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

cost of Stewart @ the Draft?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-28-2012, 02:09 AM
  #1
Ace2008
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Country:
Posts: 368
vCash: 500
cost of Stewart @ the Draft?

since Stewart's 1st yr has him playing mostly 2nd-4th line minutes at best what alongside a 1st round pick would be enough to land him would you feel would be his value

a 2nd line player..._+ what else

or a top 4 dman + what else

Ace2008 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:12 AM
  #2
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,608
vCash: 270
we'll see how he finishes and get back to you

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:21 AM
  #3
bluemandan
Ya Ma Goo!
 
bluemandan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,688
vCash: 500
Let us see how the Blues do in the playoffs, then we will know just what we need for the future.

bluemandan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 02:37 AM
  #4
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Depends on how he finishes to some degree. It also depends on Tarasenko signing when the WCs are over May 20.

Once Tarsenko signs, they are going to want to have room for him. They still have D'Agostini under contract who one would hope would be ready to go by the start of next year from his concussion. D'Agostini isn't so important a player that big decisions have to be made deferring to his roster spot, but he is a RW and is under contract. Oshie will obviously be kept.

Some of this answer depends on Schwartz. If he signs a contract when his season is done, looks good in Peoria to close the year, and keeps building muscle in the offseason, he stands a shot at the roster, which means if Tarasenko signs too then it's more likely they move Stewart.

Personally I liked what I was hearing with regard to Phoenix' possible willingness (and even NYR's possible willingness) to deal a LD where each of those teams is very strong. If there were a way for Stewart to be enticing enough to Phoenix that the Blues could trade Stewart and a 1st and an offensive prospect for Yandle (for Yandle I'd include Rattie), then that's my preferred draft day trade. I think the Coyotes are really liking 2006 1st rounder Chris Summers on that side, plus OEL is turning into a top-pair guy and they have a healthy Klesla, who's still good. But they traded away Turris and Whitney's near retirement and Doan's no spring chicken so Stewart and an offensive prospect to replenish the cupboard MIGHT entice them enough to part with some of their defensive depth in a star package that a big offer like Stewart + Rattie + 1st would entail.

That's the kind of package I'd put him in. Yandle gets more than a McDonagh or MDZ or Gormley because he's an established elite player at the position and only a big package gets him.

If they can't swing a deal for a package and Tarasenko is signed, especially if they feel Schwartz is close, then I'd also be willing to trade him for a prospect d-man who's either already drafted (Gormley, Siemens types) or one coveted from this year's draft. I personally don't want to depend on Chris Stewart as part of a core because you'll always have to pay him more than he's worth and go long stretches of crummy play. Streaky, hard to motivate guys can kill you.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 08:56 AM
  #5
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,598
vCash: 500
Streaky? Hard to motivate?

Not quite fair. Chris Stewart has had two full seasons in the NHL and has scored 28 goals in each of those seasons. That's the definition of consistency. His goals come in bunches. Not uncommon.

You know first-hand that he is hard to motivate because ... ???

Stewart is having an off-season. It happens. I'm not giving up on him yet.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 09:14 AM
  #6
SteenMachine
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Fenton, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 4,163
vCash: 500
Doubt he'd be available at the draft, this team needs to keep its RFAs and manage their budget well by taking advantage of it. Especially for a pick we don't need. He's never going to be a guy who's dealt for a sellers package. Unless the team literally can't afford to pay his salary, and as long as they get a stable owner of some kind it'd be pointless.

SteenMachine is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 10:49 AM
  #7
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
LOL. I'm talking about Chris Stewart, the streaky, hard to motivate player who was streaky in Colorado and in St. Louis, and has been described both frequently by Avs fans and perceived directly by me with the Blues to be hard to motivate ("you'll see my best game of the season" ... nothing ... lolz). That's who I was talking about. That's the guy I've been saying (consistently) for months I want to ultimately see moved because I don't want to be dependent on him.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:12 AM
  #8
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Jackman and Brewer had been wipping boys that some fans wanted traded in the past couple of seasons. Jackman is having one of his best seasons this year. Berglund and Stewart have been the wipping boys this year, Cola to a lesser degree. (not Berglund lately) The solution for these fans is to trade them. If they had their wishes 1/2 the roster would turn over every year. Look at the standings. Even with all the injuries, one of the lowest payrolls and a few players not meeting expectations the Blues are among the top teams in all of hockey. With all the success this season has brought I would have thought more Blues fans would be enjoying the ride.

stlweir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:12 AM
  #9
Alklha
Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 8,407
vCash: 500
If, as expected, Tarasenko signs, then Stewart will be available for the right price at the draft. We have depth on the right, and while I'd ultimately rather hold onto him, we have other needs. The problem with proposals on here is that his value is of a 24 year old with 40 goal potential and already has 2 28 goal seasons under his belt. We have no reason to trade that for scraps because he had an off year.

