GDT: Game #19 St. Louis Blues @ Washington Capitals

[Tohoya]

I didn't say it was a stupid question. I just don't really see how one could think Halak has a lot of value. Goalies in general don't have much value at all. I agree that the right deal is the one that helps bring us a cup. Would Miller make us better? Absolutely. But I highly doubt that the difference between Halak and Miller is what puts us over the hump to the cup. We're scoring right now, but that will most likely change. The same thing happened last year. The offense started off hot and then cooled off. There's no doubt that a scoring by committee strategy can be effective during the regular seiason, but during the playoffs you need that go to offensive player. Every team that has won a cup recently has had at least one, if not more go to guys. We're lacking that. So for me, it's not that I don't want Miller, it's that if we are going to give assets up, I feel like that one missing piece up front is more needed.

I keep hearing this notion that you need a go-to scorer in the playoffs, and that scoring by committee only works in the regular season, but I haven't seen any evidence for it. Does the game of hockey change fundamentally in the playoffs? How does the game change in such a way as to make scoring by committee not work there, while it works just fine in the regular season?

It just strikes me as one of those sports platitudes that broadcasters like to parrot but that doesn't' have much basis in either analysis or fact. Or possibly, an overreaction to the scoring woes last year in the playoffs, since everyone loves to prepare for the last war rather than the next one. That's not to say that getting more offensive weapons isn't a good idea, or even that scoring by committee is more prone to droughts than scoring with a consistent point man. I just think we're all a little mislead by the fact that a drought happened to coincide with the playoffs last year.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

He did play pretty well, and I think he was going to get a look anyway with 17 games in 35 days. Elliott serves an important role and he's a quality backup, but he's not going to lead us to a cup.

I might be naive, but I still think Halak can.


Ugh life sucks after a loss.

I think he has the ability to. It's all in his head at this point. It's frustrating to watch, but at the same time he's like 10-3. That's not too shabby.

 

[illninofan*]

I'm not saying Halak didn't suck and put us behind the 8 ball, because clearly he did. I'm just saying that the offense has to find a way to score in that game. You can't plan on winning every game 1-1. That's just a recipe for disaster.

Agreed, that said I think this team's offense is good enough to get us INTO the playoffs (as is the case with just about every Blues team that's a "contender" ), but we'll either need added scoring so that when everyone else cools off, one guy can step in and get that one goal needed to win the series, or get the superstar sniper that everyone will focus on, thereby giving guys like Oshie, Backes, Steen, Stewart...etc. more room to operate.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

I keep hearing this notion that you need a go-to scorer in the playoffs, and that scoring by committee only works in the regular season, but I haven't seen any evidence for it. Does the game of hockey change fundamentally in the playoffs? How does the game change in such a way as to make scoring by committee not work there, while it works just fine in the regular season?

It just strikes me as one of those sports platitudes that broadcasters like to parrot but that doesn't' have much basis in either analysis or fact. Or possibly, an overreaction to the scoring woes last year in the playoffs, since everyone loves to prepare for the last war rather than the next one. That's not to say that getting more offensive weapons isn't a good idea, or even that scoring by committee is more prone to droughts than scoring with a consistent point man. I just think we're all a little mislead by the fact that a drought happened to coincide with the playoffs last year.

Generally speaking, scoring is a lot harder in the playoffs. Think about it. All of your games are against quality opponents. That means you are going to face better defense and better goaltenders night in and night out, especially in the later rounds. Add that onto the fact that the playoffs seem to be much more physical than the regular season and it means it's very difficult to score. My point was really that the teams that win the cup have those cornerstone offensive players that can score goals by themselves even when the rest of the team has gone cold. Sometimes all you need is that one goal to spark the rest of the team. All of the recent cup winners have had at least one of those go-to guys that they can count on to score the big goals in the playoffs.

 

[Bluesgirl]

wait, some of you are seriously blaming him for the first Ovies goal? Thats just ridiculous, it was a perfect snipe, I dont think anyone else would catch it. NHL facebook page posted it and everyone was just saying what a blast it was, I dont think anyone there was blaming Halak. Its just some of the blues fans and thats just pathetic

 

[BlueDream]

Great Post.

What Miller brings to the Blues will not put them over the cup hump. They cannot rely on goaltending. I don't even care who is playing goalie come playoff time. This team will need to score to win, and they will need to not rely on their defense and goalie. Any of Elliot, Miller, and Halak can get hot come playoff time and out perform each other, no matter the regular season.

Really? You don't even care who's playing goalie for us in the playoffs? Sounds like a recipe for success.

This post doesn't make any sense. This is the Blues, not the Penguins or Blackhawks. Our STRENGTH of the team is defense, so yeah we will probably be winning because of it most likely so get used to it. Despite our hot start, we are not really a high-powered offensive team aside from one line right now.

