Confirmed with Link: He's Back - Brouwer

[EastonBlues22]

Sanford hasn't been "garbage," that's just your own bias speaking. He is much better suited to playoff hockey while Fabbri is a defensive liability in tight-checking games. They aren't building the best offensive team that can win in November, they are building a team that can win in May and June.

I'm sure Berube and Armstrong know what they are doing even if you or other fans don't get it. They prefer two way players, not one dimensional offensive players.

Regarding Brouwer, it's good to have a respected veteran around. He seems to have a great attitude and work ethic. It will be good to have him around, even if he's far past his prime on the ice. As the announcers mentioned last night, it might light a fire under bottom six guys to know that they have to compete for ice time going forward.

Fabbri did just fine in the playoffs his rookie year under Hitchock. He was one of the best forwards on the team in terms of having a positive impact with his play. Sanford hasn't had a playoffs that came anywhere close to the impact Fabbri had that year, so I think you're demonstrating a fair bit of bias yourself with your descriptions of the two players.

Also, Armstrong said himself that he tried to talk Fabbri into staying once he requested a trade...not to mention the fact that he drafted him. That's pretty clear evidence that he thought Fabbri brought value to the organization in spite of Fabbri being a "one dimensional offensive player." Certainly Armstrong didn't proactively get rid of Fabbri, as if he was dead-weight, to give the team some sort of makeover to bolster the team's chances for a Cup. That pretty much undercuts the narrative you're crafting here to support the move.

 

[Reality Czech]

Fabbri did just fine in the playoffs his rookie year under Hitchock. He was one of the best forwards on the team in terms of having a positive impact with his play. Sanford hasn't had a playoffs that came anywhere close to the impact Fabbri had that year, so I think you're demonstrating a fair bit of bias yourself with your descriptions of the two players.

Also, Armstrong said himself that he tried to talk Fabbri into staying once he requested a trade...not to mention the fact that he drafted him. That's pretty clear evidence that he thought Fabbri brought value to the organization in spite of Fabbri being a "one dimensional offensive player." Certainly Armstrong didn't proactively get rid of Fabbri, as if he was dead-weight, to give the team some sort of makeover to bolster the team's chances for a Cup. That pretty much undercuts the narrative you're crafting here to support the move.

It's not really fair to use pre-injury Fabbri in this comparation. If he had been playing like he did before his injuries, we wouldn't be having this debate and Fabbri would be entrenched in our top six. Post-injury Fabbri was very ineffective in the playoffs, while Sanford was pretty useful. That's not really debatable. Of course if Fabbri can rediscover his pre-injury form then we will regret this trade but that didn't seem very likely this year and last. I mean he was -4 with 1 point in 10 playoff games and that one goal was an absolute softie from Bishop.

I have no bias against Fabbri, I really liked him and was sad to see him traded. I would have given him a longer leash and given him more of a chance in the top six. I'm just tired of the bias and hyperbole that I read here on a daily basis.

Fans constantly bash Sanford even though him and Thomas have the same points in the same number of games. Sanford outscored Fabbri by more than a 2-1 ratio last year. Yet he is "garbage?" People focus on the fact that Sanford hasn't made the most of his top 6 role but in ATOI only Mac, de la Rose, Kostin and Fabbri have averaged less than Sanford's 12:04 per game. Thomas didn't do much during his trial run on the first line but people cut him slack while they constantly rip Sanford. It's annoying.

 

[Majorityof1]

It's not really fair to use pre-injury Fabbri in this comparation. If he had been playing like he did before his injuries, we wouldn't be having this debate and Fabbri would be entrenched in our top six. Post-injury Fabbri was very ineffective in the playoffs, while Sanford was pretty useful. That's not really debatable. Of course if Fabbri can rediscover his pre-injury form then we will regret this trade but that didn't seem very likely this year and last. I mean he was -4 with 1 point in 10 playoff games and that one goal was an absolute softie from Bishop.

