DeFranks' chat: What can we expect from the Blues at the draft and in free agency?

Read the full transcript of our weekly Blues chat.

Matthew DeFranks: Good afternoon. It's two days until the NHL draft and five days until free agency opens. Let's get to some quesions.

Larry: Do you think Army will be active in the free agent market this year? If so you can you see Army targeting.

Matthew DeFranks: I do not see it. Both Tom Stillman and Doug Armstrong have cautioned that this summer may not be one with flashy additions. That's more so because of where the Blues are as an organization -- waiting for prospects to develop, too many holes on the NHL roster -- than their cap situation.

The Blues should have around $11M to spend in free agency (that's assuming a cheap contract for Nikita Alexandrov, and two ELC forward on the NHL roster). That's certainly enough to spend on a marquee free agent or two, but by the time the Blues are good, that UFA is likely on the wrong side of 30 and signed to a long-term deal.

So it feels like more of a minor acquisition summer. If the Blues were able to find an equivalent to Brandon Saad this summer, that would probably work. A middle-six depth forward signed to a reasonable cap hit over a medium term.

Rob in St. Charles: I know this won鈥檛 be a popular trade proposal but I think the Blues should dangle Jordan Binnington out there and see who nibbles. I think Hofer is ready to be #1. The Blues are at least two to three years away from seriously winning so why not trade Binnington, get some excellent prospects or high draft picks.

Matthew DeFranks: If I'm the Blues, I look at the recent goalie trades, and I'm not impressed by the trade market. Markstrom pulled a 2025 first (that figures to be around 20?) and Kevin Bahl. Ullmark was the No. 25 pick, Marc Kastelic and a bad goalie with retained money.

There are different circumstance, sure. Markstrom is a UFA in two years. Ullmark is up after this season. And you would get three years for Binnington. So those would be factors that would change the return, but the goalie market has been underwhelming, at least viewing it from the outside.

You make a fair point about the timeline to contention, and whether Binnington's talents are wasted in 狐狸视频 in the meantime. It was the same discussion we started having about Pavel Buchnevich late in 2023. I just don't see the Blues losing that type of stabilizer on ice, and persona off ice while they go through this transition.

Rob in St. Charles: Is it a pipe dream to consider acquiring Brady Tkachuk?

Matthew DeFranks: Yes. He's signed long-term in Ottawa, and judging by the Ullmark trade, they're once again trying to turn the corner instead of build for the future.

Ask me again in 2028, when Brady is a UFA and the Blues would presumably be in a much better position to contend.

Rob in St. Charles: How does Army try to move Parayko, Krug, Leddy & Faulk. I know they all have no trade clauses. Can Army threaten to release them, and they get picked up by a team they aren鈥檛 crazy about or can they go to Army and give him a list of 10 teams they would be willing to waive their NTC.

Matthew DeFranks: I think he's been trying to move a defenseman for the last two years, and it's been unsuccessful. At this point, it's not worth it to the Blues to eat money or attach a sweetener just to dump a contract. Next summer? Maybe. But right now, they have enough cap space as is, and spending assets to dump a salary wouldn't line up with the plan they've put forward.

Now, if they're able to complete a hockey trade? Sure, Doug Armstrong would jump all over that.

As for avoiding the NTC, we just saw an example. The Rangers waived Barclay Goodrow and he was claimed by the Sharks. San Jose was on his no-trade list, but the Sharks also had first waiver priority to claim him.

The Blues can always waive those players -- that's the main difference between a NTC and a NMC -- and that threat is there for Armstrong to use. But in order for it to be a relevant threat, a team has to be on the other end ready to claim that player.

Matt S.: With the PLD and Walman trades I feel as though it鈥檚 become painfully apparent it will be impfor the Blues to shred any unwanted contracts. (Krug, for instance) Do you get this sense as well?

Matthew DeFranks: Right now? No, I do not get that sense. The Blues aren't crunched for cap space right now. They aren't in a position to contend where they would be using that cap space to become a threat. So there's not really a need for them to lose assets just to get rid of a contract.

That could change in a year or two, when the young players take on bigger roles, and the results improve, and suddenly, you look at that $6.5M and say "We could really use that space to push our team to the next level."

