HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > St. Louis Blues
Notices

Pick 6

View Poll Results: Who are your top-6 defenseman? ONLY pick 6
Erik Johnson 40 100.00%
Barrett Jackman 39 97.50%
Christian Backman 25 62.50%
Eric Brewer 40 100.00%
Jay McKee 37 92.50%
Bryce Salvador 24 60.00%
Jeff Woywitka 23 57.50%
Matt Walker 2 5.00%
Roman Polak 10 25.00%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-14-2007, 07:32 PM
  #26
lee17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Salvador

I think some folks are understanding what I'm trying to say, I don't dislike Salvador, it's just he's Salvador, what you get is what you see. As far as his zone coverage if he'd step up instead of back up he wouldn't be blocking so many shots. He's big enough, he's a good skater, he's tough enough, but he has yet to open the tool box, and at this stage of his career I doubt the mysterious keys appear. Woywitka , Polak,
even Backman are young enough to improve. I still don't understand why Backman wasn't playing PP point the last half of the year, he's supposed to be an offensive guy and the Blues essentially made him damaged goods as far as trade concerns by not letting him at least prove he can or can't cut it as the QB, first or second unit. Our power play was dreadful most of the year, Brewer is not the answer for ANY pp, why not let the kid sink or swim. I realize it sounds like I'm contradicting myself concerning EJ on the PP, but Backman isn't a rookie, he's been around long enough to either step up or off. Right now the 2 most marketable d-men we have are Salvy and Backman. If Salvy is as good as you think he should bring far more value than Backman, he had a good 2nd half and as has been stated he and Mckee are essentially the same, the biggest difference being Mckee's outrageous price tag. I'm not trying to dis the guy, but if the Blues are going forward to stand pat with what you get is what you see isn't going to cut it.

lee17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-14-2007, 09:57 PM
  #27
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
The Blues would absolutely love Backman to step up and take one of the point jobs on the pp. Unfortunately, you can't hardly get him to shoot the puck when he is there. If, he doesn't get traded, this will be make or break season for him. Either he turns all that potential into production, or the Blues will be looking for a new home for him.
There is no doubt the Blues need a good point man, but we are probably going to have to make do with what's available this year.

barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2007, 07:55 AM
  #28
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
Kimzey, I normally agree with you, but I think you are underrating the importance of a defenseman in the transition game. That is part of a defenseman's actual job.
I am NOT underrating that part of the game; you are underrating how effective Salvy is at moving the puck up ice. MOST of the time Salvy makes a very clean pass up ice. He doesn't do anything flashy with the puck but he is VERY reliable in regards to the transition game.

Quote:
We are blessed with a bunch of board chippers right now.
No, what we are "blessed" with right now is a number of "great passers" with poor vision. Most of our D men have good, hard passes but panic under pressure and can't find open men(Kitchen's screwy system made this VERY apparent). We have VERY few D men who are pure "board chippers"(Walker is the only one who really fits that description, and that's only because he's too slow to look for open players).

Quote:
The reason we were so good with MacInnis and Pronger was our transition game IE. the first pass out of the zone.
NO, the reason we were so good with mac and Pronger is because of the offense they had supporting them. With those two we ALWAYS had a group of forwards that would come back and help out defensive and largely eliminate the need for 90-110 foot passes. Pronger and Mac certainly had the ability to connect on those passes, but they didn't need to use that ability very often(as much fame as Pronger got for those passes he RARELY made more than 1 or 2 per game).

Quote:
The Blues do not move the puck very well out of their own zone.

1) Under Kitchen this was a fair statement to make; under Murray it is not.


2) The Blues, as currently constructed, simply don't have the foot speed for an effective up-ice rush(see Doug Weight, Dallas Drake, David Backes and Brad Boyes). For them to get the "head start" needed to generate breakway attempts they would have to completely abandon their defensive responisbilities and Murray won't allow that. That does NOT, however, mean that we don't have an effective transition game. It just means that we have to be a bit more creative in how we move up-ice.


The few players on our team that DO have the speed for that don't have the hands to cap off the plays their speed generates(calling Mr. Mayers and Mr. Johnson).


Quote:
Brewer is color blind, but he can carry the puck.
1) There was a SHOCKING difference between Brewer under Kitchen and Brewer under Murray. Under Murray Brewer drastically cut down on his bad passes.

2) While I would conceed this point to be true, you're ignoring the fact that Brewer is a VERY good passer when he sees his target. The ability is there, he just isn't there mentally.

Quote:
Jackman ices the puck too much. (home run passes, sometimes he hits)
Under Kitchen this was absolutely true.
Under Murray this is absolutely FALSE. After being benched by Murray, Jackman became the most effective puck distributor on the team BY FAR.


Quote:
Salvador has no need for teammates.
Could somebody PLEASE explain this statement to me; because I honestly don't have a clue what he means. Salvy rarely carries the puck and rarely makes a "bad" pass.

Quote:
Woywitka and Polak definitely need some work in that area, but show some promise.
Woywitka is in the same boat as Backman and Brewer; he has the skills to be a GREAT puck moving D man but doesn't have the mental game yet.

