Around The NHL Discussion 2018-2019
- Thread starter EastonBlues22
- Start date
- Status
Haha. We have a way better roster than SJ and LA for sure. And I bet we will be better than Vegas this year too.
We have a top 10 offense and defense easily.
Zamadoo
Hail to the CHIEF
- Apr 4, 2013
- 1,851
- 1,529
Yeah, we came out killing the league, Steen had 30 goals by December and got his contract extension before being injured and never scoring like that again.
Celtic Note
Living the dream
- Dec 22, 2006
- 16,933
- 5,719
Majorityof1
Registered User
I know I am not supposed to say it because we need to be 100% positive and all.....but......
Quick >>>> Allen
Jones >>>Allen
With Yeo's historic slumps and with Allen's historic slumps, if things line up wrong, we could easily fall to 10th in the league, and that would be generous.
We really couldn't though. Allen was garbage last year, we have no PP and we played a majority of games with four top-6 players... we still only missed by a point.
What I love about the opinions of other fans on the main boards is how insane their opinions on Blues goaltending is. Elliott and Hutton are nothing but backups who were products of the Blues system. But, now we're doomed because Allen is garbage and we'll never replace Hutton?!
Putting the Kings and Sharks above the Blues in a power ranking is easy at this point. Nashville and Winnipeg are safe in the Central, the Pacific is garbage and they are the safest bets. Then Vegas are there because they made the Finals last season.
My top 3 in the west, in no order, are St. Louis, Nashville and Winnipeg. Pacific teams might finish with more points, but it's an easier division.
Majorityof1
Registered User
Hutton and Elliott played a style that fit with the Blues system. Allen plays one that does not. There are stretches where he plays well because he is focusing on his fundamentals. But it all goes to crap eventually. That is why Allen is, not garbage, but a terrible goalie for our system. We funnel the pucks to areas where he is weakest.
Last year we finished 1 point out of the West because we had Hutton play 30+ games with a W/L record at a 68.5% point capture rate. That rate would put us just over 112 points or 3rd overall last year. Allen had a point capture 51.8%, which would put us at 20th in the NHL and 10 points out of a playoff spot. We do not have Hutton anymore. Chad Johnson may be a fit. I have honestly not paid much attention to him. So we will see there. Improving our top 6 should help the PP, but there was a definite coaching component too which was not addressed. And who knows how much chemistry the new players will have to be able to produce. great signings on paper don't always translate to on-ice success. Adding Stastny was never the boost we needed. If ROR has the same effect, and Peron is Perron and Bozak and Maroon is Sobotka and Berglund, we've been there before.
I am not saying we WILL be the 10th best team, but until we go out and prove it on the ice, I can see why a Power Ranking, which is heavily dependent on recent performance, would not want to move us up so much. Its not necessarily a prediction. You take the old power rankings and you slide teams around based on recent events.
The Note in MI
Bow to the pyramid
Personally I don’t think that’s going to be a bad deal for them. They groomed Hellebuyck for the starting role pretty well and last year it came to fruition.
rumrokh
THORBS
- Mar 10, 2006
- 10,108
- 3,285
Stastny. Developing young players.
Vegas is still a complete wildcard. I don't expect them to be as good as they were last season, but I can forgive almost any projection for them, even if it conforms to the incredibly conservative tendencies of hockey media. Did the team make the playoffs last year? Then they're predicted to make them again this year unless we need to make room for a bubble team with a superstar story or a Canadian team we want to focus on for headlines.
Being favorites never worked for us. But being “underdogs” always has seemed to favor us better. On paper, statistically we’re right up there with Nashville and Winnipeg depending on which metric you’re looking at, and while Vegas is close and Kovy is a wildcard for the Kings, they aren’t in the same shape we are, imo. It’s the Blues, Jets and Preds in a tight pack, and then a decent step down to the rest of the conference. I think the Flames could possibly surprise, they’ve got underdog status going for them as well.
Allen has questions, I get that, but I’m really hoping that he gets his head on straight and we can put it behind us. Carolina is in a similar situation: very strong skater group, huge goalie questions (and Mrazek doesn’t help). But if Darling/Mrazek can be even replacement level, they’re going to surprise a ton of people in the East, even the Toronto’s, Boston’s, and Tampa’s.
There’s really only one way to find out which Allen we’ll see this year, and that’s to play games in January. Until then, if people want to rank us middle of the pack that’s fine, doesn’t bother me a bit. But the stats favor us strongly, and the unknown factors (i.e. Thomas, Kyrou, Fabbri, Kostin, Husso etc) can really only favor us more. I’m not as worried as the rest of the hockey-writing world seems to be.
rumrokh
THORBS
- Mar 10, 2006
- 10,108
- 3,285
And as scary as it is to rely on a goalie like Allen to get hot for the playoffs, he has shown he can do it. He was the best goalie in the league for a few straight months and completely stole a series just over a year ago. So even if he's really mediocre for most of the year, if he's hot when it matters, that risk might be better than, say, paying out the ass to replace him with someone who is more consistent but lacks the ability to dominate for long stretches.