You are right, though, about the price for getting rid of money. It's astounding that the Red Wings had to attach a second-rounder to Walman just to get rid of his ... $3.4M cap hit? I think many of us thought that sort of sweetener would be lessened with the cap going up. I guess that was wrong.

Rob in St. Charles: Does Army deal Kyrou?

Matthew DeFranks: I can't see that, either. Jordan Kyrou is the exact type of player the Blues are trying to find: right age group, right production, right contract (yes, it will be fine).

Rob in St. Charles: Do the Blues need a Ryan Reeves type player now? Bortuzzo was the closest thing we had to an enforcer. Seems like we got pushed around a lot last year.

Matthew DeFranks: I don't think any team needs a Ryan Reaves player. I think what teams need are "hard skill" players. They will get to dirty areas. They will mix it up after the whistle. They will draw teammates into the fight. And they will be productive players. Right now, the Blues have ... 2 1/2 of those guys? Schenn, Neighbours and maybe Buchnevich.

I'm talking guys like the Tkachuks or even players like MacKinnon, Point, Hintz that have an edge without having to fight other players.

Physicality is important, sure. But I think we saw how unimportant Matt Rempe or Ryan Lomberg were on the ice in the playoffs.

Eric: Hey Matthew! Thanks as always for the chat! What's your sense of how the Blues handle the draft on Friday. Do they stay put and draft at 16 or do they try to move up and grab one of the better d men?

Matthew DeFranks: I hope they move up to grab one of those upper echelon D. They might not be positioned like this again: already with a mid-teens pick, with two seconds and two thirds, plus a deep D draft. It's like a perfect storm for them to jump forward and pick up a 1D a summer after they got a 1C.

I just am skeptical of it because it's hard to move up in the draft -- that high in the draft, I should say -- and teams that move up generally pay more of a premium than the team moving down.

Rob in St. Charles: Matthew, thanks for the opportunity to chat. The Blues are set to draft at #16. They have a total of 9 picks in this draft. Do you see the Blues using some of those picks, and perhaps a minor league player or two to move down in the draft? Perhaps a deal with Utah or Ottawa to move down?

Matthew DeFranks: I looked at the recent history of trading up earlier this week. It's hard to move into the top 10, particularly picks 6 (Utah) or 7 (Ottawa).

Historically, it鈥檚 tough for teams that are outside the top 10 to move into the top 10 using just draft picks. The last team to do so was San Jose in 2007, when it moved from No. 13 to No. 9 in order to select Logan Couture. Ironically, that trade was with the Blues, who also picked up a second-rounder (No. 44) and a third-rounder (No. 87) in the process.Otherwise, an NHL player has been included in order to move into a premium draft position. Chicago鈥檚 haul in the Alex DeBrincat trade included pick No. 7 from Ottawa. Oliver Ekman-Larsson brought Arizona pick No. 9 from Vancouver.

Mike: Matt, thanks for the great coverage. Instead of jumping up to a top 10 position in the draft, could the Blues package their 2 second round picks and get a mid 20鈥檚 pick in exchange?

Matthew DeFranks: It's a good question. I defer to one of the few publicly available pick value charts out there, and that's PuckPedia. According to their model, picks 48 and 56 in the second round wouldn't even be enough to get back into the first round at 32.

You can play around with it yourself here:

Tyler G: Matty D, thanks for covering the Blues, I like your opinion and reading your articles. Who do you have the Blues selecting in round 1 assuming the hang onto the 16th pick?

Matthew DeFranks: As far as defensemen, Stian Solberg and Adam Jiricek should be available. The hope would be that Carter Yakemchuk falls to them, but he's slated to go earlier in the draft.

Up front, I wonder about Michael Brandsegg-Nygard, Michael Hage, Bennett Sennecke, Konsta Helenius, Cole Eiserman or Trevor Connelly.

It's a lot of names, but there's a lot of uncertainty once you get past the top few players.

Scott Stewart: Since this is the second year of playing our the bad contracts, could the blues look for bounce back candidates on short term deals that could be flipped at the trade deadline?

Matthew DeFranks: That is a good idea. But we saw it's not always that easy. Sometimes, you end up with Jakub Vrana, Kasperi Kapanen, Sammy Blais and Kevin Hayes all in the Opening Night lineup.

