HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Your 2012-2013 St. Louis Blues

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
06-06-2012, 03:56 PM
  #851
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
And, pray tell, why exactly can't Stewart match Perron/McDonald numbers.
The guy hit 64 points in 09-10. Both Perron and McDonald pace at 60-65 point levels.

If Stewart bounces back he is far and away our best goal scorer, easily one of our top 5 most talented players(D men and goalies included) and is a top line player on literally every team in the League. IMO you are putting way to much stock his his poor showing this year and completely ignoring his past performance.
You often cite the importance of different systems teams use. When you look at how Stewart produced all those goals in Colorado (and initially in '11 after the trade), you see two things really stand out. First, you see him fly the zone a little early, catch a pass, rocket a slapshot on an odd man rush coming down right wing. Lots of that. Hitchcock won't play him if he flies the zone here. Second, you see him cleaning up rebounds on the power play, either tipping shots in from the crease or standing on the far doorstep waiting to put home rebounds. Hitchcock was eventually forced to remove him from the PP entirely because he wasn't producing anything.

So, how exactly is he going to get back to his old numbers?

PocketNines is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 04:02 PM
  #852
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
You often cite the importance of different systems teams use. When you look at how Stewart produced all those goals in Colorado (and initially in '11 after the trade), you see two things really stand out. First, you see him fly the zone a little early, catch a pass, rocket a slapshot on an odd man rush coming down right wing. Lots of that. Hitchcock won't play him if he flies the zone here. Second, you see him cleaning up rebounds on the power play, either tipping shots in from the crease or standing on the far doorstep waiting to put home rebounds. Hitchcock was eventually forced to remove him from the PP entirely because he wasn't producing anything.

So, how exactly is he going to get back to his old numbers?
By becoming more of a traditional PF, which his off-season workout regime should help with. Backes and Arnott both scored the majority of their goals by planting their big butts in front of the goalie. Stewart wasn't able to do that in this system because he was consistently a step behind the rest of the play. If he really does get his conditioning level up to where he can keep pace with the rest of the team, he will be able to crash the net like Backes does; and Stewart has already proven that he is just as good, if not better than Backes in front of the net. If the goals are coming for Stewart, the rest of his points will also.

kimzey59 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 04:11 PM
  #853
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
By becoming more of a traditional PF, which his off-season workout regime should help with. Backes and Arnott both scored the majority of their goals by planting their big butts in front of the goalie. Stewart wasn't able to do that in this system because he was consistently a step behind the rest of the play. If he really does get his conditioning level up to where he can keep pace with the rest of the team, he will be able to crash the net like Backes does; and Stewart has already proven that he is just as good, if not better than Backes in front of the net. If the goals are coming for Stewart, the rest of his points will also.
I guess what I'm saying is this. I think he wouldn't have had the numbers he had in Colorado if they hadn't had such an ole defense and needed to win games 9-5 like that one game where he killed us. That's why they traded Shattenkirk and aimed for EJ – so many offensive D, so few defensive D. And I think they realized that Stewart's numbers were inflated by that run-and-gun system. He'd put those same numbers up on a team like Toronto or Ottawa but never on a team like the Kings or Blues as the Blues are currently constructed.

Maybe hiring a nutritionist and ok for serial really trying this time he'll have a big rebound year, but just objectively, the odds are against it. Because his two way play is poor, he really has to put up over .7 PPG to justify a top six role on this team; Oshie and Steen at .65-.68 are far more valuable given all their other attributes that Stewart lacks and will continue to lack even IF he becomes a more effective rebound cleaner. That means Stewart needs to put up 58 or more points to justify being a top six player in St. Louis. If he's not doing that, really, what's so bad about salvaging value? It also means he has to double his production or else he's a 3.25M third liner on a budget team with other valuable options riding the pine because of the glut.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 04:15 PM
  #854
SneakerPimp82
Registered User
 
SneakerPimp82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Chicago, IL
Country: United States
Posts: 1,691
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to SneakerPimp82
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
How could you guys POSSIBLY want more LHD? Are you trying to corner the market the way the Dukes went after frozen concentrated orange juice?
I just watched that movie last night. They don't make them like that anymore. Hilarious.

