Are 2013Blues a better team than 2012Blues?
View Single Post
01-24-2013, 03:28 PM
Jake the Snake Man
Join Date: Mar 2006
To add to what has been said...
Assuming everybody plays about how they did last season, the Blues are a better team just because of added depth and scoring. To my point: Langenbrunner and D'Agostini saw decent time on scoring lines last year, but have both been healthy scratches for two of three games (both of which were better performances without them). Part of that is due to injuries to Perron, Steen, and McDonald last season, but it's also due to adding Tarasenko and Schwartz.
Stewart also looks to have turned it around. He's healthier, faster, and appears more focused.
The biggest question marks are
Health, particularly that of Andy McDonald
Can Cole or Redden be better than Colaiacovo for the whole year?
Can Halak and Elliott repeat their great performances?
Can Stewart rebound?
Deadline acquisitions will revolve around the answers to those questions, most likely.
I think most Blues fans agree that the Blues are better this year - or at least have more potential without losing any reliability.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by rumrokh