OT: Should Doug Armstrong get fired?

[ChuckLefley]

I’ll point out for those that keep bringing up the 9 NTC’s that there are 15 other teams that have 8 or more players with NTC’s or NMC’s. Someone posted it at the asylum and it checks out.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

10 NTC's, 9 of which were signed by Armstrong [Hayes was inherited from Philadelphia].

Full (7) - Binnington, Schenn, Saad, Faulk, Krug, Parayko, Leddy
Partial (3) - Buchnevich [12-team NTC], Hayes [12-team NTC], Scandella [7-team NTC]

Just spot-checking: no other team has 4 defensemen signed to a full NTC for this season, much less a full NTC that extends into the final season of their contract in some way, much less signed those guys to those contracts themselves. Detroit has 5 guys with some form of a NTC, but none of them are full [Petry has a 15-team NTC, the rest have 10-team NTCs]. Toronto also has 5 guys signed to some form of a NTC, but only Reilly has a full NMC; the rest have partial NTCs, Muzzin is on LTIR and Klingberg is only for 1 season (and he's out the rest of the year). Minnesota has 3 guys with a NMC this season (Spurgeon, Brodin and Goligoski - all courtesy Bill Guerin), but Spurgeon's drops to a 10-team NTC starting next season, Brodin's trade protection drops completely after '24-25 and Goligoski's contract ends after this season.

 

[ChuckLefley]

10 NTC's, 9 of which were signed by Armstrong [Hayes was inherited from Philadelphia].

Full (7) - Binnington, Schenn, Saad, Faulk, Krug, Parayko, Leddy
Partial (3) - Buchnevich [12-team NTC], Hayes [12-team NTC], Scandella [7-team NTC]

Just spot-checking: no other team has 4 defensemen signed to a full NTC for this season, much less a full NTC that extends into the final season of their contract in some way, much less signed those guys to those contracts themselves. Detroit has 5 guys with some form of a NTC, but none of them are full [Petry has a 15-team NTC, the rest have 10-team NTCs]. Toronto also has 5 guys signed to some form of a NTC, but only Reilly has a full NMC; the rest have partial NTCs, Muzzin is on LTIR and Klingberg is only for 1 season (and he's out the rest of the year). Minnesota has 3 guys with a NMC this season (Spurgeon, Brodin and Goligoski - all courtesy Bill Guerin), but Spurgeon's drops to a 10-team NTC starting next season, Brodin's trade protection drops completely after '24-25 and Goligoski's contract ends after this season.

Interesting response. Did it take you long to pick those cherries?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Interesting response. Did it take you long to pick those cherries?

More time than it appears you needed to think up that "response."

So what if other teams have a ton of NTCs on the books? Are they all rebuilding reloading refocusing? Did that other "analysis" go through the current ages of all those guys, or how long those contracts go out, or how long the original contracts were? We've got 7 current NTCs that are full this season. 6 are still full next season. [Binnington's becomes a 15-team NTC.] 4 of those 6 are on defense. Leddy, Krug and Faulk (and Schenn ... and Saad) turn into partials for '25-26, but that's still 2 seasons away and they still have 15-team (16 for Leddy, 12 for Saad) no-trade lists.

The shortest contract we handed out with one was 4 years (Leddy). Saad was 5. Binnington got 6. Faulk and Krug got 7. Parayko and Schenn got 8. Those guys whose NTCs drop to partials in '25-26 are going to be 34 (33 for Faulk) years old. Schenn's contract, where he still has some form of NTC, goes out until 36. So does Parayko. Faulk's goes to 34. Krug's goes to 35. Players are generally on the decline by 32-33; maybe they've got a last hurrah at 35, but for every Ovechkin who has a stellar year at 37 or Selanne who has a stellar year at 40 there's dozens of guys who hit the 33, 34, 35 age mark and drop off badly. If that's going on with any of those guys, they get that much more difficult to move without having to throw in assets as a sweetener - and hoping someone is always desperate and/or stupid is a bad way to go planning for trades.