SneakerPimp82 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 04:51 PM
  #855
Ignore42me*
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 172
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
I guess what I'm saying is this. I think he wouldn't have had the numbers he had in Colorado if they hadn't had such an ole defense and needed to win games 9-5 like that one game where he killed us. That's why they traded Shattenkirk and aimed for EJ – so many offensive D, so few defensive D. And I think they realized that Stewart's numbers were inflated by that run-and-gun system. He'd put those same numbers up on a team like Toronto or Ottawa but never on a team like the Kings or Blues as the Blues are currently constructed.

Maybe hiring a nutritionist and ok for serial really trying this time he'll have a big rebound year, but just objectively, the odds are against it. Because his two way play is poor, he really has to put up over .7 PPG to justify a top six role on this team; Oshie and Steen at .65-.68 are far more valuable given all their other attributes that Stewart lacks and will continue to lack even IF he becomes a more effective rebound cleaner. That means Stewart needs to put up 58 or more points to justify being a top six player in St. Louis. If he's not doing that, really, what's so bad about salvaging value? It also means he has to double his production or else he's a 3.25M third liner on a budget team with other valuable options riding the pine because of the glut.
While i often disagree with Kimzey, you clearly didnt read what he said. Id add Stewart has all the physical attributes to be a solid two-way player and his conditioning was a big reason he was always behind in the play. Along with not being acclimated to any game other then run-and-gun. The thing from past seasons is that we've seen he know how to get to ther front of the net and what to do. What makes you so sure that he cant succeed next season.

Ignore42me* is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 05:06 PM
  #856
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,540
vCash: 270
A well conditioned Stewart can have a 2-way game that is at least just as good as Perron's. Stewart needs to be able to skate and get to where he needs to be. It's not like his defensive assignments are anything crazy.

Pocket, I really don't get why you don't think a proper offseason routine would make a difference. A better workout routine, a decrease in body fat, and time dedicated to learning how to play in our system would make a world of difference.

I was and am still in favor of a trade involving Stewart, I just think it would be better if we moved Perron, as we can get the piece that we truly need, but you can't just ignore the fact that if Stewart gets into shape, that he will be in a much better position to succeed.

He was a 1st round pick and had 2 successful NHL seasons, so it's not like he doesn't know how to play the game.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 05:27 PM
  #857
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
Do you guys believe Jackman will be a Blue next season?
All I know is my gut says maybe.

(I would give it about a 65% chance of happening right now.)

EastonBlues22 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 05:33 PM
  #858
EastonBlues22
Mod Supervisor
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
EastonBlues22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,894
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
I guess how I'd put it is if the Blues could trade Stewart either for Joe Morrow or the 16th pick in this year's draft, I choose Morrow, no question. Here's my preferred order of operations on a Stewart trade:

1. Package for a top-two center (e.g., Staal) OR for a bonafide #2 LHD (e.g., Yandle, Giordano).
2. Close to straight up for a known prospect (e.g. Morrow, Despres, Gormley, Brodin) at defense or center. Minor balancing if necessary.
3. Straight up for a first round pick in 2012 (e.g., Washington with their situation seems like a good fit since 1. They have the 11th 2. They're losing Semin and not replacing him with Kuznetsov 3. Eastern team).
4. 2013 1st and 2013 3d as compensation for offer sheet.
---- GAP ----
5. Pay him 3.25M for one year and hope like hell he hits the bullseye sweet spot production-wise where you can retain him as a solid player without having to overpay and lose other guys.
6. Trade him for a totally redundant piece (e.g., Gunnarsson), as now you've traded an asset for something easily available on the market.

Reason I'm talking about the third item on the list is it strikes me as more likely than some of the other options. In a CBA summer, #4 is even less likely than normal and offer sheets are rare though Stewart's situation could tempt a few teams who play more wide open styles or have trouble attracting free agents. #1 would be fantastic but won't be easy to believe in until it's already happened. Plus, the guys we're targeting play for teams whose fans generally hate the idea of Stewart being the centerpiece in such a trade. #2 idea, in part because we're on a board biased toward higher quality prospects, fans tend to hate the idea of trading the guy they've been excitedly following for a suspect player who had a terrible year.
Thanks for the clarification. I think that's a perfectly reasonable stance. My own "gap" line falls between #2 and #3 on your list (with another gap before #6), with #5 moving up the charts a bit and everything else staying relative.

I'd like to give him a chance to rehabilitate his value if #1 or #2 doesn't come to pass, and a hot start (whether sustainable or not) could get someone to bite on that type of deal if no one will now. Not everyone is going to be able to fill out their scoring like they would hope this offseason, so he should remain movable regardless of what happens. If 20 or so games into next season it's looking like more of the same, then his value isn't really that far off from where he is now and I would start entertaining #3 type offers for the next draft, with #4 and #6 entering the equation next offseason if we still have him after the trade deadline.

