It’s a haul for Vancouver because they get 3 NHL players in their lineup right now. In Minnesota’s case, might not be quite the haul to them. I’m sure they see it as Buium and the 1st round pick as the real part of the deal. They can replace some of that if the wheels fall off next year and they are forced to move him. My guess is as long as they are trending toawards a playoff spot next year, they will just ride it out and risk letting him leave. Guerin is all in, so I don’t think he cares at this point that Hughes will leave after 2027. He’s taking his shot at a cup now.SameOldBlues wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 12:35 pm After thinkin more about the trade, I dont think Vancouver really gave up a humongous haul UNLESS… Buium reaches his ceiling and becomes another Hughes, and if the Wild cant re-sign him, then it becomes quite painful for Minnesota.
Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Blues Talk Moderators
-
Pierre McGuire
- Forum User
- Posts: 1858
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:10 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
-
SameOldBlues
- Forum User
- Posts: 558
- Joined: 24 May 2024 11:36 am
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Good point about recouping assets if need be. And yep, youve gotta give Guerin credit for having brass balls and not being scared to go for it.Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 13:11 pmIt’s a haul for Vancouver because they get 3 NHL players in their lineup right now. In Minnesota’s case, might not be quite the haul to them. I’m sure they see it as Buium and the 1st round pick as the real part of the deal. They can replace some of that if the wheels fall off next year and they are forced to move him. My guess is as long as they are trending toawards a playoff spot next year, they will just ride it out and risk letting him leave. Guerin is all in, so I don’t think he cares at this point that Hughes will leave after 2027. He’s taking his shot at a cup now.SameOldBlues wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 12:35 pm After thinkin more about the trade, I dont think Vancouver really gave up a humongous haul UNLESS… Buium reaches his ceiling and becomes another Hughes, and if the Wild cant re-sign him, then it becomes quite painful for Minnesota.
-
juan good eye
- Forum User
- Posts: 213
- Joined: 08 Oct 2025 23:31 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
How else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Those guys wouldn’t want to come to STL. They have options.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
-
bluetunehead
- Forum User
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: 23 May 2024 14:28 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
I'm not saying you never make that deal, just that it wouldn't make sense for the Blues right now. We need to fill a lot of holes, not make a bunch of new onesjuan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
-
TheJackBurton
- Forum User
- Posts: 2753
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:43 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
and yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
-
son_of_foolsgold
- Forum User
- Posts: 2980
- Joined: 12 Dec 2018 17:52 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Only because we have played more games.BleedingBleu wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 08:55 am+1Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 07:59 amNope…Guerin is trying to put them in position to win now. He’s not worried about the future. They have plenty left for a deal for someone like Schenn. Guerin still has work to do…I hope Army can capitalize on itBleedingBleu wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 06:12 amLoL, what could they possibly have left that they’d part with? After their last 3 First Round Picks and a future first round pick was taken off the board, it’s no longer sloppy seconds.Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑12 Dec 2025 20:02 pm Minnesota gonna need some help at center. JR mentioned a couple of weeks ago that he thought the Wild had interest in Schenn
Minnesota Wild Top 10 Prospects
1. Zeev Buium, LHD
2. David Jiricek, RHD, 21 - 2022 First Round (6)
3. Danila Yurov, RW/C, 21 - 2022 First Round (24)
4. Jesper Wallstedt, G, 22 - 2021 First Round (20)
5. Liam Öhgren, LW, 21 - 2022 First Round (19)
6. Riley Heidt, C, 20 - 2023 Second Round (64)
7. Ryder Ritchie, RW, 18 - 2024 Second Round (45)
8. Charlie Stramel, C, 21 - 2021 First Round (21)
9. Aron Kiviharju, LHD, 19 - 2024 Fourth Round (122)
10. Adam Benák, C, 18 - 2024 Fourth Round (102)
They were already one of the older teams, but after this trade that parted w/Rossi & Buium and left them with lots of guys prone to injury, they’ll likely want to keep that remaining depth between 1-6. Don’t you think?
I’m for it. Who do you think they’ll get for Schenn?
