Army's report card from the assylum members

[ratonmono2]

Let's grade the parts to come up with the overall grade.

NHL Roster C
AHL Roster D
Other Roster C

Scouting D
NHL Draft D
Player Development D

Overall - D

What Army did in 2019 is immaterial to the grade today.

How can you not grade the entire body of work? If we are only grading post cup years, I agree he's been more miss than hit. But there's no way you can honestly assess the man's GM career and leave off an entire decade of solid work.

[somni]

Not sure anyone predicted the top players playing like duds and the goaltending acting like giant sieves. Weird start to say the least.

Army did well bringing in Bjugstad and Suter. Blues now have good depth in the middle and back half lines. But somehow the reliable scorers and point getters are struggling massively.

Where Army missed was addressing the 3rd D pairing. It was already a risk going with Tucker/Mailloux. And playing the top 4 these minutes will catch up with them. Hopefully a solution starts emerging one way or another.

I agree the 3rd pairing is a bit mystifying. Im supposing they greatly overestimated Tucker. Hes been ok, Mailloux looked really good in preseason so i get starting Mailloux. With a better D partner Mailloux may have been in a better spot. He needed a guy like Suter or Leddy but at this point it is what it is but that move deserves criticism

Unless Skinner comes in and plays amazing, I can totally see Army making a trade for a vet. Nothing of the Fowler sort, but a solid vet.
That is assuming the team top players start actually scoring like normal. Otherwise, something of a shake up could most likely happen.

[Army's Mom]

A lot of good points in this thread. Some assorted thoughts:

1. The Cup. That was Army, and it counts. Still. He took plenty of flak for trading away Oshie and Perron (breaking up the boy band), only to about face and re-sign Perron, lose him in the draft, and then re-sign him again. Trading away EJ to make room for Petro, the failed attempt to contend with Ryan Miller (which showed the team he was all in), swapping Runblad for Tarasenko, drafting Schwartz, trading spare parts and futures for Schenn and O'Reilly, acquiring Bouwmeester and Gunnarson, drafting Parayko. Even letting Backes walk - that was all Army, and it was a helluva ride.

2. COVID sucked. Had it not been for the COVID related cap freeze, I'm not convinced the Blues and Petro part ways - the risk involved with the NMC and bonus structure would have been substantially less. But Army (bleep) the bed by preemptively bringing in Faulk and then bidding against himself to make sure he got Krug. If only he'd been so committed to landing Matt Tkachuk, but I digress. COVID ended our Cup window prematurely, and Army deserves blame for trying force it from closing with duct tape...

3. Defensemen. Krug didn't work out. Faulk did. Leddy did, but was retained for too long. Same with Scandella. Suter worked great, but wasn't retained long enough. Fowler worked great, but his extension might have been too generous - hope he rebounds. Broberg has been great, especially relative to everyone else. Going out: Dunn, Mikkola, Walman, Perunovich. Three of the four are fixtures in the top 4 of their respective teams, two on contenders. What was a strength of the Cup team has been a glaring weakness since, and there are signs it's systemic (ie we seem to be keeping mediocre guys in favor of better, younger ones).

4. Broberg and Holloway. I mean, when I lost my old username (Dwayne Elizondo), I chose this one based on Army's famous quote. A great coup, brilliantly executed - and the returns have been better than I hoped for. This early part of the season doesn't change the fact that both project as impact players for many years, and cost us table scraps. Army had been trending down since the Cup (though he was hampered by circumstances beyond his control, he failed to adapt as fast as other GMs), but last year was a sign that the old Army who built the Blues without regard for favorite sons Oshie and Backes was back. Fowler was another steal, and he was ruthless in pruning the dead weight that Saad and Leddy had become. I don't mind, if the results are there.

5. This year. How can you not be upset? I get the logic behind the Bolduc for Mailloux swap. But Army went from bidding on Dobson and dangling Kyrou to missing on Dobson, and then buying high and overselling Mailloux. The timing makes me question the move, and reminds me of when Army pivoted to Krug.