Why does it matter how he win in the playoffs as long as we do? We need to score more but we aren't going to be lighting it up every game. So yeah, defense is what we fall back on because we may have the best in the NHL.

And no, there is quite the gap between Elliott and Miller. Ask LA how their goaltending situation worked out for them in 2012. I'm sure it was just terrible. They shouldn't have relied on it.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

Really? You don't even care who's playing goalie for us in the playoffs? Sounds like a recipe for success.

This post doesn't make any sense. This is the Blues, not the Penguins or Blackhawks. Our STRENGTH of the team is defense, so yeah we will probably be winning because of it most likely so get used to it. Despite our hot start, we are not really a high-powered offensive team aside from one line right now.

Why does it matter how he win in the playoffs as long as we do? We need to score more but we aren't going to be lighting it up every game. So yeah, defense is what we fall back on because we may have the best in the NHL.

And no, there is quite the gap between Elliott and Miller. Ask LA how their goaltending situation worked out for them in 2012. I'm sure it was just terrible. They shouldn't have relied on it.

Pretty much what I'm saying is that it's not worth giving up future assets for Miller when he's not that much better than Halak/Elliot. Will Miller really get us over the hump? What if he hits a rough spot right as the playoffs near. If the previous years are any indication, a goalie could be playing hot during the playoffs despite regular season success. It's not that I don't really care who the goalie is, I just think it's more about consistency and finding who will get hot for this team. Halak could very well get on a hot streak while Miller goes cold, or the other way around. The playoffs are unpredictable like that. But me personally, I would like to have Miller and think he would be more consistent, but its just not worth giving up a lot for him because the increase in consistency won't be that much different. I'm all for getting him if the price is right, a pretty big "if".

 

[JustOneB4IDie]

Really? You don't even care who's playing goalie for us in the playoffs? Sounds like a recipe for success.

This post doesn't make any sense. This is the Blues, not the Penguins or Blackhawks. Our STRENGTH of the team is defense, so yeah we will probably be winning because of it most likely so get used to it. Despite our hot start, we are not really a high-powered offensive team aside from one line right now.

Why does it matter how he win in the playoffs as long as we do? We need to score more but we aren't going to be lighting it up every game. So yeah, defense is what we fall back on because we may have the best in the NHL.

And no, there is quite the gap between Elliott and Miller. Ask LA how their goaltending situation worked out for them in 2012. I'm sure it was just terrible. They shouldn't have relied on it.

Thank you BlueDream.

 

[jura]

I also think that the blues fans turn their backs on players too early. I love Halak, I may be one of his biggest fans, I wake up at 2 am just to see him play.

Bluesgirl

 

[Captain Creampuff]

Pretty much what I'm saying is that it's not worth giving up future assets for Miller when he's not that much better than Halak/Elliot. Will Miller really get us over the hump? What if he hits a rough spot right as the playoffs near. If the previous years are any indication, a goalie could be playing hot during the playoffs despite regular season success. It's not that I don't really care who the goalie is, I just think it's more about consistency and finding who will get hot for this team. Halak could very well get on a hot streak while Miller goes cold, or the other way around. The playoffs are unpredictable like that. But me personally, I would like to have Miller and think he would be more consistent, but its just not worth giving up a lot for him because the increase in consistency won't be that much different. I'm all for getting him if the price is right, a pretty big "if".

No, Miller really is that much better than Halak and Elliott. Also I love how people are still concerned about scoring when we are 13-3-3 and we've only lost when scoring 2 or less goals other than the Winnepeg game in which we scored 3. We've already had 3 GAMES in which we've scored more than 6 goals. You guys want to blame not being able to score every night, well you aren't going to be able to score every night. The Blackhawks lost to the Preds 7-2 the other day and you don't see them looking to upgrade their offense because they can't score. So far the forwards and defense are playing the best hockey of their lives, goaltending has not however.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

No, Miller really is that much better than Halak and Elliott. Also I love how people are still concerned about scoring when we are 13-3-3 and we've only lost when scoring 2 or less goals other than the Winnepeg game in which we scored 3. We've already had 3 GAMES in which we've scored more than 6 goals. You guys want to blame not being able to score every night, well you aren't going to be able to score every night. The Blackhawks lost to the Preds 7-2 the other day and you don't see them looking to upgrade their offense because they can't score. So far the forwards and defense are playing the best hockey of their lives, goaltending has not however.