Polak is a seperate entity altogether. He is Salvador Jr.


Quote:
If you can find someone who will take Salvador as a #5 defenseman or #4, then let's make a deal for a forward. Salvador had the best season of his career, but I would trade him in a heartbeat for a high draft pick or a 20 goal scorer.
IF(and it is a VERY big IF) somebody were offering a 20 goal scorer for Salvador we'd be fools not to make that trade; but to my knowledge there isn't an offer like that on the table. I am NOT saying that we need to keep Salvy; ALL I'm saying that he is a LOT more valueable than a "#7 D man on a good team" like Lee17 stated.

One thing I WILL point out though is that Salvador likely has a lot more meaning to the team than his "market value" would indicate. He may only be a 4/5 D man; but he has taken on a leadership role here(he REALLY helped settle down Brewer after Murray took over), is one of the top shot blockers in the league.

Quote:
Keep in mind Kimzey, come playoff time, the entire team had to shut down. That doesn't say much for our roster be any good in general, when half the teams make the playoffs.

Again I'm going to ask for a translation.
I THINK you're saying that "because we missed the PO's our roster must not be very good".

My response to THAT would be this:


A) This team started the year 7-17-4 due almost entirely to a completely inept coach.
- Over that 28 game stretch we scored 60 goals and allowed 95 goals against.
- Over a full season that would project to a 21-49-12 record(54 points) with 176 goals for and 278 goals against.

B) We went on a 20-10-5 run from the time Murray took over until the trade deadline.
- Over this 35 game stretch we scored 97 goals and allowed 88 goals against.
- Over a full season that would project to a 47-23-12 record(106 points) with 227 goals for and 206 goals against.

C) From the deadline to the end of the year the team had a 7-8-4 record.
-Over this 19 game stretch we had 49 goals for and 50 goals against.
-Over a full season to a 30-35-17 record(77 points) with 214 goals for and 216 goals against.

MY analysis:
This team missing the PO's had VERY little to do with the talent on the ice. While it would certainly be nice to upgrade our offense; "lack of skill" was NOT our problem.

Quote:
I disagree that Mckee and Salvador are the same player also. McKee is one of the best positional players that I have seen over the past 30 years. RARELY do you see him caught out of position or caught up ice. He knows his limitations. If Salvador would watch and learn from McKee, then we may have something. Salvador runs around too much in his own zone. Bryce needs to shoot more. (He's got a good shot.) He needs to hold the puck longer and make a pass. (He has shown flashes, but last year elected to settle for dumping the puck in the neutral zone.) The game is more about puck control now, and I wish that Salvador would adjust.
1) A player cannot be a good shot blocker if he is not sound positionally. You may hink that Salvy "runs around in his own zone"; but I strongly disagree with this statement. Savly is VERY good positionally in regards to what his GOAL is. Salvy isn't the kind of player that wants to mow a guy down and jump start an odd-man rush. He is the kind of player that will keep the puck to the perimeter and make the easy pass out of the zone. McKee is the EXACT same type of player; with the exception that he's gotten a LOT more press from playing in Buffalo. The ONLY difference between these two is that McKee is a bit more mobile while Salvy has better offensive tools(he doesn't USE them, but he does have them). Positionally, mentally and physically, they are mirror images of one another.

Quote:
Otherwise, I would trade him, if he has any value. With the crew we have, I would make him a #7 as well or trade him and let the kids play. He is a very good defensive defenseman, but with the defensemen that we already have, he is expendable.
ONE of our D men is expendable; but I'm not convinced that Salvy is the who should be moved. Not when you consider his leadership ability, commitment to the team and relatively cheap Cap hit. I would MUCH rather get rid of Backman and his under-achieving, 2.3 mil Cap hit. Salvy is MUCH more worthy of his salary than Backman has been and has more worht to the team because of it.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-15-2007, 10:05 AM
  #29
Prussian_Blue
Registered User
 
Prussian_Blue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Country: Germany
Posts: 7,753
vCash: 500
I'm in agreement with pretty much everything kimzey says in his post above... but this part especially speaks the truth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
ONE of our D men is expendable; but I'm not convinced that Salvy is the who should be moved. Not when you consider his leadership ability, commitment to the team and relatively cheap Cap hit. I would MUCH rather get rid of Backman and his under-achieving, 2.3 mil Cap hit. Salvy is MUCH more worthy of his salary than Backman has been and has more worth to the team because of it.
I'm not particularly anxious to send Christian Backman packing just yet, but if it came down to a choice of trading either Backman or Salvador, Backman would be my choice to be moved because he has a higher "perceived" value to another team, and would return more in trade.

People knock Salvador because he hasn't put up big numbers, either on the socreboard or in penalty time, as a Blue. But he's been just about the most effective defenseman, all things considered, that the Blues have had over the last three years or so.

P_B


Prussian_Blue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2007, 04:37 PM
  #30
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
I am NOT underrating that part of the game; you are underrating how effective Salvy is at moving the puck up ice. MOST of the time Salvy makes a very clean pass up ice. He doesn't do anything flashy with the puck but he is VERY reliable in regards to the transition game.