Yeah, Bolduc wasn't much to lose. He's a 20-goal scoring, perimeter shooting third liner and PP specialist who for one month appeared to be something more. So at least Army sold high. But Mailloux wasn't NHL ready, everyone who watched him play last year said as much, and there was no need to sell us on him. For a GM who loves to say he won't "put kids in a situation to fail" by rushing them, we absolutely put Mailloux in a situation to fail. If the team really was a contender, then there shouldn't have been an organizational need to buy an unready prospect at RHD, no matter how hard to come by they are. And if the Mailloux gamble really was worth it (I suspect it was, though I don't follow our prospects as expertly as others here, whose takes I love) then the team wasn't ready for the GM or coach to proclaim "retool over".

If you're going to trade for a prospect, and then shoe-horn him into the lineup, protect him. Make sure you can re-sign Suter (or find another mentor) to pair Mailloux with on the third pair, and be prepared to have to demote Mailloux for Kessel in case Mailloux really struggles. Instead, the Blues plan was to promote an unproven Tucker to be the #5 D, and instead of pairing him with Suter like we did last year, jettison Suter for a less proven #6 in Mailloux. The risk was obvious, and it blew up. Now, I'm no pro athlete, and I have no idea how the Blues locker-room reacted to the sell job the Blues did on Mailloux, but I wouldn't appreciate it if I'm a Blues goalie.

Then there's Kyrou. If the demand really was there, they should have found a taker. Yes, Kyrou is twice the player he was two years ago, and I give him all the props for rising to the challenge up until the playoffs last year. Since then, he's reverted back to being a waste of talent. Giving him away would be addition by subtraction.

The season isn't over, and there's plenty of time to right the ship. But a Top 5 pick would also look nice, as much as I hate to sound like one of the resident trolls. I'd rather give away Kyrou and get a top 5 pick via a losing season than have Kyrou find the scoring touch and get us back into no-man's land. Though I'll cheer the team on, either way.

Such is the curse...

[Bubble4427]

A lot of good points in this thread. Some assorted thoughts:

1. The Cup. That was Army, and it counts. Still. He took plenty of flak for trading away Oshie and Perron (breaking up the boy band), only to about face and re-sign Perron, lose him in the draft, and then re-sign him again. Trading away EJ to make room for Petro, the failed attempt to contend with Ryan Miller (which showed the team he was all in), swapping Runblad for Tarasenko, drafting Schwartz, trading spare parts and futures for Schenn and O'Reilly, acquiring Bouwmeester and Gunnarson, drafting Parayko. Even letting Backes walk - that was all Army, and it was a helluva ride.

2. COVID sucked. Had it not been for the COVID related cap freeze, I'm not convinced the Blues and Petro part ways - the risk involved with the NMC and bonus structure would have been substantially less. But Army (bleep) the bed by preemptively bringing in Faulk and then bidding against himself to make sure he got Krug. If only he'd been so committed to landing Matt Tkachuk, but I digress. COVID ended our Cup window prematurely, and Army deserves blame for trying force it from closing with duct tape...

3. Defensemen. Krug didn't work out. Faulk did. Leddy did, but was retained for too long. Same with Scandella. Suter worked great, but wasn't retained long enough. Fowler worked great, but his extension might have been too generous - hope he rebounds. Broberg has been great, especially relative to everyone else. Going out: Dunn, Mikkola, Walman, Perunovich. Three of the four are fixtures in the top 4 of their respective teams, two on contenders. What was a strength of the Cup team has been a glaring weakness since, and there are signs it's systemic (ie we seem to be keeping mediocre guys in favor of better, younger ones).

4. Broberg and Holloway. I mean, when I lost my old username (Dwayne Elizondo), I chose this one based on Army's famous quote. A great coup, brilliantly executed - and the returns have been better than I hoped for. This early part of the season doesn't change the fact that both project as impact players for many years, and cost us table scraps. Army had been trending down since the Cup (though he was hampered by circumstances beyond his control, he failed to adapt as fast as other GMs), but last year was a sign that the old Army who built the Blues without regard for favorite sons Oshie and Backes was back. Fowler was another steal, and he was ruthless in pruning the dead weight that Saad and Leddy had become. I don't mind, if the results are there.

