Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Blues Talk Moderators
-
2forDiving
- Forum User
- Posts: 907
- Joined: 23 May 2024 14:39 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
The Thomas rumors make even less sense than the Parayko rumors from two years ago, and those were about as dopey as rumors get.
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Probably at least one of Laferrier/Byquist/Clarke along with good/top prospect(s) and picks.
Laferrier, Clarke, 2nd this year, 1st next?
Can we just move all of Thomas, Kyrou, and Faulk? We'll take Laferrier, Clarke, Cihar, Brzustewicz...
"But our team will be bad next year" - our team was bad this year after being bad for half of last year after being bad before that. It's not bad because of Mailloux or Dvorsky or Stenberg or Snuggerud or Kaskimaki, or any rookies they've plugged - it's bad because of the group of veterans. I think we should get value from them while we can. If someone is asking about Thomas or Kyrou's 4x$8.1M then we should be entertaining the thought.
Laferrier, Clarke, 2nd this year, 1st next?
Can we just move all of Thomas, Kyrou, and Faulk? We'll take Laferrier, Clarke, Cihar, Brzustewicz...
"But our team will be bad next year" - our team was bad this year after being bad for half of last year after being bad before that. It's not bad because of Mailloux or Dvorsky or Stenberg or Snuggerud or Kaskimaki, or any rookies they've plugged - it's bad because of the group of veterans. I think we should get value from them while we can. If someone is asking about Thomas or Kyrou's 4x$8.1M then we should be entertaining the thought.
-
SameOldBlues
- Forum User
- Posts: 672
- Joined: 24 May 2024 11:36 am
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Very true, and that’s what alot of fans refuse to admit.zamadoo wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 05:35 amBut our team will be bad next year" - our team was bad this year after being bad for half of last year after being bad before that. It's not bad because of Mailloux or Dvorsky or Stenberg or Snuggerud or Kaskimaki, or any rookies they've plugged - it's bad because of the group of veterans. I think we should get value from them while we can. If someone is asking about Thomas or Kyrou's 4x$8.1M then we should be entertaining the thought.
-
Tony Palazzolo
- Forum User
- Posts: 311
- Joined: 24 May 2024 10:13 am
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
There is no doubt the veterans including Thomas didn't have a great start to the season. I saw a stat the other day about Thomas's year. What really down for him is assist. That can attributed two a couple of things. One not making the passes that sets up a goal and the other is setting up a player and they whiff. How many times have we seen Buch set up in the middle this year, get the puck and whiff on the shot. That and he's been playing hurt for some time. They had been managing it until they decided to shut him down and let it heal.SameOldBlues wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 06:35 amVery true, and that’s what alot of fans refuse to admit.zamadoo wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 05:35 amBut our team will be bad next year" - our team was bad this year after being bad for half of last year after being bad before that. It's not bad because of Mailloux or Dvorsky or Stenberg or Snuggerud or Kaskimaki, or any rookies they've plugged - it's bad because of the group of veterans. I think we should get value from them while we can. If someone is asking about Thomas or Kyrou's 4x$8.1M then we should be entertaining the thought.
We are only trading Thomas if they believe that his attitude is hurting the locker room. For what he is and what he's paid you can't replace that easily. Even if you get a player that is comparable, but younger within a couple of years you'll have to pay that player more.
-
moose-and-squirrel
- Forum User
- Posts: 6101
- Joined: 20 Dec 2020 10:49 am
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
yeah.. let's trade Thomas.. maybe we'll get a young cost controlled highly skilled center back.. we've always wanted one of those
-
Pierre McGuire
- Forum User
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:10 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Highly unlikely he’s moved but there sure seems to be a lot of smoke. If the Blues as an organization have decided he’s not a guy that can lead them going forward, then I’ve got no problem moving him. Gonna take a heck of a return though.moose-and-squirrel wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:41 am yeah.. let's trade Thomas.. maybe we'll get a young cost controlled highly skilled center back.. we've always wanted one of those
-
seattleblue
- Forum User
- Posts: 2329
- Joined: 08 Feb 2025 12:01 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
It would be crazy to discard the status quo! So stupid! This team is ready to cook with Robert Thomas. I read he is going to go to a summer camp and remind himself when he's there that he needs to shoot. Cross fingers for upcoming seasons for this consistent, champion leader.
No they are obviously hoping to compete again someday so they have to recycle the value by turning their current best into blue chippers and hope that works out. It's clearly not going to work out with Thomas. They do not want him captain, they want to skip over him and give it to Neighbours. Armstrong simply believed in Thomas and Kyrou (and Buchnevich) and he locked us into them on his way out the door, and we are screwed for awhile.
No they are obviously hoping to compete again someday so they have to recycle the value by turning their current best into blue chippers and hope that works out. It's clearly not going to work out with Thomas. They do not want him captain, they want to skip over him and give it to Neighbours. Armstrong simply believed in Thomas and Kyrou (and Buchnevich) and he locked us into them on his way out the door, and we are screwed for awhile.