I have no bias against Fabbri, I really liked him and was sad to see him traded. I would have given him a longer leash and given him more of a chance in the top six. I'm just tired of the bias and hyperbole that I read here on a daily basis.

Fans constantly bash Sanford even though him and Thomas have the same points in the same number of games. Sanford outscored Fabbri by more than a 2-1 ratio last year. Yet he is "garbage?" People focus on the fact that Sanford hasn't made the most of his top 6 role but in ATOI only Mac, de la Rose, Kostin and Fabbri have averaged less than Sanford's 12:04 per game. Thomas didn't do much during his trial run on the first line but people cut him slack while they constantly rip Sanford. It's annoying.

Thomas is 20 years old and has been bounced around between lines and linemates. He has looked dangerous at times, when he isn't scoring, but his linemates failed to capitalize on his passes.

Sanford is 25 and has been given consistent time at a prime spot on ROR's wing. Most of the time he isn't scoring, with an admittedly few exceptions, he is invisible.

People are willing to overlook rough patches in a 20 year old with potential, as kids need time to adjust. The Sophmore slump is a real thing, and benching the kid is the wrong approach to it. Sanford is no longer a prospect. He should be in his prime. Even given the benefit of the doubt for his missed year due to shoulder injury, he should be fully developed and consistently producing. He is not. Nor is he good enough when he is on to pull a Vladdy and play (seemingly) disinterested. So points being equal, as you say, most people would prefer to give minutes and prime spots on the roster to a guy with upside left to tap.

 

[EastonBlues22]

It's not really fair to use pre-injury Fabbri in this comparation. If he had been playing like he did before his injuries, we wouldn't be having this debate and Fabbri would be entrenched in our top six. Post-injury Fabbri was very ineffective in the playoffs, while Sanford was pretty useful. That's not really debatable. Of course if Fabbri can rediscover his pre-injury form then we will regret this trade but that didn't seem very likely this year and last. I mean he was -4 with 1 point in 10 playoff games and that one goal was an absolute softie from Bishop.

I have no bias against Fabbri, I really liked him and was sad to see him traded. I would have given him a longer leash and given him more of a chance in the top six. I'm just tired of the bias and hyperbole that I read here on a daily basis.

Fans constantly bash Sanford even though him and Thomas have the same points in the same number of games. Sanford outscored Fabbri by more than a 2-1 ratio last year. Yet he is "garbage?" People focus on the fact that Sanford hasn't made the most of his top 6 role but in ATOI only Mac, de la Rose, Kostin and Fabbri have averaged less than Sanford's 12:04 per game. Thomas didn't do much during his trial run on the first line but people cut him slack while they constantly rip Sanford. It's annoying.

Post injury Fabbri was in his first year back after missing a huge amount of time with injuries. Any expectation for him to be anywhere near peak form at any point last year, whatever level that might be for him moving forward, was simply unreasonable.

This year, he never really put in a situation to succeed. He's not going to thrive in an intermediate bottom six role with bottom six linemates anymore than someone like Thomas would, and he's not at a point in his career where he can be spot started here and there and expect him to perform well. Physically he's looked fine, but he needs to be playing regularly in an appropriate role to regain his timing and confidence.

Berube didn't want to play him in a top six role, and he didn't want to play him regularly. I understand that. Others were playing better for the roles Fabbri was in competition for, and Berube doesn't like to mess much with the lineup when it's winning. He deserves credit for having the Blues where they currently are in the standings, and his philosophy is a part of that.

At the same time, it was quite arguably in the best interests of the Blues (not to mention Fabbri as well) to find out what they had in him, and they needed to put him in a better position to succeed to do that. They didn't, and now that there's a need, they're (potentially) paying for neglecting that particular investment.

Was one way right and one way wrong? I don't think it's that clear cut. There were always pros and cons to both, and it's never easy to balance what's best for the present against what might be best for the future, especially when circumstances are constantly changing.