5. This year. How can you not be upset? I get the logic behind the Bolduc for Mailloux swap. But Army went from bidding on Dobson and dangling Kyrou to missing on Dobson, and then buying high and overselling Mailloux. The timing makes me question the move, and reminds me of when Army pivoted to Krug.

Yeah, Bolduc wasn't much to lose. He's a 20-goal scoring, perimeter shooting third liner and PP specialist who for one month appeared to be something more. So at least Army sold high. But Mailloux wasn't NHL ready, everyone who watched him play last year said as much, and there was no need to sell us on him. For a GM who loves to say he won't "put kids in a situation to fail" by rushing them, we absolutely put Mailloux in a situation to fail. If the team really was a contender, then there shouldn't have been an organizational need to buy an unready prospect at RHD, no matter how hard to come by they are. And if the Mailloux gamble really was worth it (I suspect it was, though I don't follow our prospects as expertly as others here, whose takes I love) then the team wasn't ready for the GM or coach to proclaim "retool over".

If you're going to trade for a prospect, and then shoe-horn him into the lineup, protect him. Make sure you can re-sign Suter (or find another mentor) to pair Mailloux with on the third pair, and be prepared to have to demote Mailloux for Kessel in case Mailloux really struggles. Instead, the Blues plan was to promote an unproven Tucker to be the #5 D, and instead of pairing him with Suter like we did last year, jettison Suter for a less proven #6 in Mailloux. The risk was obvious, and it blew up. Now, I'm no pro athlete, and I have no idea how the Blues locker-room reacted to the sell job the Blues did on Mailloux, but I wouldn't appreciate it if I'm a Blues goalie.

Then there's Kyrou. If the demand really was there, they should have found a taker. Yes, Kyrou is twice the player he was two years ago, and I give him all the props for rising to the challenge up until the playoffs last year. Since then, he's reverted back to being a waste of talent. Giving him away would be addition by subtraction.

The season isn't over, and there's plenty of time to right the ship. But a Top 5 pick would also look nice, as much as I hate to sound like one of the resident trolls. I'd rather give away Kyrou and get a top 5 pick via a losing season than have Kyrou find the scoring touch and get us back into no-man's land. Though I'll cheer the team on, either way.

Such is the curse...

Good thoughts.
I agree with almost everything in your post.

[a smell of green grass]

Let's grade the parts to come up with the overall grade.

NHL Roster C
AHL Roster D
Other Roster C

Scouting D
NHL Draft D
Player Development D

Overall - D

What Army did in 2019 is immaterial to the grade today.

How can you not grade the entire body of work? If we are only grading post cup years, I agree he's been more miss than hit. But there's no way you can honestly assess the man's GM career and leave off an entire decade of solid work.

That's not how report cards work.

Did your 8th grade report card reflect your work in 1st grade?

If I was to grade Army on his career in STL, I'd say B. He won a CUP, but left the roster in a hole that no GM will be able to easily dig out of.

[DawgDad]

No curse. Some good points there, some I do not subscribe to.

Kyrou is not the key to this team, he's ONE of them. He didn't injure Thomas, Neighbours, or Holloway (who I believe is on a long arc to reattain his former level of play). He didn't get into Hofer's head. He didn't melt down on RD. He's a member of the veteran core that has been underperforming all season.

Improvement needs to come from the back-middle out. We're seeing the goaltending improve. The defensemen are showing signs of getting back on track, more gap to close there.

The centers - here lies the rub. Sunny and Suter are doing their jobs but look at the combined performance of Thomas, Schenn, and Dvorsky in the top-9 - it's been a horror show offensively. Thomas and Dvorsky ALMOST netted ES goals the other night, almost. Herein lies the key, currently: Thomas and Dvorsky (or Schenn or whoever) MUST start driving offensive production at ES. If they do the Blues will come together. If they don't, start planning for next season.