Alklha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:47 AM
  #10
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Whipping boy discussions have more to do with some fans wanting a concrete example to point to for classifying themselves as more knowledgable fans. That's the most significant undercurrent. And by that I'm pointing the finger at people who are the first to whip out that term.

Brewer was always a bad fit here. They made the decision to re-sign him to a bad four year deal and that's on management. In their defense, it's harder to get free agents to sign with a losing team, but the bottom line is he's one of the weaker top-pair guys in the NHL and they definitely needed to move on from him, which they did. He's a whipping boy who should have been.

Jackman has always been a different sort. He was overexposed as a top-minutes defender but as a #3/#4 minutes guy paired with a PMD he's in his best fit. He's a whipping boy who shouldn't have been.

Brad Boyes became a whipping boy because he stopped being useful in the primary role for which he had use. He was a whipping boy who should have been.

Patrik Berglund is a player currently caught in the middle of figuring out who he is on the ice. The version we saw in Nashville and a few other games (mostly recently) is a detemined force. The version we've seen in 90% of his games this year is a player on a line where he needs to be a difference maker but hasn't been capable.

Chris Stewart, whether he finishes the year with 30 goals or not, should be someone moved from the team. He doesn't provide much beyond scoring. He's not very physical, he doesn't win many board battles, despite the fact that many describe him as a "tough" "power forward." He needs drastic moves like publicly embarassing demotion to eventually play harder and he's streaky. That is an accurate description of him and those aren't the kind of players you build with or should want to depend on for consistent winning.

Discussing it in the vein of "if you criticize Stewart and want him not part of the team you're a short-sighted whipping boy mentality poster whose decisions would've ruined the team" is simplistic and a more corrosive attitude than it's ever cited for being. It reduces everything into "fer" or "agin" in an unhealthy polarizing way for discussing players, which is a primary purpose for hockey message boards. Some players deserve to be whipping boys ans some don't. It's a case by case basis. There's far more smug complaining about complaining as an overreaction to gnats who do what gnats do, and it has a chilling effect on the discussion.

/rant

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 11:49 AM
  #11
execwrite
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Peekskill, NY
Posts: 3,598
vCash: 500
Thank goodness Doug Armstrong makes the decisions and not all of us expert posters who observe players on television, have no idea what is really going on in the clubhouse or on the ice, and decide that we know everything.

Tarasenko and Rattie have a combined zero NHL goals so far in their careers. Let's see them actually score a professional goal in North America before we trade away proven NHL players to clear the way for them.

The next time Armstrong calls me for advice I'll let you guys know.

execwrite is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:05 PM
  #12
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 22,608
vCash: 270
Quote:
Originally Posted by execwrite View Post
Thank goodness Doug Armstrong makes the decisions and not all of us expert posters who observe players on television, have no idea what is really going on in the clubhouse or on the ice, and decide that we know everything.

Tarasenko and Rattie have a combined zero NHL goals so far in their careers. Let's see them actually score a professional goal in North America before we trade away proven NHL players to clear the way for them.

The next time Armstrong calls me for advice I'll let you guys know.
maybe one of us is secretly Armstrong himself

bleedblue1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:05 PM
  #13
CarvinSigX
Meh
 
CarvinSigX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: The Ill Side
Country: United States
Posts: 8,878
vCash: 500
It's not that we believe so heavily in the prospects...It's that it wouldn't be that hard for Tarasenko to come over and be a better fit than Stewart. I'm pretty confident that he will be more productive as well.

CarvinSigX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:15 PM
  #14
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 execwrite View Post
Thank goodness Doug Armstrong makes the decisions and not all of us expert posters who observe players on television, have no idea what is really going on in the clubhouse or on the ice, and decide that we know everything.