EastonBlues22 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 06:00 PM
  #859
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,540
vCash: 270
My thing is that he lost that burst of speed that he had when he first came here, so if conditioning gets that back, problem solved IMO.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 07:04 PM
  #860
TK 421
Donut Squad
 
TK 421's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignore42me View Post
While i often disagree with Kimzey, you clearly didnt read what he said. Id add Stewart has all the physical attributes to be a solid two-way player and his conditioning was a big reason he was always behind in the play. Along with not being acclimated to any game other then run-and-gun. The thing from past seasons is that we've seen he know how to get to ther front of the net and what to do. What makes you so sure that he cant succeed next season.
I see a whole lot of Stewart apologists throwing his conditioning out as a major reason why he had a crap year. Funny thing is, people really didn't start using that until Stewart stated this offseason would be his most important to date. A whole bunch of people bought it and then latched tight to that as the reason he sucked(the same people who would hold onto any little thing at all in the hope that he'll rebound). Sorry, but his lack of desire to be better is the primary reason. You can certainly cite his lack of hockey sense or reads as a secondary reason, but the guy looked like he didn't even care for the vast majority of the season. We're supposed to believe he's going to accomplish a complete 180 degree turn around? What evidence did you see that would indicate such a reversal?

TK 421 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 07:22 PM
  #861
Harley83
Registered User
 
Harley83's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 294
vCash: 500
Stewart just didn't seem to have the enthusiasm he did when he first came on. When he first came he would stand in front of the goal and bang in rebounded pucks, get in the middle of scrums, grind it out in the corners and you just didn't see much of that this year. In some ways it would be bad to lose him though because what he can offer as far as the enforcer role and the potential he has as a goal scorer because St. Louis is a little light on goal scorers at the RW position right now. I have a feeling that The Tank coming over will see Langenbrunner going elsewhere.

Harley83 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 09:34 PM
  #862
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
TK421,

What evidence do you need? Stewart was a 28 goal scorer the previous two years. If you saw the even strength goal scoring numbers he scored the same number of even strength goals as Backes and I'm sure Backes had at least a couple of empty netters. Oshie only scored one more even strength goal. Stewart is 24 not 34. His skills haven't eroded. Conditioning had little to do with his season. I believe after having a poor year and seeing what Arnott does he decided to change his diet and go on more of an extensive work out regiment. A very sensible thing to do.

On another note trading Stewart for a mid first round pick is a big gamble. For one, the draft choice at best won't be able to contribute for at least 2 years and there is no guarantee that whoever they pick will pan out. Stewart is a proven goal scorer and a good fighter. We'll see what happens.


Last edited by stlweir: 06-07-2012 at 07:24 AM. Reason: spelling
stlweir is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 09:51 PM
  #863
Crumblin Erb Brooks
Registered User
 
Crumblin Erb Brooks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Grenyarnia
Country: United States
Posts: 3,168
vCash: 500
I still think Stewart is going to get moved now that Tarasenko is going to come over. First and foremost, he is our best trading chip. I think they would move Stewart before Berglund, Perron, and Oshie, and Stewart would bring more in a trade than Dagostini. Stewart still has a lot of value, and we will need to be moving something of value to get a quality center or dman.

Crumblin Erb Brooks is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 09:54 PM
  #864
Use the Schwartz*
****in' eh
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,512
vCash: 500
Add me to the "dont trade Stewart" list.

At the very least, he scores 15 goals and is a above average 3rd liner who can fight. As long as he's working hard.

I don't see him scoring less then 20 goals this year anyway. We'll be preaching him as our best player come December like the Blues fans we are.

Use the Schwartz* is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 10:10 PM
  #865
The Note
Bullies
 
The Note's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: STL
Country: United States
Posts: 2,593
vCash: 500
I don't necessarily want Stewart to be traded just to trade him but I would much rather see him moved before Perron/Oshie.