The reason Salvy is such an excellent penalty killer is not only his positioning and maintaining his defensive shape, it is that he doesn't have to worry about a transition game. The only goal in creating a turnover is to ice the puck. Creating any kind of offense off of a penalty kill is a major bonus. I have not noticed myself that on even strength situations where Salvador has been very effective making a first pass even conservative in nature. He has more of a goal to move the puck to the neutral zone. This is where lack of footspeed on offense works to the Blues disadvantage, if you throw a puck out of the zone up for grabs where you will get beat to the puck. I will agree to disagree with you.


No, what we are "blessed" with right now is a number of "great passers" with poor vision. Most of our D men have good, hard passes but panic under pressure and can't find open men(Kitchen's screwy system made this VERY apparent). We have VERY few D men who are pure "board chippers"(Walker is the only one who really fits that description, and that's only because he's too slow to look for open players).

This is also a fair assessment. Salvy is not in Walker's league when it comes to the art of board chipping. Call them great passers with poor vision or great shooters with no accuracy. (Dennis Wideman) It isn't very effective. Hence part of the Blues problem last year. Thank goodness Murray made some adjustments.

NO, the reason we were so good with mac and Pronger is because of the offense they had supporting them. With those two we ALWAYS had a group of forwards that would come back and help out defensive and largely eliminate the need for 90-110 foot passes. Pronger and Mac certainly had the ability to connect on those passes, but they didn't need to use that ability very often(as much fame as Pronger got for those passes he RARELY made more than 1 or 2 per game).

My point here is the point that you made above. Our defense panics under pressure and coughs up the puck. RARELY did you see Pronger or MacInnis cough up the puck even under pressure.

1) Under Kitchen this was a fair statement to make; under Murray it is not.

I will agree with your assessment of Kitchen's system not giving our defense any options when they were pressured.

2) The Blues, as currently constructed, simply don't have the foot speed for an effective up-ice rush(see Doug Weight, Dallas Drake, David Backes and Brad Boyes). For them to get the "head start" needed to generate breakway attempts they would have to completely abandon their defensive responisbilities and Murray won't allow that. That does NOT, however, mean that we don't have an effective transition game. It just means that we have to be a bit more creative in how we move up-ice.

I'm not worried about breakaway attempts. I'm worried about hitting the winger along the boards or hitting the center circling back in stride. Backman does this quite well. Jackman does this quite well. Brewer even has his moments. Salvy is satisfied with dumping the puck up the boards giving the forward the option of tipping it out of the zone or trying to adjust to the puck on the boards and getting hit. I have seen plenty of games the past few years to be able to assess Salvy's style of play.

The few players on our team that DO have the speed for that don't have the hands to cap off the plays their speed generates(calling Mr. Mayers and Mr. Johnson).

I agree both would be more effective without a stick.


1) There was a SHOCKING difference between Brewer under Kitchen and Brewer under Murray. Under Murray Brewer drastically cut down on his bad passes.

2) While I would conceed this point to be true, you're ignoring the fact that Brewer is a VERY good passer when he sees his target. The ability is there, he just isn't there mentally.

I agree fully, but when he did mess up a pass it seemed like it was only hitting a forward in stride right in front of his own net with no one else around. Hence, the colorblind assessment.

Under Kitchen this was absolutely true.
Under Murray this is absolutely FALSE. After being benched by Murray, Jackman became the most effective puck distributor on the team BY FAR.

Absolutely false is a reach. I agree with Jackman being the best puck distributor, and that he played much better under Murray. I applaud Jackman's efforts in trying to create offense.



Could somebody PLEASE explain this statement to me; because I honestly don't have a clue what he means. Salvy rarely carries the puck and rarely makes a "bad" pass.

Quite simply, if you are not going to use your teammates and just clear the zone, then you really don't have much of a need for them. Maybe a bit drastic on my part much like your absolute statements. Honestly watching him, I don't see where his motives seem to be anywhere other than getting rid of the puck. Just my opinion.

Woywitka is in the same boat as Backman and Brewer; he has the skills to be a GREAT puck moving D man but doesn't have the mental game yet.

I agree. Hopefully he can open the tool box.

Polak is a seperate entity altogether. He is Salvador Jr.

I hope not. That would mean that he never could open the tool box either. I see your point in making that assessment. Great shot, Good speed, not afraid to hit, and defensively responsible, but let's hope with the new NHL that he will develop some puck control skills.




IF(and it is a VERY big IF) somebody were offering a 20 goal scorer for Salvador we'd be fools not to make that trade; but to my knowledge there isn't an offer like that on the table. I am NOT saying that we need to keep Salvy; ALL I'm saying that he is a LOT more valueable than a "#7 D man on a good team" like Lee17 stated.

He is plain and simple a defensive defenseman. He is a defensive specialist as Wideman was an offensive specialist. Every team could definitely use one.

One thing I WILL point out though is that Salvador likely has a lot more meaning to the team than his "market value" would indicate. He may only be a 4/5 D man; but he has taken on a leadership role here(he REALLY helped settle down Brewer after Murray took over), is one of the top shot blockers in the league.