[a smell of green grass]

A lot of good points in this thread. Some assorted thoughts:

1. The Cup. That was Army, and it counts. Still. He took plenty of flak for trading away Oshie and Perron (breaking up the boy band), only to about face and re-sign Perron, lose him in the draft, and then re-sign him again. Trading away EJ to make room for Petro, the failed attempt to contend with Ryan Miller (which showed the team he was all in), swapping Runblad for Tarasenko, drafting Schwartz, trading spare parts and futures for Schenn and O'Reilly, acquiring Bouwmeester and Gunnarson, drafting Parayko. Even letting Backes walk - that was all Army, and it was a helluva ride.

2. COVID sucked. Had it not been for the COVID related cap freeze, I'm not convinced the Blues and Petro part ways - the risk involved with the NMC and bonus structure would have been substantially less. But Army (bleep) the bed by preemptively bringing in Faulk and then bidding against himself to make sure he got Krug. If only he'd been so committed to landing Matt Tkachuk, but I digress. COVID ended our Cup window prematurely, and Army deserves blame for trying force it from closing with duct tape...

3. Defensemen. Krug didn't work out. Faulk did. Leddy did, but was retained for too long. Same with Scandella. Suter worked great, but wasn't retained long enough. Fowler worked great, but his extension might have been too generous - hope he rebounds. Broberg has been great, especially relative to everyone else. Going out: Dunn, Mikkola, Walman, Perunovich. Three of the four are fixtures in the top 4 of their respective teams, two on contenders. What was a strength of the Cup team has been a glaring weakness since, and there are signs it's systemic (ie we seem to be keeping mediocre guys in favor of better, younger ones).

4. Broberg and Holloway. I mean, when I lost my old username (Dwayne Elizondo), I chose this one based on Army's famous quote. A great coup, brilliantly executed - and the returns have been better than I hoped for. This early part of the season doesn't change the fact that both project as impact players for many years, and cost us table scraps. Army had been trending down since the Cup (though he was hampered by circumstances beyond his control, he failed to adapt as fast as other GMs), but last year was a sign that the old Army who built the Blues without regard for favorite sons Oshie and Backes was back. Fowler was another steal, and he was ruthless in pruning the dead weight that Saad and Leddy had become. I don't mind, if the results are there.

5. This year. How can you not be upset? I get the logic behind the Bolduc for Mailloux swap. But Army went from bidding on Dobson and dangling Kyrou to missing on Dobson, and then buying high and overselling Mailloux. The timing makes me question the move, and reminds me of when Army pivoted to Krug.

Yeah, Bolduc wasn't much to lose. He's a 20-goal scoring, perimeter shooting third liner and PP specialist who for one month appeared to be something more. So at least Army sold high. But Mailloux wasn't NHL ready, everyone who watched him play last year said as much, and there was no need to sell us on him. For a GM who loves to say he won't "put kids in a situation to fail" by rushing them, we absolutely put Mailloux in a situation to fail. If the team really was a contender, then there shouldn't have been an organizational need to buy an unready prospect at RHD, no matter how hard to come by they are. And if the Mailloux gamble really was worth it (I suspect it was, though I don't follow our prospects as expertly as others here, whose takes I love) then the team wasn't ready for the GM or coach to proclaim "retool over".

If you're going to trade for a prospect, and then shoe-horn him into the lineup, protect him. Make sure you can re-sign Suter (or find another mentor) to pair Mailloux with on the third pair, and be prepared to have to demote Mailloux for Kessel in case Mailloux really struggles. Instead, the Blues plan was to promote an unproven Tucker to be the #5 D, and instead of pairing him with Suter like we did last year, jettison Suter for a less proven #6 in Mailloux. The risk was obvious, and it blew up. Now, I'm no pro athlete, and I have no idea how the Blues locker-room reacted to the sell job the Blues did on Mailloux, but I wouldn't appreciate it if I'm a Blues goalie.

Then there's Kyrou. If the demand really was there, they should have found a taker. Yes, Kyrou is twice the player he was two years ago, and I give him all the props for rising to the challenge up until the playoffs last year. Since then, he's reverted back to being a waste of talent. Giving him away would be addition by subtraction.