The Note is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 10:25 PM
  #866
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignore42me View Post
While i often disagree with Kimzey, you clearly didnt read what he said. Id add Stewart has all the physical attributes to be a solid two-way player and his conditioning was a big reason he was always behind in the play. Along with not being acclimated to any game other then run-and-gun. The thing from past seasons is that we've seen he know how to get to ther front of the net and what to do. What makes you so sure that he cant succeed next season.
I didn't read what kimzey said? You toss out "not being acclimated to any game other than the run-and-gun" as if it's trivial to simply become a totally different type of player. Do you or others honestly believe it's a function of simply being a little more fit? Are we really establishing this huge fiction that Stewart's problems were a result of him being out of shape? I get that people want there to be a reason for things but it's getting silly. Players don't often suddenly change their skillsets overnight or because of a solid training summer. It's a fairly ridiculous notion and it's kind of stunning to see so many people thinking this is a real thing. He's going to work out harder therefore he'll be a 2-way player. Sure, he can be a little more physically potent but that won't change him being a poor puck handler in any kind of traffic, that won't change him not knowing how to use his teammates, that won't change his anticipation of the play and knowing what lane to be in to interrupt a pass.

What kimzey said was that by being more physically conditioned he'll wind up scoring more goals from the front of the net the way he used to score. But there wasn't much pushback to my argument about how he still has a large number of goals cut down by not being allowed to cheat defensively in this system the way he would be allowed in Colorado. Because kimzey is smart enough to know it's a good point. I just don't think he's going to become a 30-30 guy from better abliity to battle in front of the net because of better conditioning. And if he isn't a 58 point guy (.7 PPG over 82 games) then he's not giving you enough reason to play him over two wingers who should be .7PPG+ (McDonald and Perron) or the two wingers who'll be just shy but have vastly better two-way games (Oshie and Steen) even if all the things kimzey suggests come to pass. Plus there's Tarasenko. Therefore if he can't crack the top four wingers on the team, my argument is are you really losing much by mining value from him as an asset before it's too late? I get why many want to believe nothing but the best, but let's just admit that there's a very realistic possibility the system is an ill fit. And if he's off to another struggling start then suddenly the bottom falls out of his value. I want what's best for the Blues as an organization and I'd hate to see that happen. I see very few folks acknowledging that it's a very legitimate possibility it goes down that way and recognizing there are more angles to consider here.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 10:48 PM
  #867
wilco5886
Come On You Spurs
 
wilco5886's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Champbana
Country: United States
Posts: 817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post
I didn't read what kimzey said? You toss out "not being acclimated to any game other than the run-and-gun" as if it's trivial to simply become a totally different type of player. Do you or others honestly believe it's a function of simply being a little more fit? Are we really establishing this huge fiction that Stewart's problems were a result of him being out of shape? I get that people want there to be a reason for things but it's getting silly. Players don't often suddenly change their skillsets overnight or because of a solid training summer. It's a fairly ridiculous notion and it's kind of stunning to see so many people thinking this is a real thing. He's going to work out harder therefore he'll be a 2-way player. Sure, he can be a little more physically potent but that won't change him being a poor puck handler in any kind of traffic, that won't change him not knowing how to use his teammates, that won't change his anticipation of the play and knowing what lane to be in to interrupt a pass.

What kimzey said was that by being more physically conditioned he'll wind up scoring more goals from the front of the net the way he used to score. But there wasn't much pushback to my argument about how he still has a large number of goals cut down by not being allowed to cheat defensively in this system the way he would be allowed in Colorado. Because kimzey is smart enough to know it's a good point. I just don't think he's going to become a 30-30 guy from better abliity to battle in front of the net because of better conditioning. And if he isn't a 58 point guy (.7 PPG over 82 games) then he's not giving you enough reason to play him over two wingers who should be .7PPG+ (McDonald and Perron) or the two wingers who'll be just shy but have vastly better two-way games (Oshie and Steen) even if all the things kimzey suggests come to pass. Plus there's Tarasenko. Therefore if he can't crack the top four wingers on the team, my argument is are you really losing much by mining value from him as an asset before it's too late? I get why many want to believe nothing but the best, but let's just admit that there's a very realistic possibility the system is an ill fit. And if he's off to another struggling start then suddenly the bottom falls out of his value. I want what's best for the Blues as an organization and I'd hate to see that happen. I see very few folks acknowledging that it's a very legitimate possibility it goes down that way and recognizing there are more angles to consider here.
Couldn't have said it better myself.

wilco5886 is offline  
Old
06-06-2012, 11:34 PM
  #868
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,540
vCash: 270
Stewart won't ever be a 2-way player, just like Perron will never really be a 2-way player.