I agree he did help settle Brewer down. (and saved his rear more than once.) I will compromise and say a good team's #6 (Dallas Smith or Al Sims to Bobby Orr) Much like Brewer, Smith saved Orr's rear more than once when he got overzealous with the puck.


Again I'm going to ask for a translation.
I THINK you're saying that "because we missed the PO's our roster must not be very good".

My response to THAT would be this:


A) This team started the year 7-17-4 due almost entirely to a completely inept coach.
- Over that 28 game stretch we scored 60 goals and allowed 95 goals against.
- Over a full season that would project to a 21-49-12 record(54 points) with 176 goals for and 278 goals against.

B) We went on a 20-10-5 run from the time Murray took over until the trade deadline.
- Over this 35 game stretch we scored 97 goals and allowed 88 goals against.
- Over a full season that would project to a 47-23-12 record(106 points) with 227 goals for and 206 goals against.

C) From the deadline to the end of the year the team had a 7-8-4 record.
-Over this 19 game stretch we had 49 goals for and 50 goals against.
-Over a full season to a 30-35-17 record(77 points) with 214 goals for and 216 goals against.

MY analysis:
This team missing the PO's had VERY little to do with the talent on the ice. While it would certainly be nice to upgrade our offense; "lack of skill" was NOT our problem.

A better transition game would certainly make up for a lack of skill in the forward department. New Jersey in its golden years lacked in the fire power department, but had an outstanding transition game. They methodically dumped the puck in and sat back in their trap waiting for an errant pass. Stevens, Niedermayer, & co didn't have to make breakaway passes. They just made effective passes. They looked for a stick not the outside of the Blue line or advertisement on the side boards.


1) A player cannot be a good shot blocker if he is not sound positionally. You may hink that Salvy "runs around in his own zone"; but I strongly disagree with this statement. Savly is VERY good positionally in regards to what his GOAL is. Salvy isn't the kind of player that wants to mow a guy down and jump start an odd-man rush. He is the kind of player that will keep the puck to the perimeter and make the easy pass out of the zone. McKee is the EXACT same type of player; with the exception that he's gotten a LOT more press from playing in Buffalo. The ONLY difference between these two is that McKee is a bit more mobile while Salvy has better offensive tools(he doesn't USE them, but he does have them). Positionally, mentally and physically, they are mirror images of one another.

We will agree to disagree. Salvy has a habit of leaving the front of the net while his partner is already on the boards chasing the puck carrier. He has done it for several years. Brewer has the same problem. Someone has to cover the man in front of the net. He is exceptional at maintaining his shape on the penalty kill. Even strength is another story.

ONE of our D men is expendable; but I'm not convinced that Salvy is the who should be moved. Not when you consider his leadership ability, commitment to the team and relatively cheap Cap hit. I would MUCH rather get rid of Backman and his under-achieving, 2.3 mil Cap hit. Salvy is MUCH more worthy of his salary than Backman has been and has more worht to the team because of it.
1.) IF you want Soderburg and Berglund to come over, then you better keep him. Having another Swede here will help them adjust.
2.) Backman has potential to be a top 2 defenseman. He is just getting started. Perhaps with a legitimate tough guy, Backman won't get run constantly without retribution. Kitchen should have sold little boxes of cookies not coached the Blues. I blame him.

I will agree to disagree with you on some of these points, but we do have some common ground.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2007, 04:39 PM
  #31
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,136
vCash: 500
Sorry, I don't know how to splice and do all of the tricks that Kimzey does. He's a pro, I'm not. My replies are in the above quote answering some of his replies.

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2007, 05:03 PM
  #32
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
1.) IF you want Soderburg and Berglund to come over, then you better keep him. Having another Swede here will help them adjust.

Unless Backman suddenly fulfills all the potential - keeping him because of other Swedish prospects is exactly the wrong thing to do. You don't want "a floater" serving as a role model.

2.) Backman has potential to be a top 2 defenseman. He is just getting started. Perhaps with a legitimate tough guy, Backman won't get run constantly without retribution. Kitchen should have sold little boxes of cookies not coached the Blues. I blame him.

Top 4 maybe, but nothing either defensively, or offensively that I've seen, indicates that he could be a top 2 dman.
As far as his getting run - some of that is his own fault.
Look at his injury from the Tootoo hit. Backman eased over to the board to get the puck, never looking over his shoulder, just assuming the icing call would protect him. Had he bothered to look - he had all the time in the world to protect himself. He took things for granted, and paid the price.