The season isn't over, and there's plenty of time to right the ship. But a Top 5 pick would also look nice, as much as I hate to sound like one of the resident trolls. I'd rather give away Kyrou and get a top 5 pick via a losing season than have Kyrou find the scoring touch and get us back into no-man's land. Though I'll cheer the team on, either way.

Such is the curse...

Nice little write-up here, but you forgot to footnote all your references to ASOGG's long-held gripes.

[son_of_foolsgold]

Lot's of people kissing Army's butt...

I'll say C-....and that's being generous. I probably should rate lower. Our Cup window should have been longer than it was, and
now the pain is going to be brutal and long lasting because he stubbornly refused to blow it up.

[BalotelliMassive]

If this is his last season in charge then his grade is still Incomplete - right now he has a B but the real test is how he leaves the franchise - are they better off today than they were when he took over.

Stan Bowman gets a C- for what it's worth

[DawgDad]

Lot's of people kissing Army's butt...

I'll say C-....and that's being generous. I probably should rate lower. Our Cup window should have been longer than it was, and
now the pain is going to be brutal and long lasting because he stubbornly refused to blow it up.

Sounds contradictory to me. Pessimistic, too.

[Army's Mom]

No curse. Some good points there, some I do not subscribe to.

Kyrou is not the key to this team, he's ONE of them.

That's the problem. He was paid to be a catalyst, someone who could elevate the play of his line. He clearly has the tools to do so. What he lacks is the consistent effort, the perseverance to shrug off contact and keep driving. These aren't new knocks on Kyrou. And, absent Kyrou disappearing in the playoffs, I could forgive the FO for thinking Kyrou has outgrown the criticism.

But that WPG series was clearly a step back. And, by all indications, Army had a chance to move Kyrou ahead of his NTC kicking in. Even if he didn't get "full value", it would have been a chance to undo the mistake of investing a core contract with NTC on a player who isn't key.

These first two months have only reinforced the view that Kyrou is at this point a flawed, one-dimensional scorer who will score plenty of points in the regular season and then disappear in the playoffs. And now we're stuck building around that player for the next several years.

[Cahokanut]

The great that is Army, isn't done losing yet.

Gifted a team that was top 3 in the league. With 7 of the teams ten top point producers under 25
And the top three under 22.

Now at the end of all this greatness. We are in line for a top 3 pick. We went from 4th in wins(with the team army was gifted) in his first five years.
To the last five years(with the team army built) where we slipped to 20-21 in wins.

For those in this thread that doesn't care about the facts. Enjoy the golden ballroom.

Very Bomac-ian of you.
Tell me, just what was he gifted?
Over the last 15 years he built the Blues. Both the good teams and the bad.

Bomac sure has a lot of handles. Who isn't Bomac.

Reread. Your answer is there. Right after I said "he was gifted"

[Hazelwood72]

As a GM he gets an A or an A+. What are your defining metrics? Most wins? Most Points? Stanley Cups? Win Percentage? Points Percentage? As highlighted in other threads, Army is 10th all time in Wins and Points. He has the 2nd best Win and Point percentage amongst those GM's in the top 10. He has won a Stanley Cup. There are a handful of modern era GM's that have won multiple titles. That is where you can drop Armstrong's grade from A+ to A. But then I have to ask the question, what is the grade scale? If you grade anything lower than A and say A- then that mean's that something like 25 other franchises are currently employing failing GM's and I just don't believe that is the case. There are another handful of franchises who are consistently competing who deserve a B or better. I believe the Av's guy is after they won correct? So you have Zito, Mcrimmon, BriseBois, Army and then Bowman with another franchise. I'm sure I am missing someone.

Only 2 GM's maybe 3 can't remember have won with multiple orgs.

Without the shut down due to COVID there is a very real chance the Blues win another title

The COVID plus the JayBo heart attack. People forget how big a role Bouwmeester played on defense. Plus I’m sure it had a psychological effect on the team as well.