Questioning The Commitment Of St. Louis Blues Ownership

I was under the impression that they would not spend a lot of money until they were close. Let the kids grow and when we only needed one or two pieces, then spend for the cup.
Keep in mind that almost all of the money is coming from Towerbrook, and they want out. Their money is not going to be there much longer. So spending on large contracts without a garaunteed money source would be a good way to see the team go to Canada.

I figured that spending a lot of money was in the plans for the future right up until the Money Partner decided to bail. Towerbrook backing out is what is causing this situation that is making all of us less optimistic than we should have been.

If the blues are going to have money for free spending to the cap, one of us is going to have to hold a fantastic bake-sale or something. Otherwise the only difference between this year and the year after the lockout is that we can’t trade Pronger twice.

Maddening is the fact that Checketts promised to be aggressive in the offseason. OK buddy, you went out and traded for Jaroslav Halak and signed him to a reasonable contract. And that’s quite nice. But seriously . . . what about that “vaunted” offense? You just traded away the guy who is arguably your top scoring prospect IN that Halak deal, and your current supposed best goal-scorer just ran into a wall because he was two fucking feet wide of the door. Interesting, to say the least.

Confidence-building is the fact that without signing any of these big-name scorers (and I’m sure Wiedler has touched on this before), you’re giving the young’uns the signal that they are to be counted on to grow into leadership roles. This can be seen as a negative, given the aforementioned statement about an aggressive offseason, and I can see that. But still, it’s nice to know that the kids who grew up in your system are assured that management has their back.

We’ll see how this shakes down, but I wouldn’t be opposed to The Note starting the season with the roster that they currently have. This roster may not be a Cup winner, but it at least can make it to the dance. However, it would be nice to add a couple pieces that could really put the team in the upper reaches of expectation, a-la the (gulp) Keenan days.

then the problem isn’t just the ownership. I mean, they can’t keep throwing millions of dollars away year after year. At some point maybe this team can’t be successful here in St. Louis in a city of this size with the number of dedicated fans we have. It ties into a larger problem of the popularity of the NHL.
Now you could say that winning the cup would turn things around financially for the club. It’s possible, but Chicago still lost money. Maybe their win last year will help sustain them fan-wise for years to come of course.
I dunno, there’s obviously some catch-22 about it. You can’t be successful without spending money, and it’s difficult to spend money without a large, dedicated fan base, and it is hard to have a large, dedicated fan base without success.
Maybe as an ownership group you have to pick a way to back into it then. You can try spending your way to success, then hope that gets you the actual success, then the fans, then the longer-term financial stability.
Or you can try to get success without spending a bunch, via growing from within, then hopefully turn that success into fans into financial stability into more success.
I think the Laurie group would say they tried the first route, and Checketts et al the second, but the problem is either way you have to go balls to the wall (as you say), all-in, and have some patience to see it through. I don’t think Laurie went balls to the wall and he certainly didn’t see it through. Then you’re left having spent a whole bunch of money but fallen short of all the other steps in your plan.
Maybe Checketts can do it with the build-from-within plan, get some success and parlay that into a better financial position that both means an actual profit of some kind for owning the team and financial backing for future runs at success. We’ll have to see I guess.
All of this is why a NBA team here, in the Drinkscotch, sure would have helped.
Checketts did get it done with Real Salt Lake, though I don’t know as much the factors they faced.
Anyway, back to what I was saying, a big part of the problem is just the NHL. There’s a large proportion of teams it seems that are essentially limping along. Some are doing what we are doing with the build from within stuff, some are making some big splashes trying to buy some success, some have just turtled it seems, but how many are actually legitimate, financially stable business enterprises that have the money figured out and can worry about success on the ice without cash concerns?

Makes things a lot harder. We all know the teams needs a scorer and we all hoped this summer might see a bit of improvement. Yes, we did go out and make the Halak deal, which was great, but we cant expect him to win all his games 1-0 or 2-1 cause this defence, with Brewer and Jackman, cant be expected to perform that well night in and night out. Im content to let them play out their contracts and free up that money while bringing up Petro, Cole etc.

