Trading Faulk Makes No Sense

[zamadoo]

I don't think anyone arguing that he's worth so much more this year has really illustrated that point well. Take a look at deadline defenseman deals in recent history. Ceci, Carlo, etc.

There is no evidence Faulk will be worth much more this year than next, even expecting him to regress next year.

I also think people expecting the Blues to retain with a year left do not have a good sense of how this team operates.

I can factor in what you and skilles say about his value, but that still doesn't answer my question about the logic behind trading him next TDL.

It's a risk either way, and I see the ratio in favor of trading now. Maybe we just disagree, but I think we risk not trading him at all. We're sitting on an asset peaking in value, regardless of how much value (or demand) we speculate he will have next season. Based on current information, it doesn't make sense to hold.

Well the idea is that you give our young developing players more time to develop and a chance to be competitive.

There should be a real concern about this thing turning into a complete disaster the likes of which players start asking to get out resulting in one of these indefinite rebuild situations.

Remember the Blues missed the playoffs in 2018, a lot can change in a year. I'm not a 100% no an trading faulk but we need to be thinking about being competitive moving forward.

I agree with you on trying to stay competitive. I think just by moving Kyrou and Faulk, we open space for young guys to enter the scene, but it doesn't collapse the team any more than it already is. We could grab Luke Schenn or someone similar in the offseason to add physicality and veteran leadership to the back end, as well as some insurance. Maybe we need someone better, maybe not, and while I'm high on our D prospects, I would be fine with acquiring someone decent to fill in after moving Faulk based on what the team thinks.

[juan good eye]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

[ratonmono2]

Trading Faulk makes perfect sense if a 1st and a prospect is available now for him. He is having a solid season and there is no guarantee that next year we will actually be selling though that's likely. Also, he may struggle next season, or get injured, etc etc. Move from him ASAP as long as the deal looks good.

[Younghopp1991]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

Its been said numerous times already. The problem is people cant handle the fact that next season has a chance to not be competitive. Thats their hang up.

[JoshInFenton]

Trading Faulk is really about getting enough value or by determining that it wont be solved in the next season or two. When he gets to 35-36, decent chance be slows down, loses his ability to make a difference, and you'd have to resign him to keep him for that to a deal maybe not exactly like Fowler but close (5M/3 or 6M/2, else he tests FA i suspect).

If you can get high value for him, you make the call to live to fight in 2028-2029 with someone else you picked up with that value (via trade or drafted). If people want to try to get him for a 3rd or a 4th, you then hope that you can look a lot better a season later with some of your younger forwards growing a lot in that timeframe.

[skilles]

I don't think anyone arguing that he's worth so much more this year has really illustrated that point well. Take a look at deadline defenseman deals in recent history. Ceci, Carlo, etc.

There is no evidence Faulk will be worth much more this year than next, even expecting him to regress next year.

I also think people expecting the Blues to retain with a year left do not have a good sense of how this team operates.

I can factor in what you and skilles say about his value, but that still doesn't answer my question about the logic behind trading him next TDL.

It's a risk either way, and I see the ratio in favor of trading now. Maybe we just disagree, but I think we risk not trading him at all. We're sitting on an asset peaking in value, regardless of how much value (or demand) we speculate he will have next season. Based on current information, it doesn't make sense to hold.

Well the idea is that you give our young developing players more time to develop and a chance to be competitive.

There should be a real concern about this thing turning into a complete disaster the likes of which players start asking to get out resulting in one of these indefinite rebuild situations.

Remember the Blues missed the playoffs in 2018, a lot can change in a year. I'm not a 100% no an trading faulk but we need to be thinking about being competitive moving forward.

I agree with you on trying to stay competitive. I think just by moving Kyrou and Faulk, we open space for young guys to enter the scene, but it doesn't collapse the team any more than it already is. We could grab Luke Schenn or someone similar in the offseason to add physicality and veteran leadership to the back end, as well as some insurance. Maybe we need someone better, maybe not, and while I'm high on our D prospects, I would be fine with acquiring someone decent to fill in after moving Faulk based on what the team thinks.