We agree on Kitchen.


barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-16-2007, 10:12 PM
  #33
lee17
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
other options

Thanks to everyone for there input on my original idea. I feel like maybe I deserve the instigator penalty on this one. I want to take it a tad further, The top 4 of EJ,
McKee, Jackman and Brewer seem to to be a given. Let's say the training camp battles end with Polak headed back to Peoria, more seasoning can't hurt. Walker ends up #7, with his experience and skill level I think he fits the role. Woywitka earns a full time job. What if both Salvador and Backman were moved for help up front or for the future and their combined salaries were used to acquire one of the guys I mentioned before, Hamrlik, Rafalski or Preissing. Pick one of them you feel is the best fit and redo your pairings. I would feel more comfortable with a top 6 including one of those 3 than I would with any other combos including the other 2.
I also feel it would be money better spent. As far as the UFA centers go the only true #1 is Briere. Gomez is kind of a 1a guy, he's a little either inconsistent or moody for my taste, and I really think Drury is an outstanding #2, kind of a stretch at #1.
I think that upgrades on both wings, left more than right, might reveal that Weight isn't on his last legs, McClement is more than a checker, and Cjanek, if he's here, can get some passes cashed in on. There seems to be more UFA depth on the wings at hopefully more reasonable prices. I'm afraid the fact that so little depth in the market at center will drive thier prices through the roof.

lee17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2007, 05:55 AM
  #34
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
He is plain and simple a defensive defenseman. He is a defensive specialist as Wideman was an offensive specialist. Every team could definitely use one.
That may be, but what are they willing to give up to get one? Stay at home types like Salvy, McKee, Mitchell, Carney, etc. are abundant in todays NHL. I find it very unlikely that somebody would waive a 20 goal forward at us JUST for Salvy.

Quote:
I agree he did help settle Brewer down. (and saved his rear more than once.) I will compromise and say a good team's #6 (Dallas Smith or Al Sims to Bobby Orr) Much like Brewer, Smith saved Orr's rear more than once when he got overzealous with the puck.
Salvy is MUCH better than Smith or Sims. HE is the type of D man that can anchor a 3rd pairing or be the "secondary" D man on a 2nd pairing. That equates to a 4/5 D man. He is probably better suited as the #5, but he has the ability to play the #4 role.



Quote:
A better transition game would certainly make up for a lack of skill in the forward department. New Jersey in its golden years lacked in the fire power department, but had an outstanding transition game. They methodically dumped the puck in and sat back in their trap waiting for an errant pass. Stevens, Niedermayer, & co didn't have to make breakaway passes. They just made effective passes. They looked for a stick not the outside of the Blue line or advertisement on the side boards.
This statement is a misnomer if ever there was one.
The Devils "in their prime" had names such as Bill Guerin, Jason Arnott, Patrick Elias, Stephan Richer, John MacLean, Brian Rolston, Steve Thomas, Bobby Holik and Peter Sykora to go along with young versions of Steve Sullivan, Brian Gionta and Scott Gomez. Saying the Devils had "no firepower" is a complete myth. They may have been better known for their defensive play, but they had the guns to compete with almost anybody at the time.


Quote:
1.) IF you want Soderburg and Berglund to come over, then you better keep him. Having another Swede here will help them adjust.
You do NOT keep a player for this reason. This may be a benefit to keeping him, but you cannot let this type of decision making affect how you build a team.


Quote:
2.) Backman has potential to be a top 2 defenseman. He is just getting started. Perhaps with a legitimate tough guy, Backman won't get run constantly without retribution.
1) Backman may have the potential to be a #2 D man; but he has yet to play up to that potential for more than a 2 game stretch. Beyond that, we are already PAYING him like a #2 D man. I'm sorry, but I just can't justify paying Backman that much money for the level of play he's given us. He's just not worth it. He's not making so much that I'd consider buying him out; but I seriously want to find a way out of his contract. For me, it's not even debateable as to who is more worth their value. Salvy is the #2 shot blocker in the league and makes a very reasonable 1.4 mil(yes IB; I know how his contract is actually structured).

2) Do we really want a D man that needs a "tough guy" to protect him?


Quote:
Kitchen should have sold little boxes of cookies not coached the Blues. I blame him.
Trust me; he's have found some way to mess that up too.

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2007, 07:20 AM
  #35
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by lee17 View Post
Thanks to everyone for there input on my original idea. I feel like maybe I deserve the instigator penalty on this one. I want to take it a tad further, The top 4 of EJ,
McKee, Jackman and Brewer seem to to be a given. Let's say the training camp battles end with Polak headed back to Peoria, more seasoning can't hurt. Walker ends up #7, with his experience and skill level I think he fits the role. Woywitka earns a full time job. What if both Salvador and Backman were moved for help up front or for the future and their combined salaries were used to acquire one of the guys I mentioned before, Hamrlik, Rafalski or Preissing. Pick one of them you feel is the best fit and redo your pairings. I would feel more comfortable with a top 6 including one of those 3 than I would with any other combos including the other 2.
I also feel it would be money better spent. As far as the UFA centers go the only true #1 is Briere. Gomez is kind of a 1a guy, he's a little either inconsistent or moody for my taste, and I really think Drury is an outstanding #2, kind of a stretch at #1.
I think that upgrades on both wings, left more than right, might reveal that Weight isn't on his last legs, McClement is more than a checker, and Cjanek, if he's here, can get some passes cashed in on. There seems to be more UFA depth on the wings at hopefully more reasonable prices. I'm afraid the fact that so little depth in the market at center will drive thier prices through the roof.
I just don't think it's realistic to expect Salvador to go in a deal, at least this year. We will have two key defensemen that need for want of a better term - babysitting - Johnson and Brewer. Jackman will in all probability get the EJ assignment, and Salvador draws Brewer to cover his butt when he goes out on his irrestible urge to take off while the puck is still in his own zone. "IF" we knew that McKee would stay healthy, then he could be counted on for one of those jobs, but at this point, we don't even know if he will be ready for the start of the season.

barnburner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2007, 11:03 AM
  #36
CuSa_1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 1,557
vCash: 500
if we dealt backman and salvador I'd be okay with Polak playing, and either banking the money or still try and go out to sign a Drury (as if there are more than one Drury).

