I've said it before, there's nothing so toxic to a discussion as the attitude that legitimate critique of a player is due to fan bad faith ("some fans need a whipping boy," bolded).
That itself is bad faith. Every year – regardless of how well the team is doing – some fans need "some fans" as a whipping boy.
I've said it before, there's nothing so toxic to a discussion as the attitude that legitimate critique of a player is due to fan bad faith ("some fans need a whipping boy," bolded).
That itself is bad faith. Every year – regardless of how well the team is doing – some fans need "some fans" as a whipping boy.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that of all the times to critique him, now seems like an odd choice. He's on the team for the playoffs. Prior to the trade deadline, at the end of the season, at the draft....all these are times he might be moved. But THIS WEEK??
I'm not saying that. I'm saying that of all the times to critique him, now seems like an odd choice. He's on the team for the playoffs. Prior to the trade deadline, at the end of the season, at the draft....all these are times he might be moved. But THIS WEEK??
Not you, the post above yours.
Yeah, I don't know why the thread was started. I think it was a non-Blues fan, and we're just kind of killing time pre-playoffs.
I just think most people don't know what to do with themselves until puck drop. Although for most of the Stewart critics, we have been critical all season, and when he has played well, and when he did start to put the effort into his game, we gave him credit. I still believe he is a bad fit for our style, but at least he is making steps and putting in the effort.
Kerber publicly bashing Stewart is significant.....Kerber is a paid representative of the Blues, so for him to single out Stewart and say on the radio he had a terrible season and should not be on the playoff roster is a bomb shell.
Kerber publicly bashing Stewart is significant.....Kerber is a paid representative of the Blues, so for him to single out Stewart and say on the radio he had a terrible season and should not be on the playoff roster is a bomb shell.
Well it's not like what kerber said is anything new. Anyone who has watched the Blues would have to agree with him. Maybe in the futurehe can improve, but what Kerber said isn't even controversial.
Well it's not like what kerber said is anything new. Anyone who has watched the Blues would have to agree with him. Maybe in the futurehe can improve, but what Kerber said isn't even controversial.
Well, I would say the part about him not deserving to make the playoff roster is controversial considering I think it's practically a given that Hitchcock will be playing him in game 1.
Given that D'Agostini is currently sitting in the pressbox, it's not a lack of viable alternatives that's keeping Stewart in the lineup. I guess Hitchcock isn't quite as down on Stewart's play as Kerber happens to be. Personally, between those two "paid representatives of the Blues", I'm going to have to go with Hitchcock having the more informed opinion on this particular matter.
I have a suspicion that Kerber is doing this deliberately to motivate Stewart. You have to think Stewart was told he might be sitting (over the last handful of games) when everyone came back healthy. Hitchcock has said repeatedly that 'performers will play' and that reputation and potential won't do it.
To me, Stewart has looked highly motivated and maybe even playing a little bit scared of losing his position. Its worked. 4th line experiment disaster notwithstanding, I think he'll be fine on the 3rd line.
Stewart is going to have a key part in this series. He's either going to score a brilliant clutch goal in the final minutes of a game, or shank one right off of the post with an open look at the net, leading to a deflating loss. I hope it's the first one...
The season is over. The playoffs are a new season. Chris Stewart had a disappointing season, but he has a chance to start fresh. I think we're going to be asking ourselves where this guy has been all year. I predict good things for Stewart.
Well, I would say the part about him not deserving to make the playoff roster is controversial considering I think it's practically a given that Hitchcock will be playing him in game 1.
Given that D'Agostini is currently sitting in the pressbox, it's not a lack of viable alternatives that's keeping Stewart in the lineup. I guess Hitchcock isn't quite as down on Stewart's play as Kerber happens to be. Personally, between those two "paid representatives of the Blues", I'm going to have to go with Hitchcock having the more informed opinion on this particular matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 Minute Minor
I have a suspicion that Kerber is doing this deliberately to motivate Stewart. You have to think Stewart was told he might be sitting (over the last handful of games) when everyone came back healthy. Hitchcock has said repeatedly that 'performers will play' and that reputation and potential won't do it.
To me, Stewart has looked highly motivated and maybe even playing a little bit scared of losing his position. Its worked. 4th line experiment disaster notwithstanding, I think he'll be fine on the 3rd line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2 Minute Minor
The season is over. The playoffs are a new season. Chris Stewart had a disappointing season, but he has a chance to start fresh. I think we're going to be asking ourselves where this guy has been all year. I predict good things for Stewart.