Bottom line is though, for all the money the Fuckhawks spent, I do NOT want to be the team that wins it all just to strip them down in the offseason. I would rather try and fail than win then do another 10 years at the bottom ala the Florida Marlins. Not saying Chicago will suck, but we all know the odds of repeating after losing 8 players off the roster are about as good as me winning the lottery.

In a era wrought with big contracts and the cap, it is refreshing to see a front office do so much with so little salary. With that in mind, it has been an unnerving offseason to say the least. It took a longer than expected to sign the core group of free agents. I couldn’t help but wonder if that had to do with the lack of a solid ownership. With the ownership issue and the comments that JD made on draft day about the cap, I knew we weren’t going all out with free agents. We still signed Steen, Perron, EJ, and Halak at prices under what was expected.

I think they are proving that they are using their money efficiently, which might attract potential suitors into ownership. Additionally, we have the cap room to make adjustments early on if things are less than stellar. We are really riding on the performance of our youth now, if we don’t have the points come late November or December, expect a trade. This management team knows what they are doing, maybe aside from this Stratchard signing. I was hoping we might go after Tim Kennedy. I really don’t get that one.

The first problem is true, but that has nothing to do with Checketts and company’s commitment to winning. That issue is just the hand they were dealt.

As for the second problem, we don’t really know yet. Other than Kovalchuk and maybe Plekanec, this free agent class wasn’t much to get excited about. Do you really want ownership to be aggressive and bring in more second line players? They also got screwed for this offseason anyway with Towerbrook backing out. If you’re looking for a “they spent how much on who????”, wait until they get this money thing figured out. They also tried your “they spent how much on who????” approach with Mckee and Kariya. Yes, those contracts were done for different reasons, but by the end of them, everyone was counting the seconds for those deals to come off the books.

The issue with the third problem is the constant comparison of the Blues and Blackhawks. St. Louis is NOT Chicago as a market. We cannot compete with the Chicagos of the NHL moneywise. Does this make the Checketts group less committed? That Chicago, an original six franchise, is in a much much larger market than St. Louis?

There’s not much that ownership can do right now. They can make another Stempniak like trade if things aren’t going well in November-December, but that’s really it until next summer’s free agent class where there are better players and hopefully we are in a more stable financial situation.

- Ok, maybe commitment to win is there. Ability, definitely in doubt.
- I wrote about Chicago because they’re the most recent Cup winners. I could have said the same thing about Pittsburgh. They lost longer and drafted higher. They have some big contracts. They’ve gone after guys like Hossa in the past. And Pittsburgh isn’t much bigger than St. Louis. It’s not about Chicago vs. St. Louis. It’s about their approaches.
- Is this team better than last season? With Halak, yes. But how much? And what I really fear is that their ceiling is a lot lower with what the front office can do with the restraints ownership has put in place/has to put in place.

And if they go on a run and contend this year, I’ll take it all back. Would love to. Anyone who reads this site knows I love this team. And that’s why I’m asking these questions.

While I do believe the owners have the good of the franchise at heart, I think some opportunities were missed.

The management did get screwed here. Having your biggest investor pull out right before the season starts really hamstrung us. Its hard to spend a lot of money when you don’t know whats going to happen to you financially.

I know we were all hoping to sign a high profile forward, but again the market was slim. Sure there was Kovy but after that the drop-off was pretty steep talent wise. I think the ball was dropped on letting Afinigenov and Frolov get signed to NYR and the KHL, as well as resigning Winchester, a true sniper was hard to locate this off season. Not to mention we still have Brewer (although that was not for lack of trying to move him)

I also applaud the move to get Halak here. That took some balls and it was good to see the front office had the minerals to do it when they got the chance.

I know we can all agree that its frustrating to go through the off season like we have. Especially after being promised an aggressive off season and then pretty much falling flat. I think some of this anger can be traced back to the lookout. We went from perennial contenders to struggling to get to the playoffs. It sucks. Hard.

I have to think that we will find another investor. And once that happens, you’ll see those big moves start to happen. Its just really hard to sink a big amount of money into assets when you aren’t sure where the money will come from. Again I’m not giving management a pass here. I really think they did miss some golden chances there. Especially with signing Winchester. But again, I think once you see an investor come in, the club will be a lot more aggressive.