I've always been a big Fabbri fan, going all the way back to when he was drafted, and I think it's a shame how this situation turned out for the Blues. I've also been anything but shy when criticizing organizational mistakes (as I see them). Those things said, I just don't see any gross incompetence here. Just a series of unfortunate circumstances.

It's a frustrating situation right now for many Blues fans given the team's injury situation, and the conversations we are having reflect that. I disagree with a lot of the hyperbole and a decent number of the rationalizations that I'm seeing, but as long as we aren't combatively confrontational with each other, we'll work through it and get to a better place.

 

[Celtic Note]

It's not really fair to use pre-injury Fabbri in this comparation. If he had been playing like he did before his injuries, we wouldn't be having this debate and Fabbri would be entrenched in our top six. Post-injury Fabbri was very ineffective in the playoffs, while Sanford was pretty useful. That's not really debatable. Of course if Fabbri can rediscover his pre-injury form then we will regret this trade but that didn't seem very likely this year and last. I mean he was -4 with 1 point in 10 playoff games and that one goal was an absolute softie from Bishop.

I have no bias against Fabbri, I really liked him and was sad to see him traded. I would have given him a longer leash and given him more of a chance in the top six. I'm just tired of the bias and hyperbole that I read here on a daily basis.

Fans constantly bash Sanford even though him and Thomas have the same points in the same number of games. Sanford outscored Fabbri by more than a 2-1 ratio last year. Yet he is "garbage?" People focus on the fact that Sanford hasn't made the most of his top 6 role but in ATOI only Mac, de la Rose, Kostin and Fabbri have averaged less than Sanford's 12:04 per game. Thomas didn't do much during his trial run on the first line but people cut him slack while they constantly rip Sanford. It's annoying.

I think there is a fair difference between Thomas and Sanford in terms of what fans are willing to put up with and for good reason. Thomas has been in the league for 1 season and was returning from an injury that kept him down in a critical offseason as far as training is concerned...and training camp.

Sanford has been around the NHL/AHL for 5 seasons and had a full camp.

Thomas is still getting started. Sanford has been at it a while and can’t figure it out consistently.

This doesn’t seem to be an apples to apples comparison.

 

[BlueDream]

I remember Brouwer had a lot of good things to say about St. Louis when he left in 2016.

And you can tell he’s genuinely happy to be back here.

Just a quick observation that’s nice to see.

 

[Honeycutt]

I remember Brouwer had a lot of good things to say about St. Louis when he left in 2016.

And you can tell he’s genuinely happy to be back here.

Just a quick observation that’s nice to see.

Yup Brower will be giving it his all as he knows this is pretty much his last hurrah.

It's too bad the moderators allow a topic about Brower to be turned into a fabbri love and Sanford sucks fest, but that's the accepted narrative here, it just like the "servers in ukraine" not based on reality.

 

[Reality Czech]

I think there is a fair difference between Thomas and Sanford in terms of what fans are willing to put up with and for good reason. Thomas has been in the league for 1 season and was returning from an injury that kept him down in a critical offseason as far as training is concerned...and training camp.

Sanford has been around the NHL/AHL for 5 seasons and had a full camp.

Thomas is still getting started. Sanford has been at it a while and can’t figure it out consistently.

This doesn’t seem to be an apples to apples comparison.

Ok, it's fair to say that they aren't 100% comparable but there doesn't seem to be a big enough difference to give one player the benefit of the doubt while constantly criticizing the other. Sanford has also had his injury issues which may have slowed his development. People act like Sanford is getting some huge opportunity but he's still getting bottom six minutes despite playing a lot on the 2nd line at even strength. It's not like Perron and ROR have been tearing it up at even strength either, ROR himself said recently in a post game interview that he needs to produce more 5-on-5.