While the league has a lot of parity, there seems to be some very strong contenders at the top, specifically in our division. The Blues are truly in that transitional phase that somewhat reminds me of the 2008-10 teams that came off the 2007/8 squads’ successful charge into the playoffs.
That 2007/8 squad emerged w/a promising young nucleus after a few dismal seasons and rebuilding. That was the team that saw contributions from a 1st full year Backes, a 19 year old Perron, a 25 year old Brad Boyes randomly scoring +40 Goals, and most importantly Manny Legacy playing out of his effing mind.
Thinking about that team then the current product where we see lots of close games, lots of OT Losses, and honestly quite a few blow-outs. It’s the product of the ups and downs of following a young team. We could still argue that it was greatly accelerated because of Holloway & Broberg. However, we really are just skipping some of the more difficult years big market rebuilds have the luxury of absorbing.
So, while I was excited about the 2025/6 club. I was probably just naively optimistic and didn’t factor in growing pains… nor Binnington coming out and laying eggs.
How are we above the Jets in the Standings!?
-
son_of_foolsgold
- Forum User
- Posts: 2980
- Joined: 12 Dec 2018 17:52 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
So what you are saying is...Vancouver wasn't interested in the scrubs that Army has drafted.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Remember, WE would have got Buium if the Blues hadn't gone on that winning streak at the end of last year...assuming that Army would have been wise enough to pick him, that is...
-
juan good eye
- Forum User
- Posts: 213
- Joined: 08 Oct 2025 23:31 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Alright let’s fill them asapbluetunehead wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amI'm not saying you never make that deal, just that it wouldn't make sense for the Blues right now. We need to fill a lot of holes, not make a bunch of new onesjuan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
-
SameOldBlues
- Forum User
- Posts: 558
- Joined: 24 May 2024 11:36 am
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
While I also hate the Blues’ penchant for playing good enough later in the year to screw up a more premium draft pick, but not good enough to get into the playoffs, you’re usin a bad example in this case since we got Jiricek 4 picks later and its startin to look like he has just as much potential.son_of_foolsgold wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:48 amSo what you are saying is...Vancouver wasn't interested in the scrubs that Army has drafted.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.![]()
Remember, WE would have got Buium if the Blues hadn't gone on that winning streak at the end of last year...assuming that Army would have been wise enough to pick him, that is...![]()
That’s why I cant stand when you ‘everything Blues sucks’ guys, as well as the ‘everything Blues do rocks’ guys have no objectivity and cant be taken seriously.
-
juan good eye
- Forum User
- Posts: 213
- Joined: 08 Oct 2025 23:31 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Yeah I was big on Buium in the draft. And def want as much flexibility as possible regarding assets and cap space to be able to maximize a Cup window.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Well those 3 guys were the only (somewhat) young elite players in recent memory that I could remember being traded.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑and yet they did become available
What’s important is the conditions that led to their availability.
Eichel’s health situation was unpredictable so we can’t expect that to repeat in the next 20 years.
OTOH frustrated elite players who want greener pastures, yes this will happen again. When is the question.
Overall there aren’t that many elite players and most teams want to try to lock them down for obvious reasons.
Are the Blues and Blues fans just supposed to wait until the next dumb organization is forced to trade their young superstar?
It could reasonably be 2, 3, maybe 5 years or more before we see the next one truly elite player on the move.
Why not make an alternative move now?
Sell baby, sell.
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
There are two objectives for an NHL team, turning a profit (keeping the doors open) and winning a Stanley Cup. Being that there are 32 teams in the league the road to building a Stanley Cup Finals team is normally long and difficult. Having an elite star player can be helpful in attracting fans and turning a profit, so can winning a lot of games and getting into the playoffs even without an elite star. Having an elite star guarantees NOTHING, really. I mean, what has it done for Buffalo and Vancouver? They prove landing an elite player is not in and of itself a valid GOAL, it is at best only a means to one of the two team objectives.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 11:26 amYeah I was big on Buium in the draft. And def want as much flexibility as possible regarding assets and cap space to be able to maximize a Cup window.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Well those 3 guys were the only (somewhat) young elite players in recent memory that I could remember being traded.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑and yet they did become available
What’s important is the conditions that led to their availability.