But that holds true for almost any team in any sport. When it comes to Chicago and winning the cup, the foundation of that team were Keith and Seabrook, both of whom took 5 years after they were drafted to become “Keith and Seabrook”. BTW, they weren’t even the highest drafted defensemen; the traded Cam barker was the 3rd overall pick in his draft I think. Kane and Toews – A #1 overall pick, and a top 3 pick. We have a #1 overall pick who is coming into his third year as a defenseman.

Our forwards are mid-first rounders; Usually, these guys don’t wind up playing at the level of top-5 picks, but we didn’t have any except Johnson and Pietrangelo, who they drafted knowing that he was young and not NHL-ready. This year’s FA market was very thin, and I for one think the money will be better spent on Oshie and Berglund next year. This team is not close to winning a Stanley Cup, which is when those one or two free agents can put you over the top. As for not even bothering to negotiate with Kovy, why waste the time? Without the cheap-ass 5 years on the tail of the contract, it’s essentially a 10 million per year deal in a media center, which is what he was wanting all along; Atlanta offered him more to stay there. What makes you think we could have lured him to St. Louis?

We don’t have the money to win the Stanley Cup like Chicago did. We don’t have the top 5 picks to land a Crosby and Malkin and Jordan Staal like Pittsburgh. This team has a lot of growing to do before we can make up for that lack of luck. A major investor would be nice; this is a dedicated group of hockey fans, and you can make money here, just not quite as easily as Hamilton.

If there was some option that we haven’t yet taken to get better, then I’m not aware of it.
We need a top line goal scorer, a top line defenseman, and a franchise goalie.
We have about half a dozen players who will be NHL quality defenseman someday that are currently waiting in our minor leagues so bringing someone in wouldn’t make sense even though I would have liked a Hamuis or one of the better defense-men that got signed this year.
We potentially have a franchise goalie in Halak.
We are only really lacking scoring. I like our third line, our fourth line is good for what it is, we have about 6 players who are good second liners or question mark first liners. There were no one to pick up in FA who would solve our top line problem and im not sure whos shopping around a first line scorer. So the choices are either do something drastic to get one or wait till next year when the problem is more easily solved and our current players are better defined. All getting a frolov would have done this year is take time away from the younger players who we need to give ice time to anyway.

And I hate having 4th period planning because I can’t read anything until 1:30. Bah.

Anywho, both TB and AJ have extremely valid points in their arguments, but a lot of this falls to circumstance and luck of the draft draw (re: sucking for many consecutive seasons). Brad’s examples of Pittsburgh and Chicago are great instances of what having high draft picks can potentially bring. Having Kane and Towes together on a team with sub-par supporting cast doesn’t guarantee a winner – you have to assemble quality players. Does that mean that the whole team needs to be made up of 50 point scorers? No, because there are other qualities (defensive capabilities, locker room skills, shot blocking, PK time, whatever) that are just as important in winning games as getting on the scoreboard is.

The difference between us and Chicago, as Brad pointed out, is that they were assertive in getting free agents. It’s not necessarily about who we drafted – we’ve drafted very well and have gotten solid kids out of it – but it’s about who we have added to the mix of what we have to compliment the youth, and vice versa. Take veteran leadership, for example. Without Walt, Kariya, and Sydor that leaves us with Jackman, and to a lesser degree McDonald. Do we probably need an older gruff son of a bitch with ability remaining somewhere in the mix? Sure (I liked the idea that we weer rumored to be after Guerin). Do we need to get rid of Brewer and replace him with an actual first pairing defenseman to play with EJ? Hell yes. Do we need someone who can score? As insurance for Boyes in case he doesn’t bounce back, that would be nice.

Actually, the only position where we have taken care of all holes is goal. We have one of the most solid tandems in the league.

The ownership’s not the group responsible for getting the draft picks – that’s on the scouts. What the owners are responsible for is filling those holes around the picks. I’d never want us to do something stupid like throwing mad ducats at a player like Brian Campbell, but there are (or were) reasonably priced individuals who could add a lot to the team just sitting there.

Honestly, the only thing keeping me from being a bit cranky about the ownership situation right now is the fact that our major investor and large source of dough backed out. I was hoping for some sort of statement move, and I guess Halak was it. I’m still really excited about having him, but I wanted someone up front as well.

Oh well – Bobby Ryan’s still fighting with the Ducks, right?

