Blues Look Like Sellers

by gallagher on Feb 24, 2008 11:16 AM CST

By Sean Gallagher

Sell! Sell! Buy! Buy! General managers in the NHL, like all sports, are basically liars. It's in their best interests to not tell the media what they're really thinking 100% of the time.

If a GM were to come out and say, for instance, "Barret Jackman is as good as gone. The guy wants too much money, especially considering the fact that he's basically a good No. 3 defenseman. We'll definitely be shipping him out by Tuesday," well, that particular GM would have just handcuffed himself and given all of the advantage to any other GM in the league who would want Jackman and his minus-267 this season.

"Look, current general manager, we all know that Jackman is like a No. 3 defenseman and that he wants too much money. I'll give you a second round pick and an option to switch furry mascots in 2009 for him."

See what I'm getting at?

But the comments made by John Davidson to Jeremy Rutherford of the P-D that were published today seem to indicate that the Blues will be making some moves at the deadline. While the suggestion is that Jackman may take a "market value" contract, which would seem to be about $3.5 million based on contracts handed out to Nick Schultz and Brent Seabrook in recent days, the Blues already have $4 million invested in Fragile Jay McKee, $4 million in Mr. Roboto Eric Brewer, $2.2 million in Sister Christian Backman and an incentive-laden contract given to Erik Johnson that could be worth as much as $3 million if it's anything like most first-overall draft picks' contracts.

Can you really give about a combined $7 million to Jackman and Bryce Salvador when you have younger, cheaper defenseman logjammed in Peoria? The simple answer is that you don't pay out over $20 million in contracts to six defensemen.

Sometimes two boys just have a connection. Not that there's anything wrong with that. The article also indicates that there have been some talks between the Blues and the Rangers about Dr Hook Martin Rucinsky, who only seems to play well when he's riding shotgun on the Rangers' line with Jaromir Jagr. Honestly, a trade like that is probably best for the player and for the Rangers. Depending on who or what would come back, that deal could work out best for everyone. Especially me, since that guy drives me right up a wall.

When it comes right down to it, I'd bet that not only Jackman and Rucinsky will be gone come game time on Tuesday night, but that Salvador and probably one other guy none of us see coming will be gone too.

Tweet Comment 5 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Based on performance alone, I’d like to keep Sal and ship out Marty and Sister Christian. However, once you factor in contracts, I’m not sure how they can keep it all together.

We don’t need any big-splash free agent pick-ups in the off season, so there’s no need to “free up” cap space. If we can quietly unload a couple contracts and open a few roster slots, we should be good to go. We can fill those slots with what’s already in the pipeline, and continue to develop.

by Tim on Feb 24, 2008 12:27 PM CST reply actions

I’m genuinely torn. I can see the argument to trade Jackman realizing how much money is tied up in defense and that there are young guys ready to contribute next year. But I hate seeing a guy like Jackman, a competitor with spirit, leave. I think I wrote in the paper a few games back that Jackman will always be an injury liability waiting to happen because of his size. He plays bigger than 6 feet tall, but he’s not. It takes it’s toll.

Rucinsky is a waste. Sal is worth the about $1.5 million a year. You basically know what you’ll get from him night in and night out.

by Brad Lee on Feb 24, 2008 2:55 PM CST reply actions

I know that Jackman is the big name everyone is tossing around, but wouldn’t Fragile Jay make a good trade prospect. What team wouldn’t want his shot blocking during a playoff run. We unload his salary and age and give Jackman and Salvador a raise while promoting a d-man from Peoria like Wags or Woywitka.
I just have a feeling that the player that gets traded is not going to be Jackman, but someone else that most didn’t see coming.

by Chris on Feb 24, 2008 3:17 PM CST reply actions

im not sure you are right in thinking good things about the blues and the cap. the blues are the 8th highest cap. and while there is SPACE in the cap, there is likely not space in the BUDGET.

if we do not sign anyone, we lose walker, bs, and jack on d, but we certainly need to sign a two-way or offensive d-man, and combined those 3 make less thn 4 mill

if we sign no forawrd we lose the johnson brothers (and some non regulars) which are unlikely to be replaced at all, and martin. scoring is an issue, and we will have, assuming a similar or smaller budget, have maybe 2 million to buy a forward. (kt. lee. and several others get significant raises next year) and several rfa are likely to get paid (boyes im looking at you) or cut (jay/yan im looking at you)

in a real sense this team already bought its f.a. forward. his name is mcdonald.

while it looks like (on cap numbers pages) the blues dop 14 million, they really are not even close to that, and again, the blues, even though solid on d, probably cant get by without a 4 million signee back there

also, if you missed it, third jerseis next year!!!!

the problem with jay is that he makes probably a bit too much for 2 more years. so no one can rent him, someone will need to wants to own a defensive d-man and commit 9 million to him.

by Childhood Trauma on Feb 24, 2008 3:32 PM CST reply actions