Toggle sidebar

Blues Discussion Thread 2018-2019 - Part VI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Brian39

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,140
13,102
Spektre said:
I'd rather have watched the Blues tank and watch the roster someone turned over than mire in mediocrity season after season after season after season......

The Blues have reeled off an incredible run the past month. There's no denying that and who doesn't like watching winning hockey? The problem is I don't see how that's sustainable in the playoffs. The talent on this team just isn't enough to compete with the top tier teams. Honestly, does anyone really think the Blues have even a decent chance of running the tables all the way through the playoffs?? Vegas has them at like 22-1. If anyone really believes there is some really good money to be made :) Turning 1000 into 22000 in 3 months is like winning the Vermillion penny stock.

The ROR trade was incredible. There's just not enough top tier talent on this roster. Maybe this will be the start of another 25 year playoff streak and stuff.
Click to expand...

Nope. However, I feel that was about the other 30 NHL teams. Absolute best case scenario, you're looking at less than a 30% chance of winning the Cup going into the playoffs.

There is too much parity in this league to win the Cup without luck. Washington was down 2-0 in round 1 last year and avoided going down 3-0 with a fluke/ugly/greasy goal off a shin pad then skate in double OT. They were also down 3-2 heading into game 6 of the Conference Final against Tampa.

In 2017, the Sens hit a post in overtime of game 7 of the Conference Final against the Pens. That Pens team also went 7 against the Caps

In 2016, the Pens were down 3-2 heading into game 7 of the Conference Final against Tampa and won game 7 by a score of 2-0.

In 2015, the Hawks get knocked out in the 1st round if not for Scott freaking Darling going into God-mode and bailing out a struggling Crawford. It also took them 7 games (and climbing out of a 3-2 hole) in the Conference Final vs the Ducks and 6 games to dispatch a LIghtning team whose goalie was basically playing on one leg.

In 2014, the Kings went to game 7 in all 3 rounds and had to reverse-sweep the Sharks in round 1 after going down 3-0 in the series.

No one runs the tables and cruises in the playoffs. Every winning team has a couple bounces that go their way. The Lightning are historically good this year and are on pace to surpass the highest point total in the cap era by about 5 points. They have a +81 goal differential through 62 games, have been shutout exactly once and have scored 4 or more goals in 61% of their games. They are currently sitting at 15 to 2 to win the Cup, which means you could turn $1000 into $7,500 in 3 months on this sure thing. By the way, they are 8-0-2 in their last 10 and have only lost 7 times at home all year. You can credit the Blues for one of those 2 losses in the last 10, one of their 7 home losses all year and the only game they have been shut out.

The Blues aren't going to keep winning at the 12-1-1 pace they're at, but they have been playing very good hockey for over 2 months now. We are either tied or winning the season series against Tampa, Nashville, San Jose, Calgary and Toronto. I don't put us at favorites to win the Cup, but this team is not miring in mediocrity since Berube took over. No addition available today makes us favorites against any of those teams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OSA, Mud the ACAS, Stealth JD and 2 others
WeWentBlues

WeWentBlues

Registered User
May 3, 2017
2,079
1,817
Armstrong said we will be a player short tomorrow in his interview with Strick so I dont expect either to be ready tomorrow
 
Brian39

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,140
13,102
SteveR85 said:
Armstrong said we will be a player short tomorrow in his interview with Strick so I dont expect either to be ready tomorrow
Click to expand...

Unless he means only dressing 17 guys, then having both of them out tomorrow would leave us 2 men short on the 23 man roster. Getting 1 of the 2 back would leave us a player short.

I'd be stunned if we sent down 3 players just to only dress 17 guys (which would also require healthy scratching someone else), so one of them should be back based on Army's comment.
 
Zamadoo

Zamadoo

Hail to the CHIEF
Apr 4, 2013
1,851
1,529
SteveR85 said:
Click to expand...

Thanks. That was a good interview. I agree with what Army said. Let the players who have earned a chance have the opportunity, as we aren't in that championship run phase yet as teams like WIN and NASH are.

He said Kyrou and Blais are going down and we'll have one extra skater until Schenn and Perron return.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mk80
Ranksu

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,705
9,329
Lapland
Really smart approach by Army. He has clearly improved his GM skills. Understand when to stay put and let team grow on while update needed areas.

I bet next off-season will be update Allen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zamadoo and mk80
TK 421

TK 421

Barbashev eats babies pass it on
Sep 12, 2007
6,464
6,123
Sounds like DA entertained possibly moving futures for a player, wonder who that was.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mk80
TK 421

TK 421

Barbashev eats babies pass it on
Sep 12, 2007
6,464
6,123
Yeah that fits with what DA's likely shopping budget was but I'm thrilled we didn't spend 2 2nds on Dzingel. I'm thinking DA had a set late-ish pick(3rd or later) + B prospect budget for a mid 6 forward and just didn't find a match which is fine. He got us a depth dman which was smart given we have a shot at a decent run, Eds has been off all year and Gunnar has been hurt.
 
Dbrownss

Dbrownss

Registered User
Jan 5, 2014
31,359
8,734
Yea, it was a tad too pricey for me given the contract he wanted and only getting a 20 game sample size.

I was really hoping for a sly Hoffman grab
 
Halak Ness Monster

Halak Ness Monster

Registered User
Nov 11, 2010
2,531
1,447
St. Louis, MO
Army: "We didn't make a trade. We didn't want to upset the chemistry."

Also Army: "We were close on one deal using some future assets but it fell through."

Hmmm...so clearly they didn't mind upsetting the chemistry and clearly they were looking to get someone that could actually help us(unlike MDZ).
 
  • Like
Reactions: mk80

BlueDream

Registered User
Aug 30, 2011
25,801
14,222
Halak Ness Monster said:
Army: "We didn't make a trade. We didn't want to upset the chemistry."

Also Army: "We were close on one deal using some future assets but it fell through."

Hmmm...so clearly they didn't mind upsetting the chemistry and clearly they were looking to get someone that could actually help us(unlike MDZ).
Click to expand...
Well... the last time we acquired a guy with a three initial name (ROR) it worked out well. Let's try again with MDZ!

- Armstrong's logic
 
  • Like
Reactions: RoarBacon, mk80, Dbrownss and 1 other person
TK 421

TK 421

Barbashev eats babies pass it on
Sep 12, 2007
6,464
6,123
Vincenzo Arelliti said:
We could have offered a comparable package for Stone.
Click to expand...

Definitely could have been and that was my initial thought as well. It would have been a low offer comparitive to Vegas obviously and I don't think a very serious bid overall but it could have been Stone.

Obviously wrangling that deal Stone just got into our Cap structure would have taken some maneuvering and leads me to believe we were probably never in on him. A team like Vegas had the space to immediately fit him into their structure plus a single better piece in Brannstrom to get the Sens attention. With the way DA buys I have no doubt his initial offer was low ball if he even made one.

I'm sticking with my gut instinct here, imo we were nothing more than soft buyers once the team knew they were getting Schenn and Perron back. The goaltending stabilized and then became a strength which greatly lessened the pressure DA felt to do anything other than add the depth d man.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom