Let's chat about Berglund

[rumrokh]

Stewart has been scoring more than Berglund lately so I disagree that "unlike Stewball, you can tell Berglund's points are coming." Berglund has never scored like Stewart has.

Since Stewart arrived with the Blues, he has 53 goals in 172 regular season games.

In that span, Berglund has 44 goals in the exact same number of games. Berglund also has twice as many playoff goals in the past two years (4g, 5a vs. 2g, 1a).

So, yea, Berglund has been scoring like Stewart has for a few straight seasons.

 

[BlueDream]

Since Stewart arrived with the Blues, he has 53 goals in 172 regular season games.

In that span, Berglund has 44 goals in the exact same number of games. Berglund also has twice as many playoff goals in the past two years (4g, 5a vs. 2g, 1a).

So, yea, Berglund has been scoring like Stewart has for a few straight seasons.

He has for a few straight seasons? Oh. Stewart is on average a 50-point player per season in the NHL. Berglund averages 41 points. Let me know when Berglund hits 30 goals or 60 points. Or, just tell me about his potential. Either way will be fine. There is a player between these two who is definitely better offensively, and his initials aren't PB.

 

[rumrokh]

He has for a few straight seasons? Oh. Stewart is on average a 50-point player per season in the NHL. Berglund averages 41 points. Let me know when Berglund hits 30 goals or 60 points. Or, just tell me about his potential. Either way will be fine. There is a player between these two who is definitely better offensively, and his initials aren't PB.

It may annoy you that other people talk about potential, but I'm not talking about potential at all. I'm talking about actual play from the past few seasons. If anything, you're talking about Stewart's potential to recapture what he was several seasons ago and I'm talking about the actual players as they are right now and have been for years.

You cannot judge a hockey player based on what they did four years ago. If we could, Derek Roy would be a lock for 70 points.

 

[Meatwagon]

I think Berglund has fallen trap to the Checketts/Davidson hype machine as soon as he was drafted. Most in the front office were selling the "kids" as 1st line players capable of PPG production and frankly all have fallen short of those expectations. Oshie is a 1st line player by default, but it is what it is. They are 2nd/3rd line players. And in all honesty, that's OK. That's what you hope to draft with late 1st rounders. You tend to get the super high end forwards with top 5 picks and after that its a crapshoot. The 2 times the Blues had top 5 picks they took defenseman, one is a Norris contender and the other was a bust(not as a player, but as a #1 overall pick). It's just the way it is. Look at Tarasenko, he should have been a top 5 pick his draft year, but because he's Russian he fell to us, and he has the highest ceiling of all our forwards. I still think Frank comes close to 30G this year, then becomes a lock for 30 for the next 7-8 years.

If the Blues weren't in such horrible shape when Bergy was drafted, he would have been able to develop at his own pace and would probably have been better off for it. But the Blues were so terrible that they needed as many skilled players as possible to compete and to sell to the fans as the "wave of the future". If he was drafted today, we would hope that a late 1st would turn into a solid NHL contributor, which is exactly what Berglund is, but since he was hyped as a sure fire 1st line center, those lofty expectations have been missed and fans feel, let down or shortchanged. Berglund is a good player and still has time to develop as a player, he may not hit his peak for a few more seasons, but really, if he can become a consistent 20G-30A player while playing physical stout defense, I would be very happy with that from our 2nd/3rd line center.

Unobtainable expectations=hard fall from grace...see Chris Stewart!

 

[intangible]

I think Berglund has fallen trap to the Checketts/Davidson hype machine as soon as he was drafted. Most in the front office were selling the "kids" as 1st line players capable of PPG production and frankly all have fallen short of those expectations. Oshie is a 1st line player by default, but it is what it is. They are 2nd/3rd line players. And in all honesty, that's OK. That's what you hope to draft with late 1st rounders.

All extremely fair and valid points. While that administration was good reasonably good at using their first pick to select a guy who would go on to play in the NHL, it also begs the question if they were much too conservative with their picks. Oshie was originally ranked as the 43rd top NA skater in the draft, and we chose him at #24 and touted him as the next coming of Jesus. Meanwhile, James Neal was chosen #33 and was ranked #19 NA skater. Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but which one would you rather have today?

 

[BlueDream]

It may annoy you that other people talk about potential, but I'm not talking about potential at all. I'm talking about actual play from the past few seasons. If anything, you're talking about Stewart's potential to recapture what he was several seasons ago and I'm talking about the actual players as they are right now and have been for years.

You cannot judge a hockey player based on what they did four years ago. If we could, Derek Roy would be a lock for 70 points.

I'm not judging these guys by what they did 4 years ago. But neither of them have changed really, unlike Roy.

 

[rumrokh]

I'm not judging these guys by what they did 4 years ago. But neither of them have changed really, unlike Roy.

When you compare career averages and suggest that Berglund is inferior because he hasn't hit 30 goals or 60 points, you are absolutely talking about what happened that long ago because Stewart has not been that player since then.

The fact is, they've both played over 180 games (including playoffs) since Stewart has arrived on the team and they've had similar production. If you think that's somehow a wrong span of games by which to judge them, please share your reasoning. Because as far as I'm concerned, until Stewart actually gets another 28 goal, 64 point season, all we're talking about is potential, not what he currently is.

Personally, I think they can both do better, but are still playing well. I think Stewart has gotten the shaft with mishmash lines and Berglund has done everything well other than scoring. I would move both of them for upgrades, but neither one for a lateral move. The Blues would have been in bad shape last year without either one's goal scoring.

 

[BlueSinceBirth]

All extremely fair and valid points. While that administration was good reasonably good at using their first pick to select a guy who would go on to play in the NHL, it also begs the question if they were much too conservative with their picks. Oshie was originally ranked as the 43rd top NA skater in the draft, and we chose him at #24 and touted him as the next coming of Jesus. Meanwhile, James Neal was chosen #33 and was ranked #19 NA skater. Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but which one would you rather have today?

I think Neal's centers in Pittsburgh might have a little something to do with his numbers. Also I don't remember anyone saying that Oshie was going to be much more than he is now, it's just the style that everyone liked. Would you not say that his value on and off the ice is pretty significant?

 

[Renard]

No, and this statement makes it relatively obvious that you either: do not watch any other team other than the Blues or you are not aware of which player Berglund is.
Berglund is the #21 with a Bluenote on his chest. Swedish guy. May or may not say "Bork Bork Bork" in the kitchen.


Not what I would ascribe his main weakness as (I would say consistency) but I can certainly agree his lack of acceleration hurts, particularly when playing with much faster players such as MPS, Schwartz, Tarasenko, etc.


Not as much as we would like him to be but he does use the body more often than "rarely"


Cannot argue that.


Have you heard of this Morrow guy?


Not all that much as of late (thankfully)


He should, he is a very effective defensive center. If he could win faceoffs with more consistency he would even be ideal.


Agreed, there should be a better center playing in the second center role as long as the Blues have a glorified second line center playing in the top position.


...This is where you lose me. Berglund is a shooter, his passing is barely passable.



In summation:
Berglund would be a great 3rd line center and a passable 2nd line if he could learn to consistently get the same good results night-to-night. Or he would be fine if the Blues had Joe Thornton on the top line.
I do not foresee the Blues attaining that true #1 center and I do not see the Berglund suddenly figuring out how to play as Angry Berglund every night.
Frankly, if the Canadiens are as serious as some of their fans are for trading Pleks for Stewart and a 3rd the Blues should hop all over that thus giving them a plethora of centers and moving Bergie down to 3rd line where he should be.
Alas I doubt they are and as such the onus is on the Blues to find a good second line center to push Berg down a line.

I know who Berglund is. I saw him in his rookie season, when he had 15 goals at midseason and people thought he might score 30 goals in his rookie season. He tailed off in the second half and wound up with 19 or 20 goals for the season.

I watched him have a dismal sophomore season.

I watched him when Davis Payne and Scott Mellanby worked with him, telling him that with his size and strength, he could come off the boards and go in front of the net and no one could keep him from doing it. The lessons didn't take.

Berglund continued to sink. He would go three or four games without recording a hit. He was awful on the faceoffs. He was slow. He couldn't win puck battles because he didn't compete.

Then, he got better. He started hitting, a little. He got better on faceoffs. He became a better defensive player. I found hope.

Now, he has leveled off. Except in goal scoring, where he has dropped off. We are 25% through the season, and he has one goal - against a Florida backup in the first game of the season.

He could be another Mike Eastwood, a slow-skating defensive center, but he isn't as good as Eastwood on faceoffs. So - he is a marginal player.

 

[Frenzy31]

I know who Berglund is. I saw him in his rookie season, when he had 15 goals at midseason and people thought he might score 30 goals in his rookie season. He tailed off in the second half and wound up with 19 or 20 goals for the season.

I watched him have a dismal sophomore season.

I watched him when Davis Payne and Scott Mellanby worked with him, telling him that with his size and strength, he could come off the boards and go in front of the net and no one could keep him from doing it. The lessons didn't take.

Berglund continued to sink. He would go three or four games without recording a hit. He was awful on the faceoffs. He was slow. He couldn't win puck battles because he didn't compete.

Then, he got better. He started hitting, a little. He got better on faceoffs. He became a better defensive player. I found hope.

Now, he has leveled off. Except in goal scoring, where he has dropped off. We are 25% through the season, and he has one goal - against a Florida backup in the first game of the season.

He could be another Mike Eastwood, a slow-skating defensive center, but he isn't as good as Eastwood on faceoffs. So - he is a marginal player.

Wow.... I don't even know what to say to this. Do you watch any of the Blues games? Or just look at point production. Blind hate isn't a good way to evaluate a player. (I thought Tommy and Jeff had been banned from this board).

Historically, Berglund has been a player where 50% of his points will come from goals. Right now, he is about 85% of his points are assists and his is clutching his stick. That will change.

A big part of his historical production is the system, where our d tend to pick up assists on plays and it cuts down on the number of assist registered to forwards - hurt his numbers historically. (shots from the points or great outlet passes). If you pot 20 goals, which is a great season for a 2nd line player, it leads to averaging 40 points.

Last night is a prime example of why his play is so important. Hitch actually switched match ups in the 2nd period because Vladi's line was getting hemmed in their own zone. Sobotka is a nice complementary player, but he isn't big enough to cover for the kids. Berglund does a much better job of covering for the kids and ALSO creating room and turnover's with his reach and body. That line was man handled for much of the first 2 periods.

For all the flack he gets, he is very strong in the d zone and tends to shut down oppositions 2nd lines. Malkin was invisible against the Blues and so were other teams 2nd lines. Further during away games, Berglund tends to get matched up against the oppositions best lines as teams try to get their top players away from Backes. He has been on the ice for 6 goals against for the season. Considering the competition, that is pretty damn good.

 

[Halak Ness Monster]

Berglund is what he is. A nice 3rd line center on a good team that has always been a bit more potential than production.

His biggest weakness, aside from his skating ability, is inconsistency.

I like him but I've also accepted that he isn't the consistent 50-60 point top 6 center I thought he might be. He is a guy that has worked hard to become a solid two way player and he fits Hitch's system well.

 

[Renard]

Wow.... I don't even know what to say to this. Do you watch any of the Blues games? Or just look at point production. Blind hate isn't a good way to evaluate a player. (I thought Tommy and Jeff had been banned from this board).

Historically, Berglund has been a player where 50% of his points will come from goals. Right now, he is about 85% of his points are assists and his is clutching his stick. That will change.

A big part of his historical production is the system, where our d tend to pick up assists on plays and it cuts down on the number of assist registered to forwards - hurt his numbers historically. (shots from the points or great outlet passes). If you pot 20 goals, which is a great season for a 2nd line player, it leads to averaging 40 points.

Last night is a prime example of why his play is so important. Hitch actually switched match ups in the 2nd period because Vladi's line was getting hemmed in their own zone. Sobotka is a nice complementary player, but he isn't big enough to cover for the kids. Berglund does a much better job of covering for the kids and ALSO creating room and turnover's with his reach and body. That line was man handled for much of the first 2 periods.

