6-way tie for 5th in defenseman points with 40. Weber stayed at 40, the two guys at 39 each got an assist and all three guys at 38 got two assists. Karlsson's obviously going to win it but 2d is only 44 (Brian Campbell), 3d is Byfuglien (albeit in ~14 fewer games than the group) and Edler with 42, then all the 40s (Weber, Suter, Chara, Pietrangelo, Phaneuf, Wideman).
However, this 29 points in 29 pace, if he keeps it up, may get Pietrangelo to 2d (55 points).
Pietrangelo has to get some consideration for the Norris, could hit 50 points and the top defenseman on what could be a record setting defense. I think the only lock is Karlsson (just because of his points) the only other names in the conversation should be Chara, Weber and Pietrangelo but you know they will probably throw Lidstrom in there just because its Lidstrom and he might retire.
Want to preface this by saying I like Bernie Miklasz in a lot of ways. I don't agree with everything he writes or how he handles everything but I think he's far too unfairly maligned and indeed knows more about hockey than is given credit for knowing.
But in an 1100+ word, 27-paragraph piece titled "Blues are the surprise of the NHL" which purports to explain how this successful season happened, the word "Pietrangelo" (or "Shattenkirk," for that matter) is not mentioned once.
Quote:
Here we are on March 8, with the Blues proudly sitting atop the Western Conference standings, one point ahead of Vancouver and two in front of rival Detroit. Anything seems possible now, including a sustained run through the postseason.
How did the Blues get there?
The oversight leapt out at me. Pietrangelo is by far the biggest reason on the ice the Blues are where they are. There are plenty of reasons, many important, but true franchise-defenseman caliber greatness has to be the starting place. Even before Hitchcock, IMO. Hitchcock simply can't do this with any old team. He could make teams better with his system, but it's Pietrangelo's effect on the entire defense that actually makes what Hitchcock wants to do possible. Pietrangelo has ability way beyond teaching or structure.
I don't think for one minute Bernie isn't in awe of what Pietrangelo can do. I don't mean to suggest he doesn't know. But I think if you're sitting down to write a piece about how did this all happen it's a big mistake not to spend at least some time talking about how special this guy is. He referred to the 1999 Rams and two Cardinals seasons. Yeah, pretty sure they had MAJOR impact players no matter how shrewd the coaching. It would be like writing a piece on the 1999 Rams starting by praising Vermeil, his offensive coordinator, then going on to list Bruce and Holt and the offense and 10 other guys and talk about how they'd bonded and were scrappy fighters and never once utter the word Warner. Alex Pietrangelo is one of the top five defensemen in the NHL, right now. That wasn't true last year (he was easily top-20) but he is an incredible impact player. He has the exact same numbers as Weber, Suter, Chara, etc. Does he face less elite assignments or play worse defense? It's nearly impossible to overstate what a huge impact that has had in taking this entire team to the next level. Yes, the supporting cast is very talented and full of potential and hard working and well-coached but holy forest for the trees, batman. It's Alex Pietrangelo first and last that's making this happen.
The Blues are 21-6-2 (.759) in 2012 while Pietrangelo's been on his 29 pts in 29 games run. That's +15 of the overall +24 for the season. He takes them to a whole other level on both sides of the ice.
Last edited by PocketNines: 03-08-2012 at 05:08 AM.
Want to preface this by saying I like Bernie Miklasz in a lot of ways. I don't agree with everything he writes or how he handles everything but I think he's far too unfairly maligned and indeed knows more about hockey than is given credit for knowing.
But in an 1100+ word, 27-paragraph piece titled "Blues are the surprise of the NHL" which purports to explain how this successful season happened, the word "Pietrangelo" (or "Shattenkirk," for that matter) is not mentioned once.
The oversight leapt out at me. Pietrangelo is by far the biggest reason on the ice the Blues are where they are. There are plenty of reasons, many important, but true franchise-defenseman caliber greatness has to be the starting place. Even before Hitchcock, IMO. Hitchcock simply can't do this with any old team. He could make teams better with his system, but it's Pietrangelo's effect on the entire defense that actually makes what Hitchcock wants to do possible. Pietrangelo has ability way beyond teaching or structure.
I don't think for one minute Bernie isn't in awe of what Pietrangelo can do. I don't mean to suggest he doesn't know. But I think if you're sitting down to write a piece about how did this all happen it's a big mistake not to spend at least some time talking about how special this guy is. He referred to the 1999 Rams and two Cardinals seasons. Yeah, pretty sure they had MAJOR impact players no matter how shrewd the coaching. It would be like writing a piece on the 1999 Rams starting by praising Vermeil, his offensive coordinator, then going on to list Bruce and Holt and the offense and 10 other guys and talk about how they'd bonded and were scrappy fighters and never once utter the word Warner. Alex Pietrangelo is one of the top five defensemen in the NHL, right now. That wasn't true last year (he was easily top-20) but he is an incredible impact player. He has the exact same numbers as Weber, Suter, Chara, etc. Does he face less elite assignments or play worse defense? It's nearly impossible to overstate what a huge impact that has had in taking this entire team to the next level. Yes, the supporting cast is very talented and full of potential and hard working and well-coached but holy forest for the trees, batman. It's Alex Pietrangelo first and last that's making this happen.
The Blues are 21-6-2 (.759) in 2012 while Pietrangelo's been on his 29 pts in 29 games run. That's +15 of the overall +24 for the season. He takes them to a whole other level on both sides of the ice.
Perhaps it was updated since you read it, but from the linked article: "The highly skilled young defensemen Alex Pietrangelo and Kevin Shattenkirk are displaying remarkable maturity."
Perhaps it was updated since you read it, but from the linked article: "The highly skilled young defensemen Alex Pietrangelo and Kevin Shattenkirk are displaying remarkable maturity."
Yeah it was totally updated! I read it and reread it to make sure I hadn't missed. I tweeted him asking about it around the same time I posted and he replied 6 hours ago, so it would make sense one line was added. He said he didn't think he needed to mention Petro since everybody had to already be aware. He also said agree to disagree on relative impact of Hitch v. Petro. I said it's like Martz/Warner. Would the Rams have been as successful with any old QB in Martz' system? Or did he need the special player to execute the system?
Yeah, it's no personal grudge against Bernie. I always liked reading columns from him 20 years ago when my dad would clip them and send them to me at college. And he went out of his way to mention me in the nice section of his Saturday column a few years ago, which some friends from back home saw and got in touch again. I think he's a good writer and when something important and emotional happens in sports, it's Bernie I want writing that piece. I just enjoy debating arguments and ideas. My criticism shouldn't be read as outrage but enthusiasm for the debate.
Yeah, you didn't come off as bitter or outraged or anything of the sort. You're usually pretty articulate with your posts and I agree that a mention of Petro was very much needed. I was just giving you s... since they actually tweaked the article for you, haha.