Pointing to WELL ALL THESE OTHER TEAMS HAVE NTCS TOO11! is as lazy as Rutherford's posting of Kyrou's quote. It has zero context. If you can't be bothered to scratch below the surface, don't get upset when someone else does it. But for a team that's trying to rebuild reload refocus, if it suddenly needs to become a reload refocus rebuild - and especially if it needs to happen by moving someone in the top-4 of the defense corps - it gets significantly more difficult when 7 guys, including all 4 of that top-4 that's getting near the "going to start dropping off" mark, hold full control of their future destination during the period of time you probably need to start that reload refocus rebuild.

But if by "pick those cherries" you mean "pointing out the Blues really have 10 contracts with some form of NTC, 7 of which are currently a full NTC," ... that's not picking cherries. That's stating facts.

 

[ChuckLefley]

More time than it appears you needed to think up that "response."

So what if other teams have a ton of NTCs on the books? Are they all rebuilding reloading refocusing? Did that other "analysis" go through the current ages of all those guys, or how long those contracts go out, or how long the original contracts were? We've got 7 current NTCs that are full this season. 6 are still full next season. [Binnington's becomes a 15-team NTC.] 4 of those 6 are on defense. Leddy, Krug and Faulk (and Schenn ... and Saad) turn into partials for '25-26, but that's still 2 seasons away and they still have 15-team (16 for Leddy, 12 for Saad) no-trade lists.

The shortest contract we handed out with one was 4 years (Leddy). Saad was 5. Binnington got 6. Faulk and Krug got 7. Parayko and Schenn got 8. Those guys whose NTCs drop to partials in '25-26 are going to be 34 (33 for Faulk) years old. Schenn's contract, where he still has some form of NTC, goes out until 36. So does Parayko. Faulk's goes to 34. Krug's goes to 35. Players are generally on the decline by 32-33; maybe they've got a last hurrah at 35, but for every Ovechkin who has a stellar year at 37 or Selanne who has a stellar year at 40 there's dozens of guys who hit the 33, 34, 35 age mark and drop off badly. If that's going on with any of those guys, they get that much more difficult to move without having to throw in assets as a sweetener - and hoping someone is always desperate and/or stupid is a bad way to go planning for trades.

Pointing to WELL ALL THESE OTHER TEAMS HAVE NTCS TOO11! is as lazy as Rutherford's posting of Kyrou's quote. It has zero context. If you can't be bothered to scratch below the surface, don't get upset when someone else does it. But for a team that's trying to rebuild reload refocus, if it suddenly needs to become a reload refocus rebuild - and especially if it needs to happen by moving someone in the top-4 of the defense corps - it gets significantly more difficult when 7 guys, including all 4 of that top-4 that's getting near the "going to start dropping off" mark, hold full control of their future destination during the period of time you probably need to start that reload refocus rebuild.

But if by "pick those cherries" you mean "pointing out the Blues really have 10 contracts with some form of NTC, 7 of which are currently a full NTC," ... that's not picking cherries. That's stating facts.

Apparently you care since you decided to go cherry pick teams to fit your opinion and now have written a novel about it.

You sound like you should be posting at the asylum…especially with how you started it off with an attempt at insulting me.

Enjoy that nerve I hit. Bye.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

Apparently you care since you decided to go cherry pick teams to fit your opinion and now have written a novel about it.

I cherry-picked ... no, wait - I looked at the other 31 teams, noted 3 who were vaguely close to what the Blues have.

If you're interested in the other 28, go do your own research. Or have someone at the asylum do it for you.

You sound like you should be posting at the asylum…especially with how you started it off with an attempt at insulting me.

Enjoy that nerve I hit. Bye.

 

[GoldenSeal]

Do we have any blue chip defensemen downstairs?

 

[Blueston]

Do we have any blue chip defensemen downstairs?

nobody in springfield projects as top 4 guy, if that is your question.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

It depends on who you ask and what you mean by "blue chip defensemen."

Guys capable of being a 1/2? IMO, no. Definitely not a 1, unless someone's development curve explodes shortly. Maybe Theo Lindstein becomes a 2, but I'm not sold on him developing that high. Some will mention Michael Buchinger, again I don't think he gets to this level.