Tarasenko and Rattie have a combined zero NHL goals so far in their careers. Let's see them actually score a professional goal in North America before we trade away proven NHL players to clear the way for them.

The next time Armstrong calls me for advice I'll let you guys know.
... says the guy who routinely fills out future year rosters with prospects rushed into full-time duty, more of a default bias than any other regular poster. (Merely latest example.)

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:30 PM
  #15
2 Minute Minor
Hi Keeba!
 
2 Minute Minor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Temple, Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 8,010
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by PocketNines View Post


Patrik Berglund is a player currently caught in the middle of figuring out who he is on the ice. The version we saw in Nashville and a few other games (mostly recently) is a detemined force. The version we've seen in 90% of his games this year is a player on a line where he needs to be a difference maker but hasn't been capable.

Chris Stewart, whether he finishes the year with 30 goals or not, should be someone moved from the team. He doesn't provide much beyond scoring. He's not very physical, he doesn't win many board battles, despite the fact that many describe him as a "tough" "power forward." He needs drastic moves like publicly embarassing demotion to eventually play harder and he's streaky. That is an accurate description of him and those aren't the kind of players you build with or should want to depend on for consistent winning.

/rant
Why can't Chris Stewart be a young player like Berglund who is still figuring out who he is on the ice? He's had some early career success that may have actually slowed his more well-rounded development. Why can't he add pieces to his game (like Backes did, and like Berglund is doing) over the next 2-3 years?

What about Stewart makes you feel he has to be moved as opposed to other players who have struggled but shown glimmers of what they can be?

2 Minute Minor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 12:48 PM
  #16
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 2 Minute Minor View Post
Why can't Chris Stewart be a young player like Berglund who is still figuring out who he is on the ice? He's had some early career success that may have actually slowed his more well-rounded development. Why can't he add pieces to his game (like Backes did, and like Berglund is doing) over the next 2-3 years?

What about Stewart makes you feel he has to be moved as opposed to other players who have struggled but shown glimmers of what they can be?
Good question. I guess I haven't seen the signs that Stewart IS adding more pieces to his game like those other guys.

I'm more confident in Berglund because I do see more pieces in his game. When Brad Boyes fell apart, he didn't have much in his game to fall back on. Just because a player's career proceeds forward in time doesn't mean he's adding pieces. You can get a read on a guy's will to be better and the way Stewart has talked about his struggles doesn't give me the confidence he's methodically and systematically trying to build in new elements. Hitch is a good teacher so I won't rule it out, but it has to come from within.

Berglund can be a good 3d line center even if he never develops consistency in his offensive game. I've been promoting a Michal Handzus comparison for most of the season. But if Chris Stewart isn't scoring and helping create scoring chances, he's going to be always overpaid for what he brings to the table. In a cap era on a budget team, you have to be shrewd about recognizing inefficiencies like that. In the Boyes example, usually we don't see players drop off that dramatically and I'm not saying Stewart will permanently fall off the face of the earth like Boyes did, but if Stewart brought the other elements to his game like Backes or Berglund then I'd be more confident. Stewart's boom/bust. I'm biased against boom/bust because of all those playoff years of disappointment. Stewart is the profile of a guy right now who can get streaky in the regular season and when he's hot he helps you win games but I don't want to rely on him in the postseason. I'd much rather be wrong and have him succeed in the postseason but I think if you can transfer the value he represents to better your organization in another way (note: not saying sell cheap) then you're better off.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:12 PM
  #17
inglouriousbackes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bellevegas, Illinois
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
the streakiness of chris stewart isn't that factor if he scores or not, he seem to not have much in puck protection skills and seems to lose the puck more often than not. He has a big body, but he can be easily be knocked off the puck. I'm just wondering why he isn't using his big frame to hold onto the puck.

inglouriousbackes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:20 PM
  #18
stlweir
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,516
vCash: 500
Part of my point Pocket is that the Blues are having a successful year and Stewart is still young and a part of the success, although no where close to what I expected him to be. His trade value is at it lowest right now. You feel he should be moved, I don't. At the end of last season I had a chance to talk to one of the players who told me that he didn't know if Stewart had a problem with Colorado's mgt but that he "didn't know what Colorado was thinking" when they made the deal. Stewart was well liked by the Blues players as of the end of last season. Jay Mc by the way was one of the most popular players on the team. I think Stewart is worth having patience with and can still become a 30+ goal scorer.

stlweir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:24 PM
  #19
Blueshockey21
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 493
vCash: 500
Whether he scores 30 goals or not you want to move him? tell me how many 30 goal scorers there are in the league and how many we have stock piled in this team?

