Once again, you're proving my point - in order to match the top 4 from last year's Cup-winning defensive corps, all we need is a Willie Mitchell-type. A 35-year-old injury-prone shut-down defensive defenseman, who managed to stay healthy long enough to put together a very impressive playoff run. That shouldn't be too hard to find.
There is something to be said for adding some size back there too. Not necessarily Hal Gill size, but damn we look small when we play teams like Anaheim and LAK. Substituting Russell for someone like Regehr might help us better counter the Getzlols and Carters and Hossas.
To me, this topic is more about a vision for the competitive nature of the team than about where the holes are in the roster. As PocketNines pointed out, those holes haven't changed in quite some time and we're all painfully aware of what they are.
I see a team with a lot of talent, but also with a lot of diversity in style. That might sound like a good thing, but as BadgersandBlues alludes below, I'm not so sure that it is in this case. Too many different styles and tendencies can dilute the overall effectiveness/identity of a team, and I think that's happening here. This team simply plays better when its identity is a bit more homogenous.
To that end, what's the vision here that we should aspire to, and who fits that vision moving forward?
Personally, I think a good goal for this team is to be a more talented Nashville (from years past). To that end, I think Perron is the clear odd man out up front. That's not a knock on Perron as a player. I just think he looks like a round peg in a square hole when it comes to fitting in with the rest of the team at this point in time. Somehow turning Perron into Pavelski would be huge for the Blues. Beyond that, I'm pretty happy with what I see up front (as I'm assuming McDonald will get things turned around).
On the back end, I personally tend to agree with Kimzy59's vision for what to add to the defense. Transition play is the lifeblood of this team, and I'll be very disappointed if we bring in a defenseman to shore up the left side who is deficient in that area. Beyond that and at least average mobility/defense, I don't have a strong opinion for how the defender should get the job done (physicality, positioning, stickwork, etc.). I have no idea who is a reasonable player to target at this point.
There is something to be said for adding some size back there too. Not necessarily Hal Gill size, but damn we look small when we play teams like Anaheim and LAK. Substituting Russell for someone like Regehr might help us better counter the Getzlols and Carters and Hossas.
I wouldn't want to substitute Russell - I like his speed on that bottom pair with Polak. I would be looking for a Redden substitute as Shatty's partner if Jackman stays with Petro. In all honesty, I'd much rather just roll the dice with Cole and let him play the rest of the season so that we can see what we've got with him (and whether we need to look into trading him), and then address the LD situation in the offseason. But if we were to do a deadline deal, that would push Redden to the press box and Cole back to Peoria, which would be okay I guess. If we get a rental (Hainsey, Leopold), then we have the option of re-signing him for next season or inserting/trading Cole. If we get someone with another year on his contract (Tallinder, Klesla), then Cole resumes his #7 role and we let Redden walk.
Once again, you're proving my point - in order to match the top 4 from last year's Cup-winning defensive corps, all we need is a Willie Mitchell-type. A 35-year-old injury-prone shut-down defensive defenseman, who managed to stay healthy long enough to put together a very impressive playoff run. That shouldn't be too hard to find.
Don't know what to tell you, but you have no idea what you're talking about when it comes to Mitchell.
We need a solid, yet not necessarily spectacular LD. If we are doing to roll 3 scoring line (Detroit did it back in the day), we need a 3rd scoring line center. We have 3 goaltenders that have played well at stretches. Riding the hot hand should be good enough.
To me, this topic is more about a vision for the competitive nature of the team than about where the holes are in the roster. As PocketNines pointed out, those holes haven't changed in quite some time and we're all painfully aware of what they are.
I see a team with a lot of talent, but also with a lot of diversity in style. That might sound like a good thing, but as BadgersandBlues alludes below, I'm not so sure that it is in this case. Too many different styles and tendencies can dilute the overall effectiveness/identity of a team, and I think that's happening here. This team simply plays better when its identity is a bit more homogenous.
To that end, what's the vision here that we should aspire to, and who fits that vision moving forward?
Personally, I think a good goal for this team is to be a more talented Nashville (from years past). To that end, I think Perron is the clear odd man out up front. That's not a knock on Perron as a player. I just think he looks like a round peg in a square hole when it comes to fitting in with the rest of the team at this point in time. Somehow turning Perron into Pavelski would be huge for the Blues. Beyond that, I'm pretty happy with what I see up front (as I'm assuming McDonald will get things turned around).
On the back end, I personally tend to agree with Kimzy59's vision for what to add to the defense. Transition play is the lifeblood of this team, and I'll be very disappointed if we bring in a defenseman to shore up the left side who is deficient in that area. Beyond that and at least average mobility/defense, I don't have a strong opinion for how the defender should get the job done (physicality, positioning, stickwork, etc.). I have no idea who is a reasonable player to target at this point.