Stewart's problem is all mental. I think he let his instant success with us go to his head and he thought he could succeed with just his talent. Last season proved that wasn't true. Stewart's poor conditioning is just a result of his mental weakness because he didn't prepare for the season.

If he actually PREPARES for the upcoming season, there is NO reason to believe that he can't rebound. Preparing for the season includes: conditioning, on-ice work, and getting ready mentally.

Stewart obviously had more problems than just conditioning, but being well conditioned, means he plays faster and stronger, which would have helped a lot.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:00 AM
  #869
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
He's going to be paid a minimum of 3.25M and if he underwhelms they'll need to do the same yet again or lose him for nothing. And if he overperforms there will be no home team discount playing on that kind of prove it contract. A prove it contract is like a bet. You actually do prove it and you find yourself one year from UFA there's no way you're giving the team who took the other side of the bet a discount.

If they trimmed Stewart from the roster and replaced him with Tarasenko, they would not miss a beat and would frankly be better. AND they will save a couple million to invest elsewhere, perhaps the difference in adding that key LHD. Evidence: he contributed a tiny amount to this year's success and they had 109 points and won a playoff series during which he was scratched for a game.

What is the risk in losing Stewart? Because many now seem like they want to pretend there's no risk in keeping him.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:08 AM
  #870
Mike Liut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,073
vCash: 50
Stewart has the hockey IQ of a bullfrog

Mike Liut is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:11 AM
  #871
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,540
vCash: 270
We need his potential goal scoring ability more than you think we do.

I really think that Armstrong is going to make a trade with one of the wingers. I think the most likely are either Stewart or Perron, and only one of those will be able to acquire a piece that we truly need.

Lets say Stewart gets in the 50-60 point range, that production still won't be demanding the big bucks. Lets say he exceeds that amount, he would prove he is worth keeping or at the minimum the prove it contract was worth it.

After the season he had, there is really no risk with Stewart either way, as the expectations will be very low. If he succeeds elsewhere, no one will blame Army for moving him. If he stays and fails again, maybe we can dump him somewhere or he just plays on the 3rd or 4th line.

We are losing a lot of salary, so his 3.25 won't be that big of a deal. More than likely we could have a typical Blues offseason and not make a big spending move, even if we do move Stewart, so you can't say that if we keep Stewart it prevents us from get Suter or Parise or any of the other high price players.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:37 AM
  #872
BlueDream
Registered User
 
BlueDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Country: United States
Posts: 7,604
vCash: 500
I don't see the Blues shedding size and grit this offseason, I see them adding a little more. We could have used more against LA. PocketNines always has to believe he's right but I think Armstrong will give Stewart another chance and keep him in there since he actually can be a valuable part of this team and provides a presence that nobody else does.

I just don't understand why some people can't realize that, as if nobody else in hockey has ever had a bad season? We made a pretty big trade to get Stewart, I don't think we're just going to dump him after one season, unless we get a really good offer that can help our team NOW (not a draft pick).

If it were up to our fanbase I don't even know how many players we would have left. Berglund would for sure be gone, Oshie would too, and Stewart and Perron would be next. Heck, not even sure if we would still have Pietrangelo either. Just doesn't work like that. These guys are all around 24.

BlueDream is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:40 AM
  #873
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,540
vCash: 270
We got bullied by LA, we need size in this lineup. We can't have the only top 9 forwards taller than 6 foot be Backes, Berglund, and Steen, as only one of those consistently uses their size.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 11:30 AM
  #874
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
So now the Blues are a small team? Compared with the rest of the league they're widely considered one of the biggest, most physical teams out there. What happened against LA was the defense couldn't smoothly handle the LA forecheck. If it had been the Blues smoothly clearing their own zone and constantly pressuring LA's defense it would have looked like the Blues "bullying" the Kings. The other aspect of this was the Kings gained institutional knowledge from their playoff exits the previous two seasons that to win you have to initiate and not retaliate. The Blues got a taste of that and it's not a function of playing or not playing Chris Stewart that is the difference, as the argument is specifically becoming (we can't trade Stewart because it makes a playoff difference). It has nothing to do with one guy (who doesn't play that way anyhow). It's a function of a team-wide attitude and understanding that you hit first and let the other team react with bad penalties.

PocketNines is offline  
Old
06-07-2012, 12:30 PM
  #875
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Colorado just gave David Jones the 4 x 4 Brad Boyes contract. Wow.

PocketNines is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:06 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.