As far as everyone saying he doesn't use his big body to protect the puck, and I think that's because hes not a power forward, we see him and we think hes the next Keith Tkachuk, but that doesn't seem to be his game. He seems more like a sniper than a power forward to me with some good hands a knack for getting dirty goals.

Blueshockey21 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:26 PM
  #20
CitizenSnips
TheFightingMongooses
 
CitizenSnips's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: St. Louis
Country: United States
Posts: 408
vCash: 500
@pocketnines
your responses and feelings towards these players is well thought out and it is obvious that you are opinionated on these subjects and rightfully so knowing you do your homework on these situations.

the problem is that although stewart may be a whipping boy at the moment, there are plenty of people around the clubhouse that feel he has a lot to show us still. he and berglund had the hardest time changing the way they have played hockey and it is true that berglund has come a long way a bit quicker, i kinda can see stewart doing the same, just needing a bit longer. berglund had an off year last year and im super glad we coached him through it because he has come a lot further this year than i think most of us expected. he is learning the 2-way game and becoming a much better player because of it. im just saying that it is fair for others to agree that they are not ready to give up on him yet and the trades suggested for the draft day sound a lot like NHL 12 than real life deals

@execwrite
the statement about tarasenko or rattie (or schwartz for that matter) have zero NHL goals is just silly. NOBODY has any NHL goals before they play in the NHL. its what you see from them at draft day and beyond that decide whether they get a shot. if you watch videos and know much about these guys currently, you would put a lot of stock in them too.

some guys you give a good hard look at giving them a chance, but there are some guys (like the above mentioned) that you can fold right in the mix. nobody is trading anyone to make way for one of these guys, they are moving someone to better their team. when you have the depth that the blues do, you can make those trades to better a weak spot in your lineup.

CitizenSnips is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:27 PM
  #21
BigB
We Want Big Macs!
 
BigB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 260
Man, I feel like the bad armchair hockey fan who acts like he knows something (which I don't).

Can't we just hate a person without having to defend in the court of law?





PS- I still hate Berglund even if he scores 50+ goals a season.



I thnk there is just dislike for Stewart because when he came here, he looked amazing. Then this season, it was like "What happened to him?! We want demand MORE!" Then we will see the negatives and amp them up until the point of wanting to crucify the man.. or whip him. We all want to win and want to have the best. We don't accept second best efforts. Noone likes a losing team and getting the hate for loving a crap team (which we aren't this year thank god!).

BigB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 01:51 PM
  #22
PocketNines
Only a 2 year window
 
PocketNines's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Crested Butte, CO
Posts: 9,298
vCash: 500
Yes, to the question of him scoring 30 goals would I want to move him. Yes. The reason I want him to get back to that is precisely because I don't want to nor think they should trade him at his lowest value.

Really want not to be mistaken on that point. I don't want to dump him at his lowest value. I want him to increase his numbers so that his value rebounds and the Blues can trade from strength (RW) to fill another hole. Even if Arnott plays another season the Blues still need another quality 2d line or better center so that center is a strength of the team. Also a defenseman with high hockey sense who can play 22-24 min a night on the left side. I'm not trying to trade him for best return. I want the return to be very good but more consistent in its performance and filling a hole in another area. It's actually quite important that he rebound for this reason.

As ingloriousbackes notes, he has poor puck protection skills which is dangerous on this team that relies on an ability to win board battles and possess the puck. He has somewhat lower than average hockey sense. Perhaps part of this is hockey not having his full sports attention as he was growing up. So, he could be scoring 30 goals by going to the net and getting opportunities and his shot being more potent, and he'd still be questionable in other aspects of the game that make him stand out from the style the Blues have committed to playing under Hitchcock.

The goal is to make the Blues better. First, last and always. If he regains value and can be used to make the overall team better that's what I'm for.

PocketNines is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 05:21 PM
  #23
BadgersandBlues
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 636
vCash: 500
Here are my thoughts on the whole Stewart situation.