It's worth it for the Blues to explore some short-term bad contracts in order to gain and asset for taking on the salary, and potentially one for flipping it if the player performs well. It's the ole Sean Monahan situation in Montreal that would be ideal.

Jimfla: Hi Matt. With all of this talk about defensemen in the upcoming draft, are any of them NHL ready or close to it ? Thanks.

Matthew DeFranks: Mid first-round picks are usually in the NHL in 2-3 years, and are a meaningful contributor in around 4 years.

As an example, Thomas Harley was No. 18 for Dallas in 2019. In 2023-24, he had his breakout season.

You can find other development curves with Schneider (NYR), York (PHI), Bouchard (EDM) or Dobson (NYI), even if some of them were more highly drafted.

Mike: Has a front office personnel or scout ever said off the record that the draft did not go as hoped and that the player they really wanted was selected just before their pick? Mostly it seems every GM can鈥檛 believe the player they selected was still available.

Matthew DeFranks: "He was much higher on our list." "We thought about trading down, but we liked the player too much." "Our scouts are overjoyed."

I can't remember who told me this a while back, but they were saying why people like restaurants so much. And one of the main reasons is that you tend to order the food that you like, so you're happy.

Teams and scouts pick players they like, regardless of relative draft position. Now, in a few years, they may look back and say "Oh, we could have done better." But on draft night? That's just not part of the lexicon.

Matt L: What about Perron as the depth forward acquisition? I fully acknowledge that may just be my nostalgia talking, but he checks some boxes. Can help on PP, won鈥檛 need a long term deal, leader. Also, he loves the Blues and we just spent the last two weeks hearing Armstrong talk about how important that is to him vis a vis Steen.

Rob in St. Charles: I believe David Perron is an UFA. Would it be worth exploring bringing him back?

Matthew DeFranks: Normally, I am very anti-bring the band back together. Many times, I just don't see the benefit of bringing back a player mostly because they were once Blues.

But this one? It makes a ton of sense.

The Blues could honestly take a page from the Chicago playbook on this one. Pay above market value on a one-year deal -- Corey Perry, Nick Foligno -- to secure a veteran presence. Use him on the power play, in the middle-six and potentially flip him if he provides value at the trade deadline.

Reset the culture, provide some scoring, and go for a fourth stint with one franchise.

Thowardmax: I will ask you this about Marner and JG on his chat. A straight up Marner for Buchnevich. Brube loves Buch saves Toronto $5 million in cap space. The Blues have the space. I have read that Marner and Thomas played together somewhere. I know the Blues would have to pony up to sign Marner long term. He also has a no movement clause. If he ok's a trade to the Blues and they can't sign they could trade him at the deadline for I think would be a great return. Also, by then what is left on his contract would be about $5 and the Blues could retain half of that if need be.

Matthew DeFranks: Toronto gains the cap space, sure, but they also give up the better player in a one-for-one trade like that one. In the old days, this might have been a trade with a conditional pick attached if the player was re-signed (i.e. the Blues would send an extra pick to Toronto if Marner re-signed). But that is no longer allowed by the league.

It's intriguing, but I don't know if it makes sense for Marner for him to waive his NMC to come to 狐狸视频 at this point in the Blues cycle.

Easy Ed: Hey Matt, psyched to see what Army does! So glad to see them sign winger Pecarcik (sp) for three years==he's going to be a keeper. Where's he playing this year? If the AHL, I wouldn't be amazed to see Dvorsky (#16 draft) and him, the two Slovaks, brought up during the season together, like Federko-Sutter. Long shot, but possible. Strong possibility for Dvorsky to make the team out of camp or come up early on. Thomas, Dvorsky at 1&2 C, Schenn, the former NYR (if extended), and Kyrou on the wing, etc? How does that sound? Holding my breath...

Buchnevich is the winger I meant. They ought to extend him. Also, wouldn't be surprise to see Army make a steal later in free agency.

Matthew DeFranks: Juraj Pekarcik could end up in the QMJHL this fall. He has options -- the USHL again, Canadian juniors, or the AHL -- but from talking to Doug Armstrong a couple weeks ago, seems like juniors is the most likely route, and Acadie-Bathurst owns his CHL rights.