I just get tired of the constant bashing. Sanford isn't supposed to be an elite top 6 talent, but that doesn't mean he can't still be a useful player. But once some fans decide they don't like a guy then that seems to cloud their judgment of the player. It seems to have become trendy among Blues fans to pile on Sanford lately, just like it used to be for Bouwmeester and will probably happen to Brouwer as well. Maybe we should give the front office and coaching staff the benefit of the doubt that they know what they are doing. If Sanford tops out at a 30-40 point 3rd line guy then there isn't anything wrong with that.

 

[bradrich99]

Ok, it's fair to say that they aren't 100% comparable but there doesn't seem to be a big enough difference to give one player the benefit of the doubt while constantly criticizing the other. Sanford has also had his injury issues which may have slowed his development. People act like Sanford is getting some huge opportunity but he's still getting bottom six minutes despite playing a lot on the 2nd line at even strength. It's not like Perron and ROR have been tearing it up at even strength either, ROR himself said recently in a post game interview that he needs to produce more 5-on-5.

I just get tired of the constant bashing. Sanford isn't supposed to be an elite top 6 talent, but that doesn't mean he can't still be a useful player. But once some fans decide they don't like a guy then that seems to cloud their judgment of the player. It seems to have become trendy among Blues fans to pile on Sanford lately, just like it used to be for Bouwmeester and will probably happen to Brouwer as well. Maybe we should give the front office and coaching staff the benefit of the doubt that they know what they are doing. If Sanford tops out at a 30-40 point 3rd line guy then there isn't anything wrong with that.

People NEED to have a dog to kick, it seems. For some it doesn't matter how you play. It matters more who they liked. These are the same dregs who used to boo and scream at Jackman towards the end of his career, a warrior who gave everything he had for the Note. Or, similarly were merciless on Brewer for having the audacity to be included in a lopsided Pronger trade. Sanford could (theoretically) go on and lead this team in scoring and some on here will only point to his faults.

 

[Celtic Note]

Ok, it's fair to say that they aren't 100% comparable but there doesn't seem to be a big enough difference to give one player the benefit of the doubt while constantly criticizing the other. Sanford has also had his injury issues which may have slowed his development. People act like Sanford is getting some huge opportunity but he's still getting bottom six minutes despite playing a lot on the 2nd line at even strength. It's not like Perron and ROR have been tearing it up at even strength either, ROR himself said recently in a post game interview that he needs to produce more 5-on-5.

I just get tired of the constant bashing. Sanford isn't supposed to be an elite top 6 talent, but that doesn't mean he can't still be a useful player. But once some fans decide they don't like a guy then that seems to cloud their judgment of the player. It seems to have become trendy among Blues fans to pile on Sanford lately, just like it used to be for Bouwmeester and will probably happen to Brouwer as well. Maybe we should give the front office and coaching staff the benefit of the doubt that they know what they are doing. If Sanford tops out at a 30-40 point 3rd line guy then there isn't anything wrong with that.

I think the difference between the two is significant. Sanford has had plenty of time to adjust to the NHL and Thomas hasn’t. Thomas has also been better defensively and was ramping up his puck distribution. There was progress being made, albeit slow.

Sanford has been getting bottom 6 minutes because he doesn’t play special teams and hasn’t played well. That has changed a bit since his nice streak of three games.

He has played with 1st line quality players which in some ways is a gift and in others is a detriment. Expectations change based on the line you play on. The coach put those expectations on the player when he put him on that line. So, some blame is tied to the coach. There is also compounding frustration that a player in Blaise who played really well with Perron and ROR got pushed off that line for a struggling player that did nothing with the chance. Both are young players, so why did one play well and the other did not? And why disrupt a good line and then not rejoin them when things weren’t working? Again, there is some frustration with the player and the coach there.

ROR and Perron have been been hot and cold 5v5 but they are leading out team in points at just shy of a PPG pace. That’s a far cry from a player posting single digit points 20 games in.

I think the irritation with fans harping on single players make sense, but the flip side for a fan is the frustration of a player, coach or GM constantly making gaffes yet getting opportunities. That’s more of a general statement than any thing only applicable to Sanford.