I think Stewart is mis-cast as a Power Forward. He isn't very physical, he isn't mean, and he doesn't make defenseman hate having to play against him in the corners and the front of the net. (In fact, I think he's the worst wall player we have on our team.....like seriously, name me someone worse on our roster. I can't think of anyone, not even any of our AHL call-ups.) He will go to the front of the net and score goals, but he doesn't TAKE the puck to the net and score goals. There is a -huge- difference. Remember what Dustin Byfuglien was like in the playoffs a couple years ago? THAT'S a power forward. He bent Chris Pronger over and that's not something many people can say.

Stewart is like Tkachuk in that he's not really a dominant power forward who creates havoc, but if you pair him with skilled players he knows how to find separation at the right time in front of the net to punch pucks home. However, Stewart NEEDS those players on his line to win puck battles along the boards and feed him to puck. He also doesn't really look good on the defensive side of things (Since he's a horrible wall player in general, so he never wins battles be it in the O or D zone....which is kind of important as a winger in the defensive zone) and clearly doesn't have very high hockey IQ, as he makes at least 1-2, "What were you thinking," moves per game. Therefore, I would characterize him as a player who is obviously one dimensional, with a specific skill-set that has allowed him to make a fairly decent living in today's NHL.

So you have to ask yourself this question. Do you really want to pay a guy 30-40 goalscorers' money who can't make it happen without a lot of help? We did it with Tkachuk for years and it got us nowhere in the playoffs. For a team on a budget it is a -big- risk to take. Could Stewart improve upon his current level and, "Add things to his game?" Sure he could, but so far in his career through TWO different franchises he hasn't been seen making an effort to do anything more then what he came into the league being able to do naturally. Will that change? That's for DA to decide, and why he gets paid the big bucks.

As for the trade question, I think we have all agreed that this team still has some pressing needs for it to take the next step to true Cup contention. A top LHD to pair with AP and (imo) a top playmaking Center tops the list. (I think we can survive without the Center, but man oh man would it be fun to see David Backes back on the wing and showing everyone what a real power forward does when he gets the puck with speed.) We have an absolute ton of depth on the wings all throughout our organization. There are a couple of teams out there who have a ton of depth at the LHD position, especially high-end LHD. I think if we can make Stewart the centerpiece of a trade bringing back a guy who will be AP's partner for the next decade, then that's a no brainer. If no such trade presents itself, I have no problem holding onto Stewart and helping ease the transition for our younger guys, while hoping that Hitchcock can get his motor running more consistently.

BadgersandBlues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-28-2012, 05:28 PM
  #24
Chicago Blues
Registered User
 
Chicago Blues's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgersandBlues View Post
Here are my thoughts on the whole Stewart situation.

I think Stewart is mis-cast as a Power Forward. He isn't very physical, he isn't mean, and he doesn't make defenseman hate having to play against him in the corners and the front of the net. (In fact, I think he's the worst wall player we have on our team.....like seriously, name me someone worse on our roster. I can't think of anyone, not even any of our AHL call-ups.) He will go to the front of the net and score goals, but he doesn't TAKE the puck to the net and score goals. There is a -huge- difference. Remember what Dustin Byfuglien was like in the playoffs a couple years ago? THAT'S a power forward. He bent Chris Pronger over and that's not something many people can say.

Stewart is like Tkachuk in that he's not really a dominant power forward who creates havoc, but if you pair him with skilled players he knows how to find separation at the right time in front of the net to punch pucks home. However, Stewart NEEDS those players on his line to win puck battles along the boards and feed him to puck. He also doesn't really look good on the defensive side of things (Since he's a horrible wall player in general, so he never wins battles be it in the O or D zone....which is kind of important as a winger in the defensive zone) and clearly doesn't have very high hockey IQ, as he makes at least 1-2, "What were you thinking," moves per game. Therefore, I would characterize him as a player who is obviously one dimensional, with a specific skill-set that has allowed him to make a fairly decent living in today's NHL.

So you have to ask yourself this question. Do you really want to pay a guy 30-40 goalscorers' money who can't make it happen without a lot of help? We did it with Tkachuk for years and it got us nowhere in the playoffs. For a team on a budget it is a -big- risk to take. Could Stewart improve upon his current level and, "Add things to his game?" Sure he could, but so far in his career through TWO different franchises he hasn't been seen making an effort to do anything more then what he came into the league being able to do naturally. Will that change? That's for DA to decide, and why he gets paid the big bucks.