CuSa_1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2007, 11:07 AM
  #37
Stealth JD
Drexel's dead!!!
 
Stealth JD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Safari Motor Motel
Country: United States
Posts: 6,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuSa_1 View Post
if we dealt backman and salvador I'd be okay with Polak playing, and either banking the money or still try and go out to sign a Drury (as if there are more than one Drury).
the moment backman AND salvador get traded, Jackman, EJ, Polak and Brewer will all go down with injuries....then fans will pile on JD...no, make that Pleau....for trading away our depth and not anticipating injuries.

Stealth JD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-17-2007, 10:38 PM
  #38
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
That may be, but what are they willing to give up to get one? Stay at home types like Salvy, McKee, Mitchell, Carney, etc. are abundant in todays NHL. I find it very unlikely that somebody would waive a 20 goal forward at us JUST for Salvy. .
Which is why having a 7 to 8 point guy may well be pointless when you have an abundance of kids Polak or as you referred to him Salvy Jr can step in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
Salvy is MUCH better than Smith or Sims. HE is the type of D man that can anchor a 3rd pairing or be the "secondary" D man on a 2nd pairing. That equates to a 4/5 D man. He is probably better suited as the #5, but he has the ability to play the #4 role..
I think you better do a little history check before you make this statement. Dallas Smith could also pass the puck. He averaged 20+ assist throughout a career with over 300 points. I think Salvy may have 40 points in 4 years. Not in his league. Maybe you should pose that question on the Bruins site. Once again 5 or 6 defenseman tops.




Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
This statement is a misnomer if ever there was one.
The Devils "in their prime" had names such as Bill Guerin, Jason Arnott, Patrick Elias, Stephan Richer, John MacLean, Brian Rolston, Steve Thomas, Bobby Holik and Peter Sykora to go along with young versions of Steve Sullivan, Brian Gionta and Scott Gomez. Saying the Devils had "no firepower" is a complete myth. They may have been better known for their defensive play, but they had the guns to compete with almost anybody at the time. .
It was sure nice having Bruce Driver, Scott Niedermayer, Brian Rafalski, and dare I say Scott Stevens get them the puck. Stevens even lead them in scoring one year. The Blues scored 214 goals this year. New Jersey 2nd overall in their conference scored 216. Brian Rafalski had 47 assists. (Brewer's 24 + Jackman's 23) In 2001-2002 205 goals 2002-2003 216 goals 2003-2004 213 goals They did score 300+ and 250 in several seasons around there, but also had puck moving defenseman that can create a transition game. The Blues had Guerin, Tkachuk, Stempniak, and Weight who have fire power, if you can get them the puck. If these guys are not considered guns, then why did we fetch first round picks for them?
Having a Hall of Fame goalie does help. I didn't say no firepower, I said they lacked fire power. Defensive shell or not, they didn't score in several seasons, but still won.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
You do NOT keep a player for this reason. This may be a benefit to keeping him, but you cannot let this type of decision making affect how you build a team.

1) Backman may have the potential to be a #2 D man; but he has yet to play up to that potential for more than a 2 game stretch. Beyond that, we are already PAYING him like a #2 D man. I'm sorry, but I just can't justify paying Backman that much money for the level of play he's given us. He's just not worth it. He's not making so much that I'd consider buying him out; but I seriously want to find a way out of his contract. For me, it's not even debateable as to who is more worth their value. Salvy is the #2 shot blocker in the league and makes a very reasonable 1.4 mil(yes IB; I know how his contract is actually structured).

2) Do we really want a D man that needs a "tough guy" to protect him?.

Then you may as well tell Jarmo not to draft any Euros. They don't play that way. Hockey is a skill game in Europe. I like to see a mix of both. Look at the New Jersey teams that won. Mogilny (whom you left off your list) Holik if you ran them, you had to answer to Daneyko or Mckay. If you want skill players, then you have to protect them. Why do you think Pittsburg picked up a legitimate tough guy at the trade deadline? To protect Crosby and Malkin. Backman has skills that Salvy can dream about, but doesn't have. Unless you want to pull another Hedican deal or Van Ryn Deal, maybe you ought to think about keeping someone that actually has some offensive tools before you pull another blunder. Salvy is Finley reincarnated. You can pick up him up for a 4th round pick, if someone gets hurt or better yet call up Salvy jr. instead.



Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
Trust me; he's have found some way to mess that up too.
Do you think we could get Detroit to hire him so we might stand a chance?

