than 1 year.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
If Maroon was replaced by anyone it would be one of the fourth liners that stayed or came around. Like Brouwer, Sunny, Del Rose, Mac Mac, Walker, Blais, Bozak
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "'" "" "" "" "" "


”The Seattle issue was more shenanigans on their part than anything Army did."
" '''"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
None of their shenanigans has anything to do with Army not wanting to re-sign Dunn. Which he didn't.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""


"The Krug deal is easy to see in hindsight but he was a 50 point per year guy and this was pre-Covid so the flat cap was not even thought of. same with Faulk."
" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "
Not hindsight for me or any of the other negative posters who [defecated] on that signing from the beginning. Army liked Krug. That's all that mattered. Also not the same as Faulk. Faulk was what Army believe would replace what Petro brought. The trade also took care of the Edmondson problem. As Army didn't want to give him money either.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "


”2) Kelly has nothing to do with Army or the on ice product. Let it go.”
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
Kelly had a lot to do with the product being sold. While you not reckoning that is fine. But management should 100% understand.
"" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""

”Army hasn’t been perfect but the revisionist history is crazy”

Army really hasn't been very good at all. Even with all the revisioned history.

He did negotiate, but the NMC was the main sticking point not the money. You either get one or you don't.

That's just not true.

At the time, JR and others reported it was full NMC and bonus structure. Petro was one of the first to push for guaranteed bonuses that exceeded 50% (when an additional work stoppage over COVID was likely).

Many of us pointed out at the time that the Blues likely couldn't afford to pay guaranteed bonuses if the league had to shut down.

A few years ago, Army admitted he had been willing to budge on the NMC.

It was the bonus structure that was the bigger stumbling block.

And, more to your point, Army admitted at that time that he should have handled it differently.

The problem with Blues fans is that they REFUSE to believe that Petro wanted to play somewhere else. His camp was not negotiating with the Blues. They had a list, and everything on that list was to be met. I once made a post with links to ALL of the points and how and who reported it. Not doing that again. In Petro's history he held out to get a contract equal to the reigning Norris Trophy winner. Do you forget 2013? He held out and got Karlsson's 6.5 aav. This time he wanted more, Josi is 9.2ish, he wanted 9.5.x 8 Full NMC, the bonus structure, ALL of it. To Army's Mom's point not only was a COVID stoppage possible, don't forget the CBA was up the following year. He would get his bonus during a lockout.

I really find it surprising that the same people who blast Army for the Krug contract still blast him for Petro. His first year in Vegas was horrible. He's had 2 good years. Full Stop. The following 2 he had 4 goals and 29 assists for 33 points. He's out this year, maybe next year? In St. Louis he'd be making 9.5, and have a third year on LTIR. The Blues would have traded Parayko. It would have been a HORRIFIC signing.

[opti mist]

The curse continues.

Blues need a significant move.

Opti

[HighStick]

I don't blame Army for Petro. Petro chose to leave his legacy behind for money. It was the guaranteed signing bonus the Blues couldn't match. $31 m guaranteed I think.Thats what made his decision. You guys thinking it was the NMC are naive. It was greed.

I DO blame Army for the Krug contract though. That signing was just awful. I think Army signed Krug because of that 1 hit he put on Thomas during the finals and it cost him. Worst move of his tenure as GM.

[rezero]

YES. It’s the curse of John Kelly. We were the 2nd best team in the NHL for the last half of last season, but now we are under the Kelly curse.