I was posting from my droid so I didn't put as much as I probably would've. Yes, I agree that Kerber saying he doesn't deserve a playoff spot is controversial, something more along the lines of, there are alternatives that can fill the role that Stewart is in better, would've been a better statement. Considering the season that he had, I don't think he earned a roster spot, but it's not like the alternatives did either IMO.
I don't think players put any stock into what reporters or announcers say, regardless if they are employed by the Blues or not.
The ultimate motivation for a NHL player is playing for the Stanley Cup. I think the playoffs will give more motivation to Stewart, which could be exactly what he needs. Since he will be playing a 3rd line role with limited PP time at the most, all he needs is to chip in a few goals here and there. If we get a motivated Stewart in the playoffs, we could get some great secondary scoring.
I expect to see a motivated D'Agostini because he will want to get onto the ice, so hopefully that will add even more motivation for Stewart.
Maybe the team was getting burned out at the end of the season because they weren't playing for much. Now that they got a break to refresh, I think we will see an energized group because they will actually be playing for something. I don't think players care all that much about the President's Trophy.
I just wonder if we do see a motivated Stewart, how will that affect his contract situation. Lets say he magically gets back to the form that he had when he first came here, will we still give him a "prove it" contract? I don't think that will happen, but I think it is a definite possibility that the playoff hockey will light a fire under his butt.
You absolutely can't blame the coaching change or the suspension for his poor play. His numbers were just as bad or worse during the first 14-15 games under Payne and prior to the suspension--but he had no problem scoring last year under Payne.
Stewart played relatively poorly last game, but he was hardly the only one. He just happens to be the easiest one to replace in the lineup.
That's weird, I didn't think he was bad. In fact, I thought he was the most effective player in the bottom six and carried the puck possession and offensive game for his line. Stewart and Reaves played better last game than Crombeen and D'Agostini did tonight. The rest of the team was just a lot better.
That's weird, I didn't think he was bad. In fact, I thought he was the most effective player in the bottom six and carried the puck possession and offensive game for his line. Stewart and Reaves played better last game than Crombeen and D'Agostini did tonight. The rest of the team was just a lot better.
I did say relatively.
I didn't see any grevious problems (outside the last play of the game, but he was hardly alone on that one), but I didn't think he played at the level that he had the previous four or five games. He didn't play poorly enough to warrant being "benched", but with so many other capable players waiting in the wings I don't begrudge him getting juggled out to see if they could generate a spark. Stewart will be back, there's no question in my mind.
Honestly, I think Arnott and Perron are the two most disappointing players for me so far. There's just nobody to replace them, though, so they're going to have to step it up and be the factors we need them to be.
I didn't see any grevious problems (outside the last play of the game, but he was hardly alone on that one), but I didn't think he played at the level that he had the previous four or five games. He didn't play poorly enough to warrant being "benched", but with so many other capable players waiting in the wings I don't begrudge him getting juggled out to see if they could generate a spark. Stewart will be back, there's no question in my mind.
Honestly, I think Arnott and Perron are the two most disappointing players for me so far. There's just nobody to replace them, though, so they're going to have to step it up and be the factors we need them to be.
Perron's been okay, considering they're really targeting him. I think he's been good in the neutral zone, mostly, but he's been too hesitant when he has the puck in the offensive zone. Arnott has been basically invisible. He misses Steen or Stewart on his line.
I still firmly believe they should spread around the talent, speed, and size. Left wing and centers basically set. Right wings up in the air. Could be any of Stewart, Oshie, and D'Agostini on lines one and three. Could be either of Oshie or Stewart on line two. Could be Langenbrunner, D'Agostini, or Reaves on line four, etc. I'd be way cool with Porter in there, too. Sobotka-Nichol-Porter is such a fast, aggressive, and responsible fourth line.
Perron's been okay, considering they're really targeting him. I think he's been good in the neutral zone, mostly, but he's been too hesitant when he has the puck in the offensive zone. Arnott has been basically invisible. He misses Steen or Stewart on his line.
I still firmly believe they should spread around the talent, speed, and size. Left wing and centers basically set. Right wings up in the air. Could be any of Stewart, Oshie, and D'Agostini on lines one and three. Could be either of Oshie or Stewart on line two. Could be Langenbrunner, D'Agostini, or Reaves on line four, etc. I'd be way cool with Porter in there, too. Sobotka-Nichol-Porter is such a fast, aggressive, and responsible fourth line.
I can agree with that. I suggested moving Perron down to the 3rd line in the GDT to ease his defensive responsibilities and improve his matchups, but that won't necessarily help in San Jose without the last change to get the desired matchups.
I'm extremely curious to see what Hitchcock does for game 3. At first I thought Steen was a lock to be on the 3rd line, but now I'm not so sure.