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-18-2007, 08:02 AM
  #39
kimzey59
Registered User
 
kimzey59's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PerryTurnbullfan View Post
It was sure nice having Bruce Driver, Scott Niedermayer, Brian Rafalski, and dare I say Scott Stevens get them the puck. Stevens even lead them in scoring one year. The Blues scored 214 goals this year. New Jersey 2nd overall in their conference scored 216. Brian Rafalski had 47 assists. (Brewer's 24 + Jackman's 23) In 2001-2002 205 goals 2002-2003 216 goals 2003-2004 213 goals They did score 300+ and 250 in several seasons around there, but also had puck moving defenseman that can create a transition game. The Blues had Guerin, Tkachuk, Stempniak, and Weight who have fire power, if you can get them the puck. If these guys are not considered guns, then why did we fetch first round picks for them?
Having a Hall of Fame goalie does help. I didn't say no firepower, I said they lacked fire power. Defensive shell or not, they didn't score in several seasons, but still won.
And I'm saying they didn't "lack firepower" considering the era of hockey we're talking about. This is the "dead puck" era of hockey we're addressing here. IF your team had 2 viable scoring lines you were automatically an upper teir offensive team in this time period. They may have been lacking by todays standards or the standards of the late 80's-early 90's, but for the mid-to-late 90's their offensive group was NOT lacking anything(they were just more famous for their system).



Quote:

Then you may as well tell Jarmo not to draft any Euros. They don't play that way. Hockey is a skill game in Europe. I like to see a mix of both. Look at the New Jersey teams that won. Mogilny (whom you left off your list) Holik if you ran them, you had to answer to Daneyko or Mckay. If you want skill players, then you have to protect them. Why do you think Pittsburg picked up a legitimate tough guy at the trade deadline? To protect Crosby and Malkin.
1) Get off this "Euro" kick now. Some of the toughest players in the league are European, and by the same token some of the SOFTEST players in the league are from NA. Nationality has NOTHING to do with a players toughness.


2) There is a HUGE difference between having forwards that need protection and having defensemen that need protection. A forward can get away with being soft if he has the skills to compensate for it(he'll be limited and relatively easy to shut down, but he CAN survive in the NHL without toughness); a defenseman can't. If a D man doesn't have the toughness to at least hold his own there is NO CHANCE that he'll be good enough defensively to stick around. We've seen that first hand in guys like Smrek, Obsut and Chebuturken. A D man needs to have at least enough strength to battle on the boards(note; I am not syaing that Backman doesn't have the strength to do this). IF a Defenseman needs a tough guy to protect him, he won't be in the NHL very long and I do NOT want to be the team who goes through that kind of experiment again..

Quote:
Backman has skills that Salvy can dream about, but doesn't have.
1) Sergei Varlamov had the "skills" to be an upper teir scorer in the NHL. So have hundreds of other players that have only played a few handfuls of games. Having "skills" is irrelevant if you don't use them consistently. With Backman, one game he'll be the best D man on the team and the next 3 will have us thinking he should be in Peoria. I'm sorry if you don't like this, but for the money we're paying him that kind of inconsistency is not acceptable. I'm not saying that I wouldn't give him another shot; but so far he has been VERY disappointing.

The problem facing us is that we might have to make that choice THIS SUMMER. If we are puit in the position this summer where we have to dump a D man, Backman is easily the least worthy of his contract.

2) Salvy has a better shot than Backman does and is WORLD's better defensively, not to mention infinately more consistent.

Quote:
or Van Ryn Deal,
When we traded Van Ryn he was on the verge of being sent down to the ECHL.
Even NOW his defensive game is BARELY NHL caliber and I seriously question whether or not he'd even MAKE our defensive unit.

NO, the only "blunder" in the Van Ryn deal was that Laurie chose that summer to start purging the team. We let ALL of our supplemental players go in the course of 1 off-season and that is what started our decline. IF we had kept even ONE of Rucinsky/Stillman/Bure our 03-04 season would have been a LOT better.




Quote:
maybe you ought to think about keeping someone that actually has some offensive tools before you pull another blunder.

You can pick up him(Salvy) up for a 4th round pick, if someone gets hurt or better yet call up Salvy jr. instead.
This team needs SCORING up front and the Trade market is likely the only place we'll be able to get it. How are we going to improve our scoring if all we're offering is "somebody that can be picked up for a 4th round pick"? As has been said many times on the Trade rumors forum, you have to GIVE value to GET value.

This statement completely undermines everything else you've said on the subject.
By your own logic process, teams are NOT going to give us a scoring line forward for Salvador. They MIGHT for Backman.
Ergo, if there is a choice to be made Backman is the one who needs to be moved. This team needs help up front FAR more than they need an enigmatic D man who occasionally shows some good puck moving ability(especially when we already have 2 other D men who fit this description along with EJ(who projects as a true 2-way D man) and Jackman who showed surprising offenxsive ability last year).

kimzey59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-19-2007, 07:06 AM
  #40
PerryTurnbullfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Penalty Box
Country:
Posts: 2,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
And I'm saying they didn't "lack firepower" considering the era of hockey we're talking about. This is the "dead puck" era of hockey we're addressing here. IF your team had 2 viable scoring lines you were automatically an upper teir offensive team in this time period. They may have been lacking by todays standards or the standards of the late 80's-early 90's, but for the mid-to-late 90's their offensive group was NOT lacking anything(they were just more famous for their system).
I believe that you're saying that in the new NHL, Firepower is important. We lack players that can create offense. Getting rid of someone who can create offense doesn't seem to me like a good idea.