If the Allen-Johnson tandem isn't getting it done, I'm really confident in Husso. I'm not predicting it, but it also wouldn't surprise me to see Husso snatch the starting job before the trade deadline. The "hockey world" would be amazed, but that's how it works.
trevorftw
Voice of Reason
Majorityof1
Registered User
As long as you base your opinion on an entire seires, and not just like a game or two......
trevorftw
Voice of Reason
I feel like some goalies have their stats inflated earlier in their careers because teams haven't figured them out yet. That may just be my poor valuation of goalies, but I'm pretty convinced it's the most risky position to give a significant contract.
Hellebuyck could be another Halak... I don't think he'll slide that badly, but if he did, that would become a bad contract very quickly for a team so close to the cap.
- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,868
- 8,199
Hellebuyck had one good season as a starter. The year before he was pretty meh in his first year as a starter, but had relatively good numbers two years back, but he wasn't THE guy. I think this deal is either too long or too much AAV for what he's proven so far, but since it potentially weakens a division rival I'm pretty pleased.
Majorityof1
Registered User
I'll take Helbychuk on that deal over any goalie in the league with a contract that doesn't end in RFA (ie Vasilevskiy). The age, skill, term, cap hit make it the best deal going right now. Better goalies either have less term (Holtby, Bobrovsky), cost more (Price) or last until the player is a bit older than ideal (Quick). Helbychuk has been brought along slowly and playing behind a bad team. He has always been envisioned as what he was this year, so its not like he is a flash in the pan.
- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,868
- 8,199
Has anyone seen the cap situation in Detroit lately? What a mess. They currently have just over $2.8M in cap space left with 13F/6D/2G signed. Their remaining RFA to re-sign is Dylan Larkin. They just gave Mantha $3.3M a year after significantly lesser production than Larkin, so he's probably going to warrant $5M-$6M. They have Franzen as a carryover on IR, but I'm pretty sure they still need to count him against the cap at the start of the season, and they have 0 roster players that are waivers exempt.
Signing Larkin will likely put them $2M-$3M over the cap, and they still have to add a D for depth. This means they are almost certainly going to have to expose a player to waivers that they don't want to lose, maybe more than one, just to be cap compliant at the start of the season.
Now look at their lineup. We probably have 4F that are better than any F on their roster, and at least 2D that are better than any D on their roster. Goalie situation is probably about a push. How the mighty Dead Things have fallen.
Signing Larkin will likely put them $2M-$3M over the cap, and they still have to add a D for depth. This means they are almost certainly going to have to expose a player to waivers that they don't want to lose, maybe more than one, just to be cap compliant at the start of the season.
Now look at their lineup. We probably have 4F that are better than any F on their roster, and at least 2D that are better than any D on their roster. Goalie situation is probably about a push. How the mighty Dead Things have fallen.
Dbrownss
Registered User
- Jan 5, 2014
- 31,359
- 8,734
This was a break out year for him. Iirc he changed his training in the offseason. Still, he's earned that contract based off of 1yr. Jets didnt get Mason for no reason, they weren't absolutely confident in Hellebuyck
- Jul 4, 2014
- 7,868
- 8,199
I guess what I'm saying is can you count on the one year you got what you expected from him to be the norm, or are you running the risk that this was an anomaly and he regresses and you regret giving him that kind of money? And goalies are weird...maybe you ride this player for 2-3 years and then he suddenly forgets how to stop the puck, loses his mojo, and now you can't rely on him to be the starter. Why give him 6 years? I just wouldn't give more than 3-4 years to any goalie unless they proven to be elite, and have sustained an elite level for more than one season.
Majorityof1
Registered User
Even with a few seasons of good play it can bite you. Schenider proved to be elite multiple seasons before now having two down ones. Goalies are just fickle. So of course its a risk with an unproven guy or a proven guy. The flip side is giving him a shorter contract and potentially losing elite goaltender to UFA, or their price goes through the roof when the short contract ends. Do you think Columbus wishes they would have given Bobrovsky a few more years? His 4-year contract ends this year. Granted he did have a more proven track record. But the point remains, I don't want to let a future star goalie go if I'm not in an attractive free agent market. Hellebuyck was excellent as a back-up three years ago. His stats were poor year before last, but he was the best goalie behind a bad team defense. the fact that he rebounded this year so much while carrying such an incredible load speaks to me to his resilience.
Then I've always felt he was poised to break-out, so maybe I am just biased.
Ken Holland has made a complete mess of the cap, and continues to do so.
Even little things. They signed Ouellet to a 2 year extension, then buy him out after one year so they could save $870k. Buying him out saves them ~$30k in cap space this year, and costs them over $200k in cap space next year. So it was all about the real dollars... so why give a RFA a 2 year deal if you give up on him after one?
They got extremely, extremely lucky with the draft this year... even with that, it doesn't seem like it will get better for them any time soon.
Seattle would be insane to even consider Ken Holland as their GM.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
-
BET ON ONLY ONE HORSE Sheepshead Bay Stakes (Gr. 2) BELMONT (AQUEDUCT) RACE 3Wagers: 2Staked: $159.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
-