Guys capable of being a 3/4? Yes - this is where I'd slot Lindstein and Buchinger right now. Quinton Burns has a max upside of 3/4, and I think he's got a better chance than most think to get to here, but he's going to need development at Springfield (and probably to put in some hard work himself) to unlock it. Last year, people were ready to put Matt Kessel here; this season, he's showing why that was wrong. Anyone putting Leo Loof here is going to be really disappointed.

Everyone else is ... you know. Not a blue-chipper.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Do we have any blue chip defensemen downstairs?

Nope. Lindstein and Buchinger are probably the best two. and they seem more 3/4 guys max. Kessel and Loof look to be bottom pairing defenders. Burns may get to 3/4, but, he's very raw and has to learn how to put everything together.

 

[Ranksu]

Poll result.

 

[TurgPavs]

I am grateful for Army bringing the cup to St. Louis, however I think its time to part ways.

This is a bad hockey team on the ice this season.
26th in Goals For per games played
10th most Goals against per games played
31st in Powerplay
18th in Penalty Kill
8th most shots against allowed
20th in FO win %
26th in Team SV%
27th in Blocked shots per game
16th in hits per game
SAT% is 27th.

The only team stats the Blues accel at is Take Aways which they are 3rd in the league.

Clearly Army has created quite a mess. You have moved out guys that where fan favorites and solid players, Petro, ROR, Perron, Maroon, Eddy, Tarasenko and have replaced them with some hot garbage.

I am not sure how the Blues get out of the situation, with the roster, they are currently in, however I am not sure I want Army to be the one to be in charge of a roster turn over.

 

[Blueston]

If teams fired the GM every time they made bad move, had bad season, or fans were upset because they lost one of our favorite players, that would be creating recipe for disaster. Teams bottoming out after long successful run and then rebuilding for next run isn't sign GM should be fired, it's sign that you have successful GM that you should keep and support.

 

[GoldenSeal]

If teams fired the GM every time they made bad move, had bad season, or fans were upset because they lost one of our favorite players, that would be creating recipe for disaster. Teams bottoming out after long successful run and then rebuilding for next run isn't sign GM should be fired, it's sign that you have successful GM that you should keep and support.

Here’s the thing: Army made several moves to ‘keep the team from crashing’ and most failed because most of those moves were unnecessary. I get replacing folks when they have heart attacks and retire but letting folks walk and spending money on trash are pretty good reasons to take the tinted glasses off and see what’s really there.

This is Army’s team. If he doesn’t deserve the brunt of responsibility, then who does?

 

[Ted Hoffman]

This is Army’s team. If he doesn’t deserve the brunt of responsibility, then who does?

The head coach. Duh. The last 3 have had to pay for the organization's sins, his sins, his mistakes.

 

[Blueston]

Here’s the thing: Army made several moves to ‘keep the team from crashing’ and most failed because most of those moves were unnecessary. I get replacing folks when they have heart attacks and retire but letting folks walk and spending money on trash are pretty good reasons to take the tinted glasses off and see what’s really there.

This is Army’s team. If he doesn’t deserve the brunt of responsibility, then who does?

of course he bears responsibility. nobody would deny that. but this rebuild was always going to happen. it's not his fault that guys get old. whether he paid this old guy or that old guy, they woulda still got old. he at least had wisdom to sell off several of them to supercharge our pipeline. and he gave up basically nothing for guys like vrana and kap to try to buy time before the kids are ready. so he is setting us up for the next wave. feel like we owe it to him to allow the next phase of his plan to unfold further before dumping the best gm we ever had.

 

[Celtic Note]

If teams fired the GM every time they made bad move, had bad season, or fans were upset because they lost one of our favorite players, that would be creating recipe for disaster. Teams bottoming out after long successful run and then rebuilding for next run isn't sign GM should be fired, it's sign that you have successful GM that you should keep and support.

Army mismanaged the core we had before our Cup core, then it looked like the Cup core was going to fail after he pulled the coach in waiting fiasco with a bad coach. He was later bailed out to some extent by Berube and Binnington (not to say he didn’t build that roster but Binnington was not part of the plans and his place in the organizational depth chart showed that and Berube was in the AHL). After that cup win (which he deserves some credit for but not an excessive amount), outside of the Buch trade, he has faltered a lot.