Eichel’s health situation was unpredictable so we can’t expect that to repeat in the next 20 years.
OTOH frustrated elite players who want greener pastures, yes this will happen again. When is the question.
Overall there aren’t that many elite players and most teams want to try to lock them down for obvious reasons.
Are the Blues and Blues fans just supposed to wait until the next dumb organization is forced to trade their young superstar?
It could reasonably be 2, 3, maybe 5 years or more before we see the next one truly elite player on the move.
Why not make an alternative move now?
Sell baby, sell.
The Blues will likely move some veterans, though I do not foresee a mass sell-off. The Blues are in a bad spot right now with all the injuries, but in the big picture context things are not as bad as they seem in the moment. They have some veterans under contract and some decent prospects who largely are not ready for the NHL, but who will be spread over the next few seasons. They still have all their first round draft picks. Next season they could begin to show as much promise as the team has been disappointing right now.
-
TheJackBurton
- Forum User
- Posts: 2753
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:43 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
no that's not what I said. We are rich in forward prospects, not in defensive prospects. Vancouver if trading one of the top 5 dmen in the entire league wanted at least someone who projects as a top 2 to replace him. We don't have that currently. If they were trading a forward we are easily in that bidding war however.son_of_foolsgold wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:48 amSo what you are saying is...Vancouver wasn't interested in the scrubs that Army has drafted.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.![]()
Remember, WE would have got Buium if the Blues hadn't gone on that winning streak at the end of last year...assuming that Army would have been wise enough to pick him, that is...![]()
I'll trade that winning streak that got us into the playoffs every single time over the chance to draft potential and won't ever blink twice about it.
-
TheJackBurton
- Forum User
- Posts: 2753
- Joined: 23 May 2024 12:43 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Sell what? It's not even January yet. We don't have much in the way that many would want available, and what they would want isn't available.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 11:26 amYeah I was big on Buium in the draft. And def want as much flexibility as possible regarding assets and cap space to be able to maximize a Cup window.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Well those 3 guys were the only (somewhat) young elite players in recent memory that I could remember being traded.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑and yet they did become available
What’s important is the conditions that led to their availability.
Eichel’s health situation was unpredictable so we can’t expect that to repeat in the next 20 years.
OTOH frustrated elite players who want greener pastures, yes this will happen again. When is the question.
Overall there aren’t that many elite players and most teams want to try to lock them down for obvious reasons.
Are the Blues and Blues fans just supposed to wait until the next dumb organization is forced to trade their young superstar?
It could reasonably be 2, 3, maybe 5 years or more before we see the next one truly elite player on the move.
Why not make an alternative move now?
Sell baby, sell.
This isn't 2022, we don't have a Ryan O'Reilly on an expiring contract or others. Players that would garner our biggest returns are locked down for several years, or we certainly don't want to trade them we are building with them.
Unless Edmonton makes a serious push this year, McDavid is likely gone. I'm not saying we'll be in those sweepstakes but that will create a ripple effect, and we need to be in on that when it does.
-
callitwhatyouwant
- Forum User
- Posts: 3908
- Joined: 12 Jan 2019 20:05 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
to me it's wild we are 4 points out of a playoff spot. I know the Jets have games in hand but the fact that San Jose is in striking distance, along with edmonton is interesting. It's going to take a run and probably a 3rd team in the playoff picture to stumble for those on the outside looking in after the holidays to be thinking about it. Edmonton is going to be in full panic mode if their team doesn't flip the script.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 12:44 pmSell what? It's not even January yet. We don't have much in the way that many would want available, and what they would want isn't available.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 11:26 amYeah I was big on Buium in the draft. And def want as much flexibility as possible regarding assets and cap space to be able to maximize a Cup window.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Well those 3 guys were the only (somewhat) young elite players in recent memory that I could remember being traded.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑and yet they did become available
What’s important is the conditions that led to their availability.
Eichel’s health situation was unpredictable so we can’t expect that to repeat in the next 20 years.
OTOH frustrated elite players who want greener pastures, yes this will happen again. When is the question.
Overall there aren’t that many elite players and most teams want to try to lock them down for obvious reasons.
