GDT: Defending Stanley Cup Champs St. Louis Blues vs. NY Rangers: our blue is better than their blue

[Blueston]

Just McDavid and Crosby, in my opinion. Regardless, the Avs are a 1 line team with a decent 2nd line, and a shallow bottom 6. Their defense is above average but not great. We all know how good Makar is offensively, but the real question will be how well he handles the physicality and the defensive coverage in the playoffs. I think we would take them out in 6 games.

Not saying he is better than McDavid and Crosby, just that he is in conversation. But I agree that Avs are otherwise good but nothing special.

 

[DoubleK81]

I want to keep this team together! Damn you Seattle for forcing us to give someone up in 1.5 years! Weird/Scary to say, but with the synergy and energy shown over these past 35 games, putting Tarasenko on that available players list seems a lot less crazy...

While I don't see trading Tarasenko as impossible in the next couple of years, leaving him unprotected in the expansion certainly is.

 

[Blueston]

How many scoring chances did Rangers have tonight? 2?

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

Just McDavid and Crosby, in my opinion. Regardless, the Avs are a 1 line team with a decent 2nd line, and a shallow bottom 6. Their defense is above average but not great. We all know how good Makar is offensively, but the real question will be how well he handles the physicality and the defensive coverage in the playoffs. I think we would take them out in 6 games.

I agree that we could be COL in a playoff series, but I think you’re underselling them a bit. Their top line is stellar, and they are massively improved in their depth after adding Donskoi and Burakovsky over the summer. They have a pretty good d-corps, and their goalie tandem is very solid.

But personnel aside, Bednar just has them playing a very fast game, and that’s something that seems to give us fits. We play a very patient, very reliable game, and won’t go chasing plays that aren’t there, preferring instead to keep the puck along the perimeter on defense. But Colorado’s speed helps them break that down in three ways:

1. Their transition game gets them scoring chances off the rush before we can establish our system,
2. They can (and have) skate around our defensive scheme, and get to the middle of the ice, and
3. They can shut down our transition game by cutting us off in the neutral zone with their speed.

That said, we are top-to-bottom a better team, and while their system makes us vulnerable, I’m fairly confident we can beat it. But it’s worth giving credit where credit is due. They aren’t that far behind us, imo.

 

[FoxyClean]

Beautiful hockey team. Was rooting for y'all all the way last year, thank you for beating Boston.

Hopefully someday in this decade you guys can root for us in the Finals (if you want )

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I agree that we could be COL in a playoff series, but I think you’re underselling them a bit. Their top line is stellar, and they are massively improved in their depth after adding Donskoi and Burakovsky over the summer. They have a pretty good d-corps, and their goalie tandem is very solid.

But personnel aside, Bednar just has them playing a very fast game, and that’s something that seems to give us fits. We play a very patient, very reliable game, and won’t go chasing plays that aren’t there, preferring instead to keep the puck along the perimeter on defense. But Colorado’s speed helps them break that down in three ways:

1. Their transition game gets them scoring chances off the rush before we can establish our system,
2. They can (and have) skate around our defensive scheme, and get to the middle of the ice, and
3. They can shut down our transition game by cutting us off in the neutral zone with their speed.

That said, we are top-to-bottom a better team, and while their system makes us vulnerable, I’m fairly confident we can beat it. But it’s worth giving credit where credit is due. They aren’t that far behind us, imo.

For the reasons you describe, it would be preferable to face Colorado in a later round after some physical punishment. If the Blues are going to make a deep run again, winning the division looks pretty important.

 

[simon IC]

Beautiful hockey team. Was rooting for y'all all the way last year, thank you for beating Boston.

Hopefully someday in this decade you guys can root for us in the Finals (if you want )

Absolutely! Rangers are my team in the East. Good luck!

 

[Renard]

Who remembers young Natalie that use to sing the anthem back in the 90’s?

I do. Her family name was DeLuca.

 

[Ranksu]

We have a rookie Dman of Finnish decent that hasn’t scored yet and would very much please a certain member of our board...if Hank’s feeling generous

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Beautiful hockey team. Was rooting for y'all all the way last year, thank you for beating Boston.

Hopefully someday in this decade you guys can root for us in the Finals (if you want )

Was rooting hard for you guys in 2014. Really wanted to see Hank raise the Cup

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Seattle will love Faulk

Fixed

 

[Chet Manly]

Trouba. You wanna act like a punk, you gonna get treated like a punk.

Rangers. You just got EMBARRASSED. Get the F**K off our ice.