He has kept us competitive for a long time and his MO has been that he can get a team to competitive after that started on an upswing. There is no good evidence IMO that he can do a proper rebuild. It doesn’t mean he cannot, but outside of trading away guys last year, he hasn’t really progressed us forward. Our off-season and last season was pretty underwhelming on the improvement of our short-term and mid-term prospects. Long term trading for extra pick was good, but we still have a ton of higher priced, hard to move, aging contracts and we are no closer to finding a #1D.

TLDR: he hasn’t just made a mistake or two. He has made a mess of them over his time here. Whether there is a better option out there or not, I am not sure. I think there is an argument that there is cause for moving on.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

It is amazing to look at the post-Cup era, look at all the trades and talk about how many of them he won, talk about how he really dodged a bullet by not signing Pietrangelo to the contract Vegas gave him, talk about all the vaunted young talent in the pipeline, and all that other great stuff post-Cup that gets attributed to him, and yet in his own words this organization is no better than it was when he took over. Not "we're not where I thought we'd be, but we're still in a really good shape and I feel good about the direction we're in" or anything that upbeat. It's gone from Cup-contending to playoff-lagging.

And for everyone still wanting to play the WELL HE HAD A FLAT CAP TO DEAL WITH card: Armstrong isn't using the flat cap as an excuse for how things got to this point; neither should anyone else. 30-31 other GMs had to deal with a flattish cap, and some of them figured it out. Maybe even won a Cup. Maybe even got to the Finals, or the Conference Finals. Not "went from Cup champions to barely in, to 2nd round, to flat out of the playoffs, to potentially missing the playoffs again" with all the great moves the GM allegedly made along the way.

 

[BlueDream]

of course he bears responsibility. nobody would deny that. but this rebuild was always going to happen. it's not his fault that guys get old. whether he paid this old guy or that old guy, they woulda still got old. he at least had wisdom to sell off several of them to supercharge our pipeline. and he gave up basically nothing for guys like vrana and kap to try to buy time before the kids are ready. so he is setting us up for the next wave. feel like we owe it to him to allow the next phase of his plan to unfold further before dumping the best gm we ever had.

It’s absolutely on him that this rebuild came this quick. It didn’t have to, we could be a much better team today than we currently are. It’s not a situation where it’s like “oh well, nothing he could do about this.” That’s so far from the truth.

Also fans love giving him credit for getting assets for ROR, Perron and Barbashev. That’s great but there’s a longer list of guys he got no value for. I don’t quite understand how the 2023 trade deadline just makes up for everything in the eyes of many. He was in that position of having to sell off those guys because his previous moves put himself in that situation. What exactly are we so impressed about with that? It’s not like he made a genius decision to sell there, it was the only possible choice.

 

[Xerloris]

Army mismanaged the core we had before our Cup core,

Please explain this one.


On a side note. All of you Petro fan boys that want to cheer for a single player over the entire franchise. What the f*** is your problem? Shouldn't you be happy that Petro got another cup instead of still years later whining that he's not stuck here with a rebuilding team that sucks?

 

[Celtic Note]

Please explain this one.


On a side note. All of you Petro fan boys that want to cheer for a single player over the entire franchise. What the f*** is your problem? Shouldn't you be happy that Petro got another cup instead of still years later whining that he's not stuck here with a rebuilding team that sucks?

Well the Backes core struggled with two things in the playoffs. Those being goaltending and probably to a greater extent scoring. Army didn’t do much in either area. If he would have fixed either we coul have achieved greater success. Instead he tried for bandaids with our goaltending (which is one of his weakest areas as a GM IMO) and he never really tried to fix our scoring issues.

 

[BrokenFace]

Army mismanaged the core we had before our Cup core, then it looked like the Cup core was going to fail after he pulled the coach in waiting fiasco with a bad coach. He was later bailed out to some extent by Berube and Binnington (not to say he didn’t build that roster but Binnington was not part of the plans and his place in the organizational depth chart showed that and Berube was in the AHL). After that cup win (which he deserves some credit for but not an excessive amount), outside of the Buch trade, he has faltered a lot.