For all the flack he gets, he is very strong in the d zone and tends to shut down oppositions 2nd lines. Malkin was invisible against the Blues and so were other teams 2nd lines. Further during away games, Berglund tends to get matched up against the oppositions best lines as teams try to get their top players away from Backes. He has been on the ice for 6 goals against for the season. Considering the competition, that is pretty damn good.

I've seen 350+ games in person. I'll see twenty games in person this season. Do I just look at point production? No. The game is about getting the puck and keeping it. You can be a valuable player and not score much. Which is why Sobotka is so much better a player than Berglund. Still, when you play on the second line, on the power play, kill penalties, and 4 on 4, and can't contribute more than one goal to the offense, I would expect to be labeled as a marginal player.

Your defense of Berglund is mainly about his defensive play. I admit he is a good defensive center, but slow. Like Mike Eastwood, a tall, slow, defensive center.

 

[rumrokh]

I've seen 350+ games in person. I'll see twenty games in person this season. Do I just look at point production? No. The game is about getting the puck and keeping it. You can be a valuable player and not score much. Which is why Sobotka is so much better a player than Berglund. Still, when you play on the second line, on the power play, kill penalties, and 4 on 4, and can't contribute more than one goal to the offense, I would expect to be labeled as a marginal player.

Your defense of Berglund is mainly about his defensive play. I admit he is a good defensive center, but slow. Like Mike Eastwood, a tall, slow, defensive center.

Over the past three seasons, Berglund has averaged 66th in forward goalscoring in the entire league. That means that on average, he's the second or third highest goalscoring forward on any given team. He's far, far, far from elite, but Berglund is a lot more than a defensive center. He's been playing injured and hasn't been finishing this year, but if you're ready to judge a player with an incredibly regular track record by 20 games this year, you've disqualified yourself from meaningful conversation.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

Over the past three seasons, Berglund has averaged 66th in forward goalscoring in the entire league. That means that on average, he's the third highest goalscoring forward on any given team. He's far, far, far from elite, but Berglund is a lot more than a defensive center. He's been playing injured and hasn't been finishing this year, but if you're ready to judge a player with an incredibly regular track record by 20 games this year, you've disqualified yourself from meaningful conversation.

The problem with Berglund is his inconsistency. You're right though, you really have to look at his career stats more than his single season.

 

[rumrokh]

The problem with Berglund is his inconsistency. You're right though, you really have to look at his career stats more than his single season.

The problem with most players is their inconsistency. Seriously. David Backes had 6 goals last season and only three more points than Berglund had. Pietrangelo is one of the few best defenders in the league and everyone was on his ass for almost half of last season. Crosby just had a ten game streak with no goals. Everybody loves Sobotka, but that guy is wildly inconsistent in offensive effectiveness. It happens to everybody and when you're talking about a player who isn't terrific to begin with, they look even worse when they're on a cold streak.

 

[Renard]

The problem with Berglund is his inconsistency. You're right though, you really have to look at his career stats more than his single season.

Goals and assists are the only stats they report in the newspaper. They are superficial stats for the casual fan. Do they tell you if the guy is hustling, winning battles for the puck, hitting, giving the puck away, taking it away, being effective on the forecheck, winning faceoffs? No.

Backes had a bad year in the goal scoring department last year, but in all the other ways I just mentioned, he was a stud.

Berglund's offensive production is awful this year, but if he was playing well in other aspects of the game, it wouldn't matter much.

If Bergy was scoring 30 goals a year, that would offset his being soft and slow. But you can't have a guy who is soft, slow and scores five goals a year as a guy on the second line and on the power play.

Berglund seems like a good guy. He tries hard. I don't hate him. I just don't like his game.