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
1) Get off this "Euro" kick now. Some of the toughest players in the league are European, and by the same token some of the SOFTEST players in the league are from NA. Nationality has NOTHING to do with a players toughness.


2) There is a HUGE difference between having forwards that need protection and having defensemen that need protection. A forward can get away with being soft if he has the skills to compensate for it(he'll be limited and relatively easy to shut down, but he CAN survive in the NHL without toughness); a defenseman can't. If a D man doesn't have the toughness to at least hold his own there is NO CHANCE that he'll be good enough defensively to stick around. We've seen that first hand in guys like Smrek, Obsut and Chebuturken. A D man needs to have at least enough strength to battle on the boards(note; I am not syaing that Backman doesn't have the strength to do this). IF a Defenseman needs a tough guy to protect him, he won't be in the NHL very long and I do NOT want to be the team who goes through that kind of experiment again..
You are correct in saying that there are Euros who are tough and play tough. I think it is a false statement to say that Backman doesn't play tough. To compare Backman with Smrek, Obsut, and Chubbyturkin is ridiculous, especially when Backman was 2nd on your team in +-. (+13 to Jackman's +20 to Salvador's -5.) Prior year Salvy was -24 to Backman's -15. Prior year Salvy -4 to Backman's +3. Sounds to me like he must have some defensive skills. Also notice the ice time he logs. Call him an experiment, if you wish. My opinion is that I'm not ready to shut off the bunson burner or put the beakers away quite yet. Keep in mind, MacInnis or Pronger didn't drop their gloves very often, because you didn't want them in the penalty box. With Backman's skill level, dropping the gloves or slashing (they call it now) a Tootoo is a major gain for the other team. I blame that on Kitchen, hopefully Murray will give stiffs like Mayers, King, Walker, and Drake the green light to do that job.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
1) Sergei Varlamov had the "skills" to be an upper teir scorer in the NHL. So have hundreds of other players that have only played a few handfuls of games. Having "skills" is irrelevant if you don't use them consistently. With Backman, one game he'll be the best D man on the team and the next 3 will have us thinking he should be in Peoria. I'm sorry if you don't like this, but for the money we're paying him that kind of inconsistency is not acceptable. I'm not saying that I wouldn't give him another shot; but so far he has been VERY disappointing.

The problem facing us is that we might have to make that choice THIS SUMMER. If we are puit in the position this summer where we have to dump a D man, Backman is easily the least worthy of his contract.

2) Salvy has a better shot than Backman does and is WORLD's better defensively, not to mention infinately more consistent.
We can agree to disagree here. Notice the +- stats again and say WORLD's better defensively and VERY disappointing, but then understand why I agree with you when you say give him another shot. Our team is young and hopefully will get younger and definitely not there yet. My opinion is that your assessment of 1 on and 3 off is a reach or he wouldn't have been a + player or for that matter 2nd in +- on the team. Backman may not have the velocity of shot, but has a better arsenal of shots and more accurate shot. He has an excellent wrist shot as well. He can score and has walked around players to do so (something Salvy cannot do.)


Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59 View Post
This team needs SCORING up front and the Trade market is likely the only place we'll be able to get it. How are we going to improve our scoring if all we're offering is "somebody that can be picked up for a 4th round pick"? As has been said many times on the Trade rumors forum, you have to GIVE value to GET value.

This statement completely undermines everything else you've said on the subject.
By your own logic process, teams are NOT going to give us a scoring line forward for Salvador. They MIGHT for Backman.
Ergo, if there is a choice to be made Backman is the one who needs to be moved. This team needs help up front FAR more than they need an enigmatic D man who occasionally shows some good puck moving ability(especially when we already have 2 other D men who fit this description along with EJ(who projects as a true 2-way D man) and Jackman who showed surprising offenxsive ability last year).
What I said was, if Salvador is so valuable, then trade him for a scoring forward. He only has true value to the Blues as you have said previously. That undermines nothing I have stated. Salvy's are a dime a dozen. As you said above, this must be a live puck era compared to the dead puck era of the late 80s and early 90s. Trading a puck moving defenseman who can score would not be a very smart thing to do when you don't have players who can generate offense. Jackman has the ability to play as a defensive defenseman as well as dish the puck. Brewer is more enigmatic than Backman. He was -10. Do you agree with that statement? He's the player I would move and think should have been moved at the deadline. We may as well agree to disagree. I don't drink the Salvy kool aid that you do, and you aren't a Backman fan.

Shouldn't we be talking about the draft instead?

PerryTurnbullfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:57 PM.

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.