As for the benefit of the doubt, it think that is easier to give for smaller errors or shorter lengths of time. When problems become habitual, you have to ask at what point is the benefit period over? With Sanford we see random and often short lived flairs of him playing to his potential, followed by long and low valleys of play. This has been his theme since his arrival here.

Fortunately we are in one of Sanford’s periods of good play. It’s a time where we get to see what he can do with some confidence. But more importantly we can see the impact of his motivation. When he is motivated, he is the useful player you proposed he could be to the team. That’s really the underlying gripe with him. He loses visual motivation for far longer stretches than he seems to have it. That’s an issue that primarily lies on the player. If he can figure it out then maybe he turns into that useful 30-40 point player. The existing evidence doesn’t exactly support that likelihood. But it is in our and his best interest for it to happen. I would think everyone wants that without it explicitly being said.

 

[Reality Czech]

Some good responses but out of respect to Troy Brouwer, I will move my comments to the general Blues thread to continue this discussion.

 

[Bluesguru]

Brouwer on a one year deal to help down the lineup. But god help me if he starts getting top 6 time.

He will eventually and IMO should while Tarasenko is out of the lineup. Brouwer is a pros pro, and Berube knows that.

 

[Bluesguru]

Brouwer will be playing a top 6 role within 5 games.

Not that quick but eventually he’ll get his shot.

 

[Bluesguru]

He had 39 points that year. Only 144 forwards hit that mark in that season and 193 hit the 30 point mark.

He had 18 goals that year. Only 115 forwards hit that mark in that season and just 148 hit the 15 goal mark.

He had 29 even strength points that year. 146 forwards hit that mark with 189 hitting the 25 point mark.

With 30 NHL teams, there are 180 'top 6' spots in the NHL. From a production standpoint, he was squarely a top 6 player.

He also had 200 hits, more takeaways than giveaways, and finished a +2. His possession numbers weren't good and his expected +/- was -3, but he also started in the defensive zone 60% of the time so his usage wasn't exactly sheltered.

You can argue that he is better described as a middle 6 player that year, but I think the context of this conversation was about 'helping the top 6' by being a support player on a top 6 line. So if you are referring to that type of usage as a top 6 player, then he would have been a top 6 player that year.

I don't think he is capable of being a 35+ point player at this point in his career, but arguing that he isn't capable of that because he wasn't capable of that 4 years ago is just inaccurate. You don't need to downplay the player he was 4 years ago to justify believing he isn't good enough to play with ROR/Perron today.

Nice post, great job with the stats and analysis. I still believe Troy is as good as he was in 16. He looked great last year as a 4th line role player for the Panthers last year. Great pick up by Blues.

 

[stl76]

I was apprehensive of this signing, but tried to keep and open mind, and I have to admit...Brouwer has looked a bit better than I expected in the bottom 6 so far.

Kudos to him, hope he can keep up the good work!

 

[Ranksu]

To me possession dies when Brouwer touch the puck. He doesn't belong to NHL anymore imo. Dead weight. Walker has been far more superior in every situation, even 1on1 battle Walker has showed he can compete. I was dead wrong about Walker, he has improve his game a lot of from pre-season games which is great.

I'm just throwing this out, but maybe Poganski would be better player at this point than Brouwer.

 

[stl76]

To me possession dies when Brouwer touch the puck. He doesn't belong to NHL anymore imo. Dead weight. Walker has been far more superior in every situation, even 1on1 battle Walker has showed he can compete. I was dead wrong about Walker, he has improve his game a lot of from pre-season games which is great.

I'm just throwing this out, but maybe Poganski would be better player at this point than Brouwer.

Well clearly Walker has been better. Why compare them tho? What have you seen in Poganski's game that leads you to believe he would be a better player?

Brouwer has played 5 games so far averaging ~11 mins on the 4th line. He has been solid defensively, is a +2 so far, has been hitting and has set up his line mates for a couple nice offensive chances (that they didn't convert). What more do you want from a 4th liner? Maybe my expectations for Bouwer were just lower than yours. I'm just glad the guy can still skate well enough to keep up with the play and isn't a liability out there.