I disagree completely, if we trade faulk we need a fairly big move to replace him IMO. Which is reasonable if we can grab a couple extra first at the deadline.

[skilles]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

Its been said numerous times already. The problem is people cant handle the fact that next season has a chance to not be competitive. Thats their hang up.

I can "handle it" I just don't think its a good idea.

[chuckt]

People continue to point out that Faulk is having a great year and is worth more. I can only reply so many times pointing out that I believe the delta in value between Faulk at this year's deadline and a Faulk at next year's deadline with a weaker overall performance will be minor. A throw in prospect or a third round pick would be a reasonable guess.

Look at defensemen traded at the deadline. Faulk with a rough season will still be a decent number four, especially when teams can look to this current season as him performing well very recently. If you disagree with this, that's fine. But can you point to a defensemen traded at the deadline in the past couple years who you would compare to Faulk in a down season and one season removed from a great year?

I just don't see the team completely punting on the playoffs in order to gain an extra third round pick. Yes, there is risk he is injured and can't be traded. I think they will take that risk when they will basically admit there is zero chance to make the playoffs next year if you trade him.

[AtillaTheBlue1]

lol

[skilles]

People continue to point out that Faulk is having a great year and is worth more. I can only reply so many times pointing out that I believe the delta in value between Faulk at this year's deadline and a Faulk at next year's deadline with a weaker overall performance will be minor. A throw in prospect or a third round pick would be a reasonable guess.

Look at defensemen traded at the deadline. Faulk with a rough season will still be a decent number four, especially when teams can look to this current season as him performing well very recently. If you disagree with this, that's fine. But can you point to a defensemen traded at the deadline in the past couple years who you would compare to Faulk in a down season and one season removed from a great year?

I just don't see the team completely punting on the playoffs in order to gain an extra third round pick. Yes, there is risk he is injured and can't be traded. I think they will take that risk when they will basically admit there is zero chance to make the playoffs next year if you trade him.

I think the Blues are probably in talks with teams about acquiring long term d men. I suspect that will be a big factor.

If the Blues think they can get their guy in the off season that would make a huge difference.

[Younghopp1991]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

Its been said numerous times already. The problem is people cant handle the fact that next season has a chance to not be competitive. Thats their hang up.

I can "handle it" I just don't think its a good idea.

Wasnt necessarily directed at you. I do understand your point. But the guy quoted keeps saying faulk will return the same next year as if health is a guarantee. The guy is 33 i think. You cant guarantee health any more than productivity.

[skilles]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

Its been said numerous times already. The problem is people cant handle the fact that next season has a chance to not be competitive. Thats their hang up.

I can "handle it" I just don't think its a good idea.

Wasnt necessarily directed at you. I do understand your point. But the guy quoted keeps saying faulk will return the same next year as if health is a guarantee. The guy is 33 i think. You cant guarantee health any more than productivity.

Definitely some risk either way you go.

[Younghopp1991]

What is the team's goal next year?

Logically, we have to assume they aren't tearing it all down and going for a rebuild. So they will hope to make the playoffs with a similar outlook to this season.

If you trade Faulk, what do you do with right D? Mailloux at number 2? The FA RD options are terrible.

I can't see them trading Faulk when they can just wait until next deadline and trade him for likely a similar value. Even if he has a down year next season, he's still likely to be worth a late first. So why trade him now and greatly reduce your odds of making the P[ositively] O[bnoxious] S[impleton] next year?

They won't.

1) How long has Faulk been a Blue?

2) Has he ever had 2 consecutive good, healthy seasons as a Blue?

If you know the answers then you have enough common sense to understand why he must go now.

Its been said numerous times already. The problem is people cant handle the fact that next season has a chance to not be competitive. Thats their hang up.

I can "handle it" I just don't think its a good idea.

Wasnt necessarily directed at you. I do understand your point. But the guy quoted keeps saying faulk will return the same next year as if health is a guarantee. The guy is 33 i think. You cant guarantee health any more than productivity.

Definitely some risk either way you go.

I hear you but not trading him seems a unnecessary risk.

[SameOldBlues]

Trading Faulk makes perfect sense

The end