As for Dalibor Dvorsky, I think his destination is either the NHL or the AHL. He has nothing left to prove in the OHL, and he's actually eligible to play in the AHL next season.

The Blues will give him every chance to make the NHL squad in the fall. I think it's worth remembering that each step this summer is just a small step. Development camp in July leads to the prospect practices in September, then the prospect tournament, then training camp, then preseason games. It all builds on each other, and each piece is just a set of information to use.

Eric: We have the draft and the start of free agency all happening with a week. Would coming out of it with one of the upper echelon d men, a mid career mid-six type veteran who can play center, and shedding one of the D contracts be about as good as it gets this off-season?

Matthew DeFranks: If they're able to shed a D contract without attaching a sweetener, that's prime, since they don't actually need to clear cap space at this moment. Only other thing that could be better is if they're able to gain an extra asset somewhere along the line whether taking on some money or moving a mid to late round pick.

Jacob: You get to be Armstrong at the draft table and Zeev Buium is at the top of your draft list. What are you packaging with 16 in order to get him?

Matthew DeFranks: It's a cop out, but I guess it depends on just how high he is up the list (like is he No. 2 overall, or No. 1 of attainable players?), and how far it looks like he'll fall (trading up to 6 vs. 10 is different).

But if I feel that strongly about him, I think you could talk yourself into trading 16, both seconds and both thirds.

Thowardmax: What RFA would you like to see the Blues go after? Necas Carolina Harley Dallas or ________ fill in the blank

Matthew DeFranks: I think Seider is the best one out there that would fit the Blues, but I don't think you'd be able to craft a deal that Detroit fails to match.

Harley could be doable, quite honestly. The Stars can't really afford what he would get paid on a long-term deal, so I would imagine he gets a bridge deal from Dallas. (This is what happened with Jason Robertson and Jake Oettinger, too.) So if a team puts a long-term offer around the $9,161,834 threshold that means surrendering a first, a second and a third ... the Stars probably wouldn't be able to match that.

Easy Ed: Matt, everyone's crabbing about the Blues defensemen--except Parayko and Leddy, of course--but do you see any of the others bouncing back? Keep keeping us informed!

Matthew DeFranks: Justin Faulk is a bounceback candidate because of his ankle injury that slowed him up basically after Christmas. While Torey Krug didn't play to his $6.5M cap hit, he was certainly better than he was in 2022-23, so I guess another step forward would be of interest for 狐狸视频.

With Kessel's involvement at the end of the season, I wonder if we've seen the end of Krug-Faulk and will instead see more of Krug-Kessel with Perunovich-Faulk.

Matt L: Any thoughts about Mureulo walking away from the Yotes? More likely the best thing that鈥檚 happened to hockey in PHX in a long time or the final nail in the city鈥檚 NHL coffin?

Matthew DeFranks: I think it's a good thing. The dude is a joke. How he handled this entire arena process and the sale to Utah was straight-up buffoonery. The arena was never getting built on his watch, so at least another ownership group can give it an actual shot instead of constant mismanagement. I don't know the particulars about when another group could get involved (do they still have to wait the five years?), but that's a better situation for Arizona hockey fans than Meruelo.

Easy Ed: I can see Army taking one gamble along the way, opportunity providing, with two years left on his contract, cap space, and a chance to be competitive this year. Blues will definitely be in the playoffs. Matt, I think their new coach will surprise--I like him a lot! Krug was underrated last year and his partner was hurt. That pair might surprise, too.

Matthew DeFranks: Easy Ed, I will say that I always do appreciate your sunny outlook. Especially on a rainy day like today in 狐狸视频.

I can see gambles on short-term deals, or short-term reclamation projects. Essentially, if they tried again on pieces similar to Vrana, Kapanen, etc.

One more thing to note, Armstrong is done as GM in two years, but he'll still be involved. He'll be Steen's boss at that point, and a key advisor until Steen becomes more and more comfortable that he no longer needs oversight.

Thowardmax: what other moving parts would be what Toronto/Berube would want to come their way. I think Marner would like to be the top dog instead of #3. Plus playing with Thomas he knows that he is going to score a lot goals.