He has kept us competitive for a long time and his MO has been that he can get a team to competitive after that started on an upswing. There is no good evidence IMO that he can do a proper rebuild. It doesn’t mean he cannot, but outside of trading away guys last year, he hasn’t really progressed us forward. Our off-season and last season was pretty underwhelming on the improvement of our short-term and mid-term prospects. Long term trading for extra pick was good, but we still have a ton of higher priced, hard to move, aging contracts and we are no closer to finding a #1D.

TLDR: he hasn’t just made a mistake or two. He has made a mess of them over his time here. Whether there is a better option out there or not, I am not sure. I think there is an argument that there is cause for moving on.

He bailed on last season and got 2 extra 1st round picks rather than chasing an obviously lost season, even though we have plenty of attractive prospects he could have traded in a dumb attempt to make the playoffs. We've also been drafting and developing well despite picking late for nearly his entire tenure. I'd say that's 2 points of evidence that he understands at least some key aspects of building through the draft. I look around the league and I don't see many GMs I'd trust to draft well and to sell rather than buy at the right time.

 

[Blueston]

He bailed on last season and got 2 extra 1st round picks rather than chasing an obviously lost season, even though we have plenty of attractive prospects he could have traded in a dumb attempt to make the playoffs. We've also been drafting and developing well despite picking late for nearly his entire tenure. I'd say that's 2 points of evidence that he understands at least some key aspects of building through the draft. I look around the league and I don't see many GMs I'd trust to draft well and to sell rather than buy at the right time.

100%. I fear that logic and making sense is lost on the anti-army crowd though. They have their pitchforks and red hats and won’t stop until they seize power.

 

[Celtic Note]

He bailed on last season and got 2 extra 1st round picks rather than chasing an obviously lost season, even though we have plenty of attractive prospects he could have traded in a dumb attempt to make the playoffs. We've also been drafting and developing well despite picking late for nearly his entire tenure. I'd say that's 2 points of evidence that he understands at least some key aspects of building through the draft. I look around the league and I don't see many GMs I'd trust to draft well and to sell rather than buy at the right time.

Fair point. I can agree with that.

 

[TurgPavs]

Since the COVID Season, the Blues are 19th in the NHL in Point Percentage. That's a reflection of a poorly constructed team.

Since 2010, the drafting has been questionable. The Blues have drafted 14 players in the 1st or 2nd round, who are considered "Busts".
Army has traded away 7 players selected by the Blues in the first round.

And I believe the Blues are the only NHL team that has not had a player taken in the last 3 drafts, play a single game in the NHL.

The trade everyone points to to defend Army is the ROR Trade, but look at that trade a little closer.
You essentially traded Stastny, Lehtera, Tage Thompson, Sobotka, Berglund, Two additional 1st round picks and a 2nd round pick for Schenn and ROR.

8 Assets' to get those two players. I only include Staz as the 1st round pick that was received was used in the Schenn Deal if I remember correctly, could be wrong.

He had to over pay to get out of Cocaine Lehtera's god awful contract.

Dude got schooled on the Oshie trade, essentially gave the dude away.

Has spent a total of 3 2nd round picks, multiple players/prospects, and lower draft picks to acquire Leddy, Leopold, and Scandella.

The Ryan Miller Trade was an absolute shit show of what not to do.

In the last 8 years, under Army, the Blues have drafted 3 players that have played in the NHL, for the Blues, more then 100 games.

The Blues have drafted 94 players since Army was named GM, 32 have played in the NHL, out of those 32, 19 have been either traded or Army let walk out the door.

Its not one or two bad trades or signings, its been a roller coaster with Army.
At the end of the day, he managed to put some heart and soul guys together that over achieved just enough with a goalie standing on his head for 2 months, won the cup.
He then proceeds to tear that heart and soul line up apart.

The Blues have had 5 Captain's under Army, he has either traded or not re-signed every single one of them.
Crazy to think, however he has never resigned a captain for the Blues, he Traded Brewer and ROR, and chose to not resign Petro and Backes.