Do you expect Steen to continue his ridiculous pace? Or how about the entire first line producing at a crazy rate? When that line slows down, our scoring is going to fall. So yes scoring is still a major concern. Right now we are essentially a one line offense. That's a huge, huge red flag.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

Do you expect Steen to continue his ridiculous pace? Or how about the entire first line producing at a crazy rate? When that line slows down, our scoring is going to fall. So yes scoring is still a major concern. Right now we are essentially a one line offense. That's a huge, huge red flag.

No but I expect others to pick it up if Steen is not scoring. If we can't count on others to pick up the slack when/if Steen drops off then god help this team.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

No but I expect others to pick it up if Steen is not scoring. If we can't count on others to pick up the slack when/if Steen drops off then god help this team.

That's kind of my point. Nobody has stepped up and we're almost 20 games in. That should be a serious worry.

 

[Captain Creampuff]

That's kind of my point. Nobody has stepped up and we're almost 20 games in. That should be a serious worry.

If anyone else were stepping up in scoring we would have to be scoring around 5-6 goals per game which is unrealistic.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

If Steen stops scoring that doesn't automatically mean others will start. It's not like he's hogging goals and stuff, he's going to slow down and this team will need scoring from others, and I don't think anyone will pick up the needed slack. This team needs a scorer.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

If anyone else were stepping up in scoring we would have to be scoring around 5-6 goals per game which is unrealistic.

Steen has been unrealistic. The fact that we have a somewhat realistic GPG with an unrealistic amount from one player is indeed a worry.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

If anyone else were stepping up in scoring we would have to be scoring around 5-6 goals per game which is unrealistic.

And if that were happeneing I wouldn't be as concerned. If we truly want to be cup contenders, we need more than one line to score. It's that simple. The fact that we are scoring at the rate we currently are is misleading because Steen is scoring at an unsustainable rate.

 

[fcpremix88]

Steen has been unrealistic. The fact that we have a somewhat realistic GPG with an unrealistic amount from one player is indeed a worry.

The Blues are third in the league in goals per game, scoring over three per game. I don't think I would have called that realistic in September.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

The Blues are third in the league in goals per game, scoring over three per game. I don't think I would have called that realistic in September.

It's a facade. Unless you believe that Alex Steen is going to continue to score at 1.41 points a game (puts him at 116 points) and David Backes to score at 1.05 points a game (puts him at 86 points) and T.J Oshie to score at .89 points a game (puts him at 73 points), there's a problem.

But if you believe Steen (career high of 51 points and only above 50 once), Backes (career high of 62 points and only above 50 twice) and Oshie (career high of 54 and only above 40 once) can keep that up, then yes I guess it's ok.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

It's a facade. Unless you believe that Alex Steen is going to continue to score at 1.41 points a game (puts him at 116 points) and David Backes to score at 1.05 points a game (puts him at 86 points) and T.J Oshie to score at .89 points a game (puts him at 73 points), there's a problem.

But if you believe Steen (career high of 51 points and only above 50 once), Backes (career high of 62 points and only above 50 twice) and Oshie (career high of 54 and only above 40 once) can keep that up, then yes I guess it's ok.

I think he was agreeing with you.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

I think he was agreeing with you.

well then I'm an idiot and apologize lol.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

well then I'm an idiot and apologize lol.

Don't worry, I almost did the same thing. I had to read it three times to get it.

 

[fcpremix88]

It's a facade. Unless you believe that Alex Steen is going to continue to score at 1.41 points a game (puts him at 116 points) and David Backes to score at 1.05 points a game (puts him at 86 points) and T.J Oshie to score at .89 points a game (puts him at 73 points), there's a problem.

But if you believe Steen (career high of 51 points and only above 50 once), Backes (career high of 62 points and only above 50 twice) and Oshie (career high of 54 and only above 40 once) can keep that up, then yes I guess it's ok.

For all of you Blues fans who love statistical averages, why are you panicking right now? Steen/Backes/Oshie will probably cool off, but then Berglund/Stewart/Whoever else who started cold will probably heat up, right?

Why is it one way but not the other?

 

[Falco Lombardi]

For all of you Blues fans who love statistical averages, why are you panicking right now? Steen/Backes/Oshie will probably cool off, but then Berglund/Stewart/Whoever else who started cold will probably heat up, right?

Why is it one way but not the other?

The average says there isn't enough offense judging by the last two playoffs.

 

[Robb_K]

That's kind of my point. Nobody has stepped up and we're almost 20 games in. That should be a serious worry.

Backes has 8 goals and 20 points. That projects to about 35 goals and 85 points for the season. So, we can't say that NO ONE else is stepping up. Tarasenko has 6 goals, and has been lokking much better lately. He should be piling up goals when Steen slows down, especially when opponents will be shadowing Steen on the PP. Tarasenko, Roy, Backes, Oshie and others will have operating room. So will his own linemates (Oshie and Backes) at even strength.