Are the Blues and Blues fans just supposed to wait until the next dumb organization is forced to trade their young superstar?
It could reasonably be 2, 3, maybe 5 years or more before we see the next one truly elite player on the move.
Why not make an alternative move now?
Sell baby, sell.
This isn't 2022, we don't have a Ryan O'Reilly on an expiring contract or others. Players that would garner our biggest returns are locked down for several years, or we certainly don't want to trade them we are building with them.
Unless Edmonton makes a serious push this year, McDavid is likely gone. I'm not saying we'll be in those sweepstakes but that will create a ripple effect, and we need to be in on that when it does.
IF, and that's a big IF, the Oilers are fringe playoff team by the time the deadline comes around, if I'm McJesus I ask for a trade. I didn't think about that scenario when this mini extension went down. But 3 years of cheap McDavid would be worth just about everything you have in your farm system and a few 1st round picks. You would sell everything to have 3 chances at winning a cup, with a guy that is hungry and that's all he wants. There's got to be a team that would kick the tires on that.
-
juan good eye
- Forum User
- Posts: 213
- Joined: 08 Oct 2025 23:31 pm
Re: Q Hughes to Wild for a HAUL
Sell what you can that won’t be core piece on a Cup team in 4 years.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 12:44 pmSell what? It's not even January yet. We don't have much in the way that many would want available, and what they would want isn't available.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 11:26 amYeah I was big on Buium in the draft. And def want as much flexibility as possible regarding assets and cap space to be able to maximize a Cup window.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:44 amand yet they did become available. Just have to be in the right place at the right time, have the cap space and the assets. Right now we have quality assets, but it also has to be assets that team is looking for. In the case of Vancouver they had to get back a dman who could potentially at least replace 75% of what Hughes was and we don't have anything close to that currently. Buium has a long way to go, but you can easily see the talent he has.juan good eye wrote: ↑15 Dec 2025 10:32 amHow else do we get in on elite talent like Hughes, Eichel, Tkachuk who rarely become available?bluetunehead wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 11:14 amA comparable deal for Hughes?Old_Goat wrote: ↑14 Dec 2025 10:24 amLikely one that the Blues would regret.juan good eye wrote: ↑13 Dec 2025 11:18 am What kind of offer could the Blues made similar to the Wild centered around Mailloux?
Mails
Stenberg
2 Top 10 protected first round picks
Something like Dvorsky (Buium), Neighbours or Holloway (Rossi), Lindstein (Ohgren), and a 1st.
For the position we're in... definitely not.
Well those 3 guys were the only (somewhat) young elite players in recent memory that I could remember being traded.TheJackBurton wrote: ↑and yet they did become available
What’s important is the conditions that led to their availability.
Eichel’s health situation was unpredictable so we can’t expect that to repeat in the next 20 years.
OTOH frustrated elite players who want greener pastures, yes this will happen again. When is the question.
Overall there aren’t that many elite players and most teams want to try to lock them down for obvious reasons.
Are the Blues and Blues fans just supposed to wait until the next dumb organization is forced to trade their young superstar?
It could reasonably be 2, 3, maybe 5 years or more before we see the next one truly elite player on the move.
Why not make an alternative move now?
Sell baby, sell.
This isn't 2022, we don't have a Ryan O'Reilly on an expiring contract or others. Players that would garner our biggest returns are locked down for several years, or we certainly don't want to trade them we are building with them.
Unless Edmonton makes a serious push this year, McDavid is likely gone. I'm not saying we'll be in those sweepstakes but that will create a ripple effect, and we need to be in on that when it does.
(bleep) these contracts are stupid:
https://puckpedia.com/team/st-louis-blues
Move Faulk for sure hopefully a late first
Schenn but probably a year too soon
Buch but its hard to see another team being that dumb
Kyrou for futures or hockey trade (Brady)
Hate to trade Binny but Berube may pull some strings
Regarding McDavid — doubtful he comes to the confused mess in St Louis and we don’t want to spend top dollar on a 1C his age going forward. Also I don’t see a big ripple effect bc of him changing teams but time will tell. Certainly wouldn’t sit on my hands in anticipation of it.