As for the trade question, I think we have all agreed that this team still has some pressing needs for it to take the next step to true Cup contention. A top LHD to pair with AP and (imo) a top playmaking Center tops the list. (I think we can survive without the Center, but man oh man would it be fun to see David Backes back on the wing and showing everyone what a real power forward does when he gets the puck with speed.) We have an absolute ton of depth on the wings all throughout our organization. There are a couple of teams out there who have a ton of depth at the LHD position, especially high-end LHD. I think if we can make Stewart the centerpiece of a trade bringing back a guy who will be AP's partner for the next decade, then that's a no brainer. If no such trade presents itself, I have no problem holding onto Stewart and helping ease the transition for our younger guys, while hoping that Hitchcock can get his motor running more consistently.

I agree with everything you said. Stewart is a ghost - you never notice him until he does something that scares the crap out of you. He very rarely Casper's.

Chicago Blues is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
02-29-2012, 02:13 AM
  #25
inglouriousbackes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Bellevegas, Illinois
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadgersandBlues View Post
Here are my thoughts on the whole Stewart situation.

I think Stewart is mis-cast as a Power Forward. He isn't very physical, he isn't mean, and he doesn't make defenseman hate having to play against him in the corners and the front of the net. (In fact, I think he's the worst wall player we have on our team.....like seriously, name me someone worse on our roster. I can't think of anyone, not even any of our AHL call-ups.) He will go to the front of the net and score goals, but he doesn't TAKE the puck to the net and score goals. There is a -huge- difference. Remember what Dustin Byfuglien was like in the playoffs a couple years ago? THAT'S a power forward. He bent Chris Pronger over and that's not something many people can say.

Stewart is like Tkachuk in that he's not really a dominant power forward who creates havoc, but if you pair him with skilled players he knows how to find separation at the right time in front of the net to punch pucks home. However, Stewart NEEDS those players on his line to win puck battles along the boards and feed him to puck. He also doesn't really look good on the defensive side of things (Since he's a horrible wall player in general, so he never wins battles be it in the O or D zone....which is kind of important as a winger in the defensive zone) and clearly doesn't have very high hockey IQ, as he makes at least 1-2, "What were you thinking," moves per game. Therefore, I would characterize him as a player who is obviously one dimensional, with a specific skill-set that has allowed him to make a fairly decent living in today's NHL.

So you have to ask yourself this question. Do you really want to pay a guy 30-40 goalscorers' money who can't make it happen without a lot of help? We did it with Tkachuk for years and it got us nowhere in the playoffs. For a team on a budget it is a -big- risk to take. Could Stewart improve upon his current level and, "Add things to his game?" Sure he could, but so far in his career through TWO different franchises he hasn't been seen making an effort to do anything more then what he came into the league being able to do naturally. Will that change? That's for DA to decide, and why he gets paid the big bucks.

As for the trade question, I think we have all agreed that this team still has some pressing needs for it to take the next step to true Cup contention. A top LHD to pair with AP and (imo) a top playmaking Center tops the list. (I think we can survive without the Center, but man oh man would it be fun to see David Backes back on the wing and showing everyone what a real power forward does when he gets the puck with speed.) We have an absolute ton of depth on the wings all throughout our organization. There are a couple of teams out there who have a ton of depth at the LHD position, especially high-end LHD. I think if we can make Stewart the centerpiece of a trade bringing back a guy who will be AP's partner for the next decade, then that's a no brainer. If no such trade presents itself, I have no problem holding onto Stewart and helping ease the transition for our younger guys, while hoping that Hitchcock can get his motor running more consistently.

If Stewart was ever a true sniper he would always find an opening to score. Snipers are usually elusive and create openings themselves and he doesn't seem to do that much. He still goes through his lapses where you just see him skating in circles and unsure what to do. When I first saw Stewart, I had hopes of him being like the next Iginla, but that I found out was something of a Fairy Tale. He has the body, but I think he just doesn't have any idea to use it adequately. His Hockey IQ is probably his biggest weakness to his game. I think the biggest problem with us initially was the small sample size in watching him playing dominantly against the Blues while in the AVs costume. The same can be said about Brandon Yip and see where that landed him.

inglouriousbackes 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 08:42 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.