Edit: I know I'm a little late to the party, but i woke up early to watch the recording. Time to start dominating the Eastern conference as well?

 

[Vincenzo Arelliti]

While I don't see trading Tarasenko as impossible in the next couple of years, leaving him unprotected in the expansion certainly is.

Wat

 

[DoubleK81]

Wat

I don't see trading Tarasenko as being unheard of in the next couple of years, but leaving him unprotected in the expansion draft certainly is.


Worded it a little differently so you wouldn't be confused what I mean.

 

[BlueMed]

I don't see trading Tarasenko as being unheard of in the next couple of years, but leaving him unprotected in the expansion draft certainly is.


Worded it a little differently so you wouldn't be confused what I mean.

Not a chance we would trade Tarasenko. We have a 40 goal scorer at 7.5M who poses an instant threat, creates his own scoring chances, and wins games all by himself. He also plays physical and back checks. Imagine what he would get on the market if he hit free agency nowadays.

 

[DoubleK81]

Not a chance we would trade Tarasenko. We have a 40 goal scorer at 7.5M who poses an instant threat, creates his own scoring chances, and wins games all by himself. He also plays physical and back checks. Imagine what he would get on the market if he hit free agency nowadays.

I've defended Tarasenko when half this board wanted to trade him when he was taking a lot of time to get back into form from his first surgery or because he wasn't backchecking. I'm not say he SHOULD be traded. I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if it happened. And I guarantee there is a better than 0% chance that it could happen.

I like how if a guy scores 40 goals once, he's automatically a 40 goal scorer. He has one 40 goal season. Exactly 40 goals. Once. You can barely even say he's a solid 35 goal scorer as he's only done that in 3 of 6 yrs ( not counting his rookie season this one for obvious reasons). I love Tarasenko, but you make it out like he's a god in this league.

 

[BlueMed]

I've defended Tarasenko when half this board wanted to trade him when he was taking a lot of time to get back into form from his first surgery or because he wasn't backchecking. I'm not say he SHOULD be traded. I'm saying I wouldn't be surprised if it happened. And I guarantee there is a better than 0% chance that it could happen.

I like how if a guy scores 40 goals once, he's automatically a 40 goal scorer. He has one 40 goal season. Exactly 40 goals. Once. You can barely even say he's a solid 35 goal scorer as he's only done that in 3 of 6 yrs ( not counting his rookie season this one for obvious reasons). I love Tarasenko, but you make it out like he's a god in this league.

And you make it out like Tarasenko fluked his way to 40 goals once. Let's do some basic math here.

2014-2015 Tarasenko has 37 goals in 77 games. Prorate that to 82 games, and you have 39 goals.
2015-2016 Tarasenko has 40 goals in 80 games. Prorate that to 82 games, and you have 41 goals.
2016-2017 Tarasenko has 39 goals in 82 games. That's 39 goals.

So 3 consecutive seasons in a row, Tarasenko is on pace for 39, 41, and 39 goals, respectively. You really want to throw that "He has one 40 goal season," as if there is a real difference between 39 and 40 goals? The point here is that, the "40 goal scorer label" isn't just a label for a player who has achieved 40 goals. At the end of the day, I don't care how many goals Tarasenko has or hasn't scored in the past. It's his current skill level that is important, and it's the same skill level that allowed him to put up 40 goals.

 

[DoubleK81]

So you're saying that someone who has never scored 40, is still a 40 goal guy when he's scored 39. 39 is not 40. 29 is not 30. 299 is not 300. This isn't little league participation trophy time.

 

[BlueMed]

So you're saying that someone who has never scored 40, is still a 40 goal guy when he's scored 39. 39 is not 40. 29 is not 30. 299 is not 300. This isn't little league participation trophy time.

That's not what I said. A 40 goal scorer is a player that has hit 40 goals and has put up similar production for multiple years. Reaching 40 goals for the sake of reaching 40 goals is pointless though. Let's say a player hits 39 goals in 39 games and then gets injured for the rest of the season. It would be pretty ridiculous to say "that's not a 40 goal scorer" when that player was scoring a goal per game before the injury. The entire point of calling someone a 40 goal scorer is more about describing someone's skill level rather than hitting an arbitrary achievement. Tarasenko has hit 40 goals and put up very similar numbers in 2 other seasons, suggesting that that type of production wasn't an anomaly.

 

[SwivelSchwartz]

It's been a crazy weekend and just seeing the recap now. My only question is did we ever get this turned into a Live thread?