There’s plenty to still clean up but the 2 point train keeps rolling
For the record I would split up the PP units and try giving them equal amount of time.
For the record I would split up the PP units and try giving them equal amount of time.
because stone cold said so ... give me a hell yeahPoints matter, doesnt matter how he plays.
Points matter, doesnt matter how he plays.
Arizona last goal shows well how bad hockey IQ Faulk has. Let man alone front of net, goes after puck carrier, doesnt box out.
True - but if he is traded, then you’re also losing another valuable player to Seattle. I’d rather lose 1 player to Seattle (whether that be Dunn or someone else), than trade Dunn for a pick/prospect AND lose another player.If they don’t trade him, they probably lose him to Seattle anyways.
He’s trying to cover 2 guys there. Where was ROR? Other D?Arizona last goal shows well how bad hockey IQ Faulk has. Let man alone front of net, goes after puck carrier, doesnt box out.
This is right way to look at it. If we trade him it shouldn’t be bc of expansion. We are gonna lose good player regardless, don’t compound it.True - but if he is traded, then you’re also losing another valuable player to Seattle. I’d rather lose 1 player to Seattle (whether that be Dunn or someone else), than trade Dunn for a pick/prospect AND lose another player.
Wingers don’t win Selke.I know Pang has been going on about it, but Schwartz really should be getting some Selke love. He’s been otherworldly this year in both ends of the ice. The guy has the second highest xG% in the league right now for any player playing more that 100 minutes. He’s been insane to start the year.
Also, I think that Parayko needs to rest. Maybe his play is because of an illness, so I’m not trying to rake him over the coals. But if he is still suffering, I believe that should give more reason to give him a breather. He’s not playing well. So give him a chance to take a break so he can feel a bit more energy for the game after. I’d even suggest just to continue that line of thought for as long as it takes. Give him 3 games to play and rest him on the 4th, or something like that. It’s not the ideal way we would want a defenseman like Parayko to be used, but neither is playing him as much as he has when something’s wrong.
Mark Stone was a finalist just a couple years ago.Wingers don’t win Selke.
Wingers don’t win Selke.
I’m well aware. That doesn’t mean he shouldn’t get some love for it. Same with Mark Stone in past years.Wingers don’t win Selke.
None of it will be ideal. I’d expose Faulk. He’s playing himself into an attraction.so protect Parayko, Faulk and Mikkola, and give them their choice of Krug or Dunn???
No way I’d protect Krug over Faulk.None of it will be ideal. I’d expose Faulk. He’s playing himself into an attraction.
Ok...I think half the time you are pulling our legArizona last goal shows well how bad hockey IQ Faulk has. Let man alone front of net, goes after puck carrier, doesnt box out.
Very likely, I agree. And of course Parayko too.Let's see how Krug plays this season before making judgements on which players to protect. I suspect we'll want to keep both Faulk and Krug despite their big contracts.
The notion that Armstrong will not protect Faulk or Krug is fanciful. The team targeted those guys, gave them long term deals, and they’re not playing poorly. They’ll both certainly be protected. I realize it was trendy to plan to expose Faulk while he struggled a bit last season, but that’s not realistic at this point.I don't know what to think about the expansion draft. If we don't protect Krug or Faulk, we stand to lose a very good defenseman, but there is a chance Seattle won't bite, because of their respective contracts. Another way of looking at it is we also would be off the hook for that contract. We could also lose a young talent like Mikkola or Dunn. I don't have an answer. Pick your poison.
Good point and well stated. It is what it is, I guess.The notion that Armstrong will not protect Faulk or Krug is fanciful. The team targeted those guys, gave them long term deals, and they’re not playing poorly. They’ll both certainly be protected. I realize it was trendy to plan to expose Faulk while he struggled a bit last season, but that’s not realistic at this point.
Mikkola or Dunn could be lost. Sanford or Sundqvist are on that list too. I’m resigned to the notion the Blues will lose a guy we’d rather keep. But it would be a mistake to get too fancy trying to make deals to protect anyone from that list and wind up giving additional assets.