The more high picks you get the better players you get, but Oshie and Perron are better than guys taken in the top-2 of the draft? That’s thelogic, right? Any Blues fan who doesn’t admit that Toews and Kane are better than Oshie and Perron needs to take off the Blues-tinted glasses.

The Blues are trying to emulate the Pens, Hawks and every other youth-movement team. The problem is, the Blues weren’t bad long enough. Two bad season netted Erik Johnson and Alex Pietrangelo, both who are still more hype than results. Do I think they’ll pan out? Hopefully. EJ looked good in the Olympics and Petro has obvious skills. However, so far, neither has become a force. I get that d-men take longer to develop and all that, but so far you can’t put them in the win category yet.

The forwards that the Blues have developed, so far, have been complimentary players. Perron, regardless of who his coach was, has taken some time to mature and get better. He’s on his way to being a great player, but he’s not there yet. And, frankly, we can’t say for certain he will ever reach that point. Sports are littered with guys who never live up to hype.

Right now, the Blues have a bunch of maybe good prospects, but no sure things like Kane, Stamkos or players like that — players that they would’ve gotten had they been bad longer.

Ownership has given up on winning this year. The only upgrade was made in net, but they still didn’t address the offensive shortage. Who on this team is going to score? I know that the market was limited, and it probably was a wise choice to punt on the offseason, but you sometimes have to call a spade a spade. The Blues saw they couldnt fix need No. 1, so they did nothing. The resigned everyone from last year, minus Kariya and are basically telling everyone to step up. It’s not a bad idea, but it still sucks that this team won’t be any better than last year’s team.

And Brian, as far as the examples you requested about Oshie’s maturity. The video of him drunk on TVwas pulled, but it did exist.

And JR wrote this:

As far as the rumors about Oshie, no one knows what’s true and what’s not true. What I know is that veterans have sat down with him and warned him about overdoing it off the ice. Plain and simple, Oshie will have to mature, and I think we’re seeing that happen.

And that’s all I have to say about that.

Sign me up for considering the Blues’ current situation not as a lack of commitment but rather a reflection of financial and rebuild reality. An internal rebuild takes time and patience, and it is the rare free agent plunge that gooses it in a productive way (How did Paul Kariya work out, in the end?). Frankly there were no free agents out there who fit that bill — including (especially so) the floating, backbreaking-contract-seeking Kovalchuk.

However, I think Brad is dead-on when he calls the Blackhawks example a myth (I’m paraphrasing) when others point to it. Not only did the Hawks suck hard, and worse, for longer than the Blues (they got more and higher picks, period), they also had more resources and they still damn-near squandered them like a drunken sailor. I wouldn’t want the Blues to go down that path even if they had Steinbrenner-style bucks backing them.

Why? Chicago was two losses away from imploding a non-Cup-winning team. The Hawks can afford to spend lavishly (Hossa) and foolishly (Campbell) and hope it all works out. The Blues cannot and — barring the divine birth of a Wal-Mart heir-in-law who actually cares about hockey — will not. Even if the Hawks hadn’t won the Cup (which “worsened” an already massive cap problem by adding a bonus to Toews), they would have had to disassemble the robot this summer anyway — their cap management was that inept. Now they have to nibble around the edges to fit under the cap for the foreseeable future, but at least they can afford to push the cap. Can’t imagine the Blues ever being able to count on that year after year, and that’s just the reality of the market, and will remain the reality of this market as long as someone like me can still afford their tickets.

As a result, they have to save their splurges for when the right guy is available (not this summer) and it can really push them over the top (also not this summer). That’s essentially what the Hawks just did. Literally their best chance to win the Cup was this past season. Until the lower-revenue Blues have a roster in that position, following this internal rebuild path is the only realistic route. (As an aside, while I disagree with TB’s valuation of Oshie and Perron I do share his feeling that this is the most sensible regime the Blues have had in … well certainly my 30 years of following them.)

….checketts and JD can go on that show “Shark Tank”, and try to get an investor from there…

what makes us think that in a couple years the blues will even spend the money to keep who we got? if guys like oshie, berglund, perron, ej, petro etc. etc. etc. actually pan out and become good to great players, how can we expect management to resign them if they are reluctant to go over the cap FLOOR?

Kalaty CHOP!!!