 

[tfriede2]

All extremely fair and valid points. While that administration was good reasonably good at using their first pick to select a guy who would go on to play in the NHL, it also begs the question if they were much too conservative with their picks. Oshie was originally ranked as the 43rd top NA skater in the draft, and we chose him at #24 and touted him as the next coming of Jesus. Meanwhile, James Neal was chosen #33 and was ranked #19 NA skater. Sure, hindsight is 20/20, but which one would you rather have today?

I'm not sure what you mean here with your Oshie example. He was not considered a "safe" or conservative pick at all - that pick was viewed as a risk at the time...it would be like saying Calgary picking Jankowski with their first round pick was considered conservative. Oshie panned out in a big way and would likely be picked in the top 15 if that draft were re-done.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

There are some things to be critical of with the Blues draft history, but the Oshie pick is one of the best vindicated moves they've made. I don't follow the logic in that criticism.

 

[BlueDream]

Yeah Oshie was a great pick.

Every team passed on Neal once and some teams passed on him twice. After the first round it's really a crapshoot. You can't seriously be mad at the Blues for failing to get guys in the 2nd round just because of hindsight.

 

[thedustman]

I can't wait for berglund to be back after that outing against the bruins. It proved to me that Berglund is a necessary glue for Tank, Stewart, Roy, Paajarvi, and a few others. He is definitely part of our team, because tonight in the 3rd period, Boston looked like the team, and we looked like an AHL assembly of future 2nd liners (albeit with some heart)

 

[Frenzy31]

I can't wait for berglund to be back after that outing against the bruins. It proved to me that Berglund is a necessary glue for Tank, Stewart, Roy, Paajarvi, and a few others. He is definitely part of our team, because tonight in the 3rd period, Boston looked like the team, and we looked like an AHL assembly of future 2nd liners (albeit with some heart)

That is the second game in a row where our 2nd line has spent a chunk of time hemmed in their zone. Vladi is a tough player, but against big bodies with skill down low he can't handle it. That line looks completely lost. They moved Morrow up to add size to that line.

On the upside it looks like Roy is starting to settle in with Stewart. I liked Schwartz on the wing with those two. Create some pretty good offense and made some nice plays in small spaces.

 

[Frenzy31]

Berglund's offensive production is awful this year, but if he was playing well in other aspects of the game, it wouldn't matter much.

.

Wow.... Of those 20 games you are going to this year, have you actually attended one yet. Or are you waiting till January. Maybe trying watching the game instead of spending time in the restroom, because no one else who is watching the game is seeing what you say you are.

 

[ManyIdeas]

I'm honestly happy with everyone's play so far, including 21.

Hell, Morrow and Roy have grown on me, and Leopold has been a very dependable player.

 

[illninofan*]

That is the second game in a row where our 2nd line has spent a chunk of time hemmed in their zone. Vladi is a tough player, but against big bodies with skill down low he can't handle it. That line looks completely lost. They moved Morrow up to add size to that line.

On the upside it looks like Roy is starting to settle in with Stewart. I liked Schwartz on the wing with those two. Create some pretty good offense and made some nice plays in small spaces.

Kind of off-topic, but what else do we need to be able to handle teams like Boston and LA?

Chicago isn't nearly as physical and they BEAT them for the cup, and we know how well we'd do in a seven game series against the Hawks. We were saying this last season that we match up much better against Chicago or San Jose than a team like Los Angeles.

 

[Multimoodia]

Kind of off-topic, but what else do we need to be able to handle teams like Boston and LA?

Chicago isn't nearly as physical and they BEAT them for the cup, and we know how well we'd do in a seven game series against the Hawks. We were saying this last season that we match up much better against Chicago or San Jose than a team like Los Angeles.

Chicago and teams of their ilk (Colorado in the future possibly) beat LA, Boston etc. via team speed and the ability to finish on chances. You send enough burners and the Bruins/Kings of the league have difficulty getting their system in place before the other team is past them.
Chicago then has a good enough defense to keep from getting hemmed in their own zone.

Not sure what the Blues could do to beat LA/Boston since they are not going to revamp the entire team to take said teams out. Playing power vs. power the Blues need bigger, better players who can score on opportunities given to them.
Or at least the ability to complete a pass which seemed to have left them last night.