-
bluetunehead
- Forum User
- Posts: 1397
- Joined: 23 May 2024 14:28 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Eh smoke from reputable sources is one thing. Most of the Thomas buzz is from fan blogs throwing s___ at the wall because they saw his name on a trade board.Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 09:24 amHighly unlikely he’s moved but there sure seems to be a lot of smoke. If the Blues as an organization have decided he’s not a guy that can lead them going forward, then I’ve got no problem moving him. Gonna take a heck of a return though.moose-and-squirrel wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:41 am yeah.. let's trade Thomas.. maybe we'll get a young cost controlled highly skilled center back.. we've always wanted one of those
-
Pierre McGuire
- Forum User
- Posts: 2245
- Joined: 23 May 2024 13:10 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
It’s more than just bloggers. Insiders have discussed the rumors as well. Pretty sure Army is listening and that’s he made it known that he’s available for a pricebluetunehead wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 10:52 amEh smoke from reputable sources is one thing. Most of the Thomas buzz is from fan blogs throwing s___ at the wall because they saw his name on a trade board.Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 09:24 amHighly unlikely he’s moved but there sure seems to be a lot of smoke. If the Blues as an organization have decided he’s not a guy that can lead them going forward, then I’ve got no problem moving him. Gonna take a heck of a return though.moose-and-squirrel wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:41 am yeah.. let's trade Thomas.. maybe we'll get a young cost controlled highly skilled center back.. we've always wanted one of those
-
SweeneyAstray
- Forum User
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 24 Jan 2026 10:48 am
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
This.Pierre McGuire wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 09:24 amHighly unlikely he’s moved but there sure seems to be a lot of smoke. If the Blues as an organization have decided he’s not a guy that can lead them going forward, then I’ve got no problem moving him. Gonna take a heck of a return though.moose-and-squirrel wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 08:41 am yeah.. let's trade Thomas.. maybe we'll get a young cost controlled highly skilled center back.. we've always wanted one of those
There are thousands of very talented people in my industry. Doesn’t mean they are all right for the team I’m building.
RT is all the things moose and squirrel says.
He can ALSO not be right for THIS team.
These aren’t mutually exclusive things.
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
LA has 0 Center prospects that could be considered even 2nd line NHL center talent. Their prospects do not line up for a Thomas trade.
-
hockey jedi
- Forum User
- Posts: 1239
- Joined: 24 May 2024 17:50 pm
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
They would definitely be a great trade partner and have many nice players that would fit our needs. We don't have to have a center coming back in THIS specific trade. There are other trades to be made that could yield a center.
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Make those trades first.hockey jedi wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 15:24 pmThey would definitely be a great trade partner and have many nice players that would fit our needs. We don't have to have a center coming back in THIS specific trade. There are other trades to be made that could yield a center.
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
NHL teams do not trade top 6 centers unless they’re near retirement or the end of their contract and can’t be re-signed (which with the rapidly rising salary cap will now be a rare issue). If the Blues don’t get a center back for Thomas that can be paired with Dvorsky in the top 6, you’re looking at a 5 year rebuild minimum unless the Blues get very lucky and win the draft lottery in a year with a sure -fire superstar center available in that year’s draft. You’re delusional if you think the Blues can get a center to replace Thomas in a trade that doesn’t involve trading Thomas. Would you trade Thomas for any of the other players on the Blues roster or any of their prospects? I wouldn’t.hockey jedi wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 15:24 pm They would definitely be a great trade partner and have many nice players that would fit our needs. We don't have to have a center coming back in THIS specific trade. There are other trades to be made that could yield a center.
If the Blues trade Thomas, it won’t be because the front office is unhappy with his play or temperament. It will be because the owners have directed the front office to dump all salary as the Cardinals have done, since the local tv contract disappears for the Blues after this season, and the revenue from local tv is about to plummet.
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Well they've got all of Logan Brown, Nikita Alexandrov, and Glenn Gawdin from which to choose...hockey jedi wrote: ↑17 Feb 2026 15:24 pmThey would definitely be a great trade partner and have many nice players that would fit our needs. We don't have to have a center coming back in THIS specific trade. There are other trades to be made that could yield a center.
Looks like they've got Brenden Morrow, ooh wait that's Brendan McMorrow...
-
Hockey Pete
- Forum User
- Posts: 363
- Joined: 25 May 2024 10:43 am
Re: Per Eklund (E4) - Thomas & LA
Let's level set this discussion a bit...
Last year, a 25yo Thomas was 13th overall in scoring among NHL centers. His ppg was 6th overall. Of those 12 centers above him, only Crosby had a better percentage at face-off's, and only McKinnon, Daisaitl and Eichel had a better +/-.
Yes, he had a tough start this season, but he also had surgery to fix something that sounds like it's been bothering him all season.
Simple fact, we're NOT going to get anyone close to a healthy Thomas (production wise) AND he is only the 31st highest paid center in the NHL on a contract that has another 4 years after this season.
Someone PLEASE explain WHY we would trade him?
Last year, a 25yo Thomas was 13th overall in scoring among NHL centers. His ppg was 6th overall. Of those 12 centers above him, only Crosby had a better percentage at face-off's, and only McKinnon, Daisaitl and Eichel had a better +/-.
Yes, he had a tough start this season, but he also had surgery to fix something that sounds like it's been bothering him all season.
Simple fact, we're NOT going to get anyone close to a healthy Thomas (production wise) AND he is only the 31st highest paid center in the NHL on a contract that has another 4 years after this season.
Someone PLEASE explain WHY we would trade him?