Matthew DeFranks: Marner and Thomas' skills overlap a ton in terms of two-way responsibility and play-making. So while they played together in London in 2015-16, it still doesn't seem like a perfect fit in terms of playing on a line together.

Pugger: Hey Matt.. I hope the Blues follow your thinking.. Try to make a move up in the draft, pick up a solid D prospect... Yes, you want to always pick the best player, but if they can get in the top 10 I think they can get a D-man that they can look at as an anchor in a few years.. Let's hope it pans out that way!!

Matthew DeFranks: It's always easier said than done, but the circumstances provide a great opportunity.

Pugger: Love your idea on Harley... That's a play you can make and will be sooo happy you did it...

Matthew DeFranks: I'm not convinced he's worth $9M right now, but you're going to have to pay above market value in order for another team to not match the offer sheet. There's also the tiny detail that Harley has to agree to sign elsewhere.

Eric: While we're throwing out trade hypotheticals, there's been a lot of talk about Draisaitl potentially walking away from the Oilers. IF (and I realize it's pretty unlikely) the Blues decided to try to put together a package for him, would anyone be untouchable?

Matthew DeFranks: In this scenario (and most scenarios, to be honest), Robert Thomas is the only untouchable.

Turekthetank: Krug for Laine. Who says no?

Matthew DeFranks: I can't see why the Blue Jackets would want Torey Krug.

Rob in St. Charles: What do you think about Steen becomeing the GM in two years?

Matthew DeFranks: It was surprising given Steen's lack of management experience, and even after two years, he'll still be on the lower end of experience around the league. Makes sense that Armstrong would like to stick around in a lessened role, but Steen was an unorthodox pick. As Gordo and I talked about on the podcast, there are plenty of different paths that GMs take to their role, and this is another one of them.

Rob in St. Charles: Is Bannister the man to take us to the "Promise Land"?

Matthew DeFranks: He has a two-year contract, and the Blues will not be Cup contenders in the next two seasons. So unless they like him enough to keep him around when Steen takes over in 2026, I'll say no.

Rob in St. Charles: That being said, when Steen takes over do you think he'll want to bring in "his" coach?

Matthew DeFranks: I have no idea what Steen will want to do. He was pretty quiet on his management philosophies and tendencies. So we might just have to wait and see. But I do think it's right that the GM gets to pick the coach he wants.

Eric: What do you think the priority is for Armstrong before handing over the day-to-day ops to Steen? Having a younger competitive team in place? Cleaning out some of the less-than-desirable contracts? Some combination of the two? And do you think Buchnevich still fits into the team's long term plan?

Matthew DeFranks: In reality, all of it. But I think the priorities will be developing younger players to take on bigger roles when 2026 arrives, and then creating cap flexibility around that time.

Rob in St. Charles: With Perunovich gatting a one year extension do you see him getting more playing time if he can stay healthy?

Matthew DeFranks: His playing time might bump up as a product of being paired with Justin Faulk, if the Blues do indeed go with a Krug-Kessel pairing.

CT Bluesman: You said Carter Yakemchuk would be your ideal Dman pick (since clearly Levshunov and Silayev won't make it past 5, and Dickenson, Parekh and Buium shouldn't make it past 8. At what pick should Army start working the phones to try to secure him? At what point is it too risky to let him pass?

Matthew DeFranks: Opinions on him vary, so I wouldn't be surprised if the Blues can wait it out to see if he's around and 11-13 in a range in which they would be able to realistically trade up.

Rob in St. Charles: Would Army be interested in bring in Sam Reinhart as an UFA?

Matthew DeFranks: His contract will likely be too long, and it will be a burden on the Blues late in the contract when they are supposed to be contending.

CT Bluesman: Should Army pursue Sam Bennett?

Matthew DeFranks: Style-wise, it makes sense. But it would probably cost more than the Blues would want to give for a 28-year-old entering the final year of his contract. That's a deal top teams make to push them over the top.

That's all the questions in the queue, so we'll call it there for today. Thanks for stopping by. Enjoy the draft and free agency. Next week's chat may have to wait until July 10 due to the timing of development camp on-ice sessions.