We are not breaking the Berglund line up, and Stewart won't go anywhere near the 1st line.
If that's what it takes to get better performances, that's what you do. And at this point, that wouldn't be the first line. Berglund's line is and will be. Berglund has been a lot better than Backes and Steen is going to get more icetime than Perron whether he's a line higher or lower. Just as Sobotka will get more icetime than Arnott, even if he starts the game on an equal or lower line.
So you see that the even strength line is not about strict player quality, it's about default combinations. Which are more about match-ups. Sometimes, it's better to heavily weight a couple lines, other times it's better to have a balance. I think the Blues generally look better with more balance.
I don't think the McDonald-Berglund-Steen line has been any better than the sum of their parts, who are simply playing well, as they pretty much always do, even when apart. Backes, on the other hand, was an offensive factor once in two games, and that was on a freakish move by Oshie. Juggling the lines won't make McDonald, Berglund, or Steen's games degrade, but it could jumpstart Backes. Even if Stewart sits for the rest of the playoffs, Arnott needs to be better and Backes needs to do more than play defense and get punched in the head.
If that's what it takes to get better performances, that's what you do. And at this point, that wouldn't be the first line. Berglund's line is and will be. Berglund has been a lot better than Backes and Steen is going to get more icetime than Perron whether he's a line higher or lower. Just as Sobotka will get more icetime than Arnott, even if he starts the game on an equal or lower line.
So you see that the even strength line is not about strict player quality, it's about default combinations. Which are more about match-ups. Sometimes, it's better to heavily weight a couple lines, other times it's better to have a balance. I think the Blues generally look better with more balance.
I don't think the McDonald-Berglund-Steen line has been any better than the sum of their parts, who are simply playing well, as they pretty much always do, even when apart. Backes, on the other hand, was an offensive factor once in two games, and that was on a freakish move by Oshie. Juggling the lines won't make McDonald, Berglund, or Steen's games degrade, but it could jumpstart Backes. Even if Stewart sits for the rest of the playoffs, Arnott needs to be better and Backes needs to do more than play defense and get punched in the head.
While I understand and appreciate the Backes criticisms, Oshie deserves more criticism...with Perron deserving the most on that line.
While I understand and appreciate the Backes criticisms, Oshie deserves more criticism...with Perron deserving the most on that line.
Perron and Oshie are at least getting the puck to the net. Backes has been offensively ineffective since several games before the playoffs.
Mostly, I'm not really even talking about criticism so much as how to throw out lines that will balance things. That includes jumpstarting guys and playing Stewart when, even though he's disappointing, has looked better than other guys who were not scratched.
It would be nice if the Backes line can score more, but I think asking them to shut down the Thornton line completely (Thornton has no points in 6 games this year against the Blues) and then being overly worried if they're not scoring on top of that shouldn't be the primary concern. Things are good right now with the matchups. The Blues' second line looks far more dangerous than does the Sharks' second line. And the Sharks' lower lines don't look very dangerous either. This is just a close to the vest series. You play things close and have just a bit of an edge on each line. That's what we're seeing.
Perron and Oshie are at least getting the puck to the net. Backes has been offensively ineffective since several games before the playoffs.
Mostly, I'm not really even talking about criticism so much as how to throw out lines that will balance things. That includes jumpstarting guys and playing Stewart when, even though he's disappointing, has looked better than other guys who were not scratched.
They might be getting the puck to the net more, but they are also letting the puck exit the offensive zone more.
Personally though my biggest beef is with Perron. He looks super timid at times and is loosing more puck battles than seen in a long time. If he doesn't generate more offense, then he is getting closer to a liability than an asset.
I agree on the Stewart front though. While his play has been underwhelming he outperformed a couple Blues that were not scratched and would have been better than D Agostini, Arnott or Langs tonight. I am really interested in seeing if he responds to the benching well or not.
It would be nice if the Backes line can score more, but I think asking them to shut down the Thornton line completely (Thornton has no points in 6 games this year against the Blues) and then being overly worried if they're not scoring on top of that shouldn't be the primary concern. Things are good right now with the matchups. The Blues' second line looks far more dangerous than does the Sharks' second line. And the Sharks' lower lines don't look very dangerous either. This is just a close to the vest series. You play things close and have just a bit of an edge on each line. That's what we're seeing.
THIS is the key. The Blues completely controlled The Sharks' top line and didn't have much problem with the lower lines. If this can be continued, -you keep doing this-It doesn't matter who scores on your team, as long as someone does. The Blues outshoot, outchance the other team, and score more. They win. You keep the lineup similar.