 

[Honeycutt]

Good guy to have around, once Steen comes back he will be in the press box and hopefully those two platoon the 4th line winger role to keep them both fresh for the spring. Hard working good character guys are a good thing to have.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

For a guy coming off his couch onto the active roster, Brouwer has been a pleasant surprise. He hasn’t been a liability, and fits the locker room culture seamlessly. You can’t find a cheaper option anywhere, and he’s a seasoned vet who can spend time in the press box without hurting his development.

I’m not sure if he would clear waivers right now, but I’d guess he wouldn’t.

De La Rose has played better too. I really don’t know what this team will do when Steen and Sundqvist return, and then Blais. Even though Walker has been a breath of fresh air, despite some posters putting more weight on a couple shifts from preseason over his season-long performance in the AHL, he probably won’t stay up. But he has earned trust.

MacEachern has stepped forward. At the beginning is the year I thought he might be a roster casualty letter on, but right now he has cemented himself on the roster, and is safely ahead of DLR.

When Steen and Sundqvist return and Poganski goes down, there is room for everyone. But when Blais returns, someone that probably won’t deserve it will get sent down.

 

[Brian39]

...
De La Rose has played better too. I really don’t know what this team will do when Steen and Sundqvist return, and then Blais. Even though Walker has been a breath of fresh air, despite some posters putting more weight on a couple shifts from preseason over his season-long performance in the AHL, he probably won’t stay up. But he has earned trust.

MacEachern has stepped forward. At the beginning is the year I thought he might be a roster casualty letter on, but right now he has cemented himself on the roster, and is safely ahead of DLR.

When Steen and Sundqvist return and Poganski goes down, there is room for everyone. But when Blais returns, someone that probably won’t deserve it will get sent down.

You say that like we aren't going to have 2 more guys hitting IR as he nears a return

 

[Ranksu]

Well clearly Walker has been better. Why compare them tho? What have you seen in Poganski's game that leads you to believe he would be a better player?

Brouwer has played 5 games so far averaging ~11 mins on the 4th line. He has been solid defensively, is a +2 so far, has been hitting and has set up his line mates for a couple nice offensive chances (that they didn't convert). What more do you want from a 4th liner? Maybe my expectations for Bouwer were just lower than yours. I'm just glad the guy can still skate well enough to keep up with the play and isn't a liability out there.

Hmmm, I saw one game from him pre-season and if I remember correctly he looked decent. 4th line type of player. Hard to know what he would look at NHL level. And same breath, I was dead wrong about Walker from pre-season games, he looks totally different player. Bad to compare pre-season games, but that is all what I've seen about those players.

I counted last night 3-4 times where Brouwer killed transition game or he turnover the puck and one time his turnover almost cost goal, it was 2on1 breakaway where Allen was superb and saved us.

 

[brokeu91]

Hmmm, I saw one game from him pre-season and if I remember correctly he looked decent. 4th line type of player. Hard to know what he would look at NHL level. And same breath, I was dead wrong about Walker from pre-season games, he looks totally different player. Bad to compare pre-season games, but that is all what I've seen about those players.

I counted last night 3-4 times where Brouwer killed transition game or he turnover the puck and one time his turnover almost cost goal, it was 2on1 breakaway where Allen was superb and saved us.

Did you just complement Allen?

 

[TK 421]

I really didn't want Brouwer back but I think he's been very good. He does a lot of the little things right and has made a bunch of heads up plays. Very happy to eat crow on that one, this guy can still play.

 

[Ranksu]

Did you just complement Allen?

book mark that my post, so next time you don't to look so suprised.

 

[LGB]

Brouwer has an on-ice xG% of 30.4 per MoneyPuck and 26.98 per NaturalStatTrick. The worst of any Blue this season by a mile.