This is basically where I headed in the OP. I am more concerned with/interested in the overall identity of this team.
This is basically where I headed in the OP. I am more concerned with/interested in the overall identity of this team.
Not enough skill to play an amazing puck possession style, while there's not enough workers to put the hurt on the other team.
I also agree that not having 9 legitimate scoring threats makes the idea of a depth team kind of moot. As soon as injuries occur, you no longer have what it takes to outscore the other team. That's a problem.
Last season, teams had to fight like mad to get the puck across their own blue line. The Blues had a great system that the whole team implemented. That's not happening this year for some reason -- note that nobody is accusing the Blues of using a "trap" this year, even though we're allowing 2 shots less per game.
Opposing teams get a better transition, which is leading to better scoring chances, which is leading to more goals. I suspect that this is also why our goalkeepers look a lot worse than they did last year (which is to say that I don't think Halak/Elliot are as stellar as they appeared to be last year or as under-skilled as they appear to be this year).
I agree with the posters that suggest that, first and foremost, the Blues have to get back on the same page with respect to the system that worked last year. Assuming they do that, then it would be worth it to sacrifice a top forward/prospect to get that puck-moving LHD we need. Unfortunately, I don't think bolstering the defense (and I totally agree that that's the move that needs to be made), without an accompanying change in attitude, is going to alter the course of this season.
Not enough skill to play an amazing puck possession style, while there's not enough workers to put the hurt on the other team.
I also agree that not having 9 legitimate scoring threats makes the idea of a depth team kind of moot. As soon as injuries occur, you no longer have what it takes to outscore the other team. That's a problem.
Why is it a problem? That's the not the Blues' game. Ken Hitchcock was hired because Armstrong knew he had a core group of forwards that didn't have elite skill but rather a group of really solid two-way players that Hithcock could mold into a unit that would thrive under a 200 foot system.
If anything, adding more talent has hurt the Blues' team identity at various parts of the season and the string of poor goaltending only further exposed what happens when defensive is sacrificed for an offense that isn't close to being one of the leagues elite.
McDonald and Tarsenko were both out of the lineup when the Blues played their most dominant and stifling period of the year against Phoenix in the 3rd last week. For various reasons, they are simply are an easier team to play against this season.
So we should trade our skill players because we play better without them? A change is coming soon enough...It's inevitable. That game was also against Phoenix. I want to see that against Vancouver, LA, and Chicago.
Why is it a problem? That's the not the Blues' game. Ken Hitchcock was hired because Armstrong knew he had a core group of forwards that didn't have elite skill but rather a group of really solid two-way players that Hithcock could mold into a unit that would thrive under a 200 foot system.
If anything, adding more talent has hurt the Blues' team identity at various parts of the season and the string of poor goaltending only further exposed what happens when defensive is sacrificed for an offense that isn't close to being one of the leagues elite.
McDonald and Tarsenko were both out of the lineup when the Blues played their most dominant and stifling period of the year against Phoenix in the 3rd last week. For various reasons, they are simply are an easier team to play against this season.
I tend to agree with this. People mention Hitch and his "system", which I thought was predicated on defense first. Trading Arnott/Langs for Schwartz/Tarasenko has not only sacrificed defense for offense, but also experience for youth. At this point, I'd rather address the situation in the offseason, instead of making a deadline deal that could further upset the odd chemistry that we have. This team, as it is currently built, is good enough to get into the playoffs. Sure, we may not advance as far as we'd like, but we might as well give Schwartz/Tank/Cole as much experience as possible this season and see how far we can go - I've always felt that this was a transition year anyway.
We should build off of the Chicago model - after they won the Cup, they made several lineup changes and still got the #8 seed, then improved with a solid year last year, and now they've got the best record in the league.
I tend to agree with this. People mention Hitch and his "system", which I thought was predicated on defense first. Trading Arnott/Langs for Schwartz/Tarasenko has not only sacrificed defense for offense, but also experience for youth. At this point, I'd rather address the situation in the offseason, instead of making a deadline deal that could further upset the odd chemistry that we have. This team, as it is currently built, is good enough to get into the playoffs. Sure, we may not advance as far as we'd like, but we might as well give Schwartz/Tank/Cole as much experience as possible this season and see how far we can go - I've always felt that this was a transition year anyway.
We should build off of the Chicago model - after they won the Cup, they made several lineup changes and still got the #8 seed, then improved with a solid year last year, and now they've got the best record in the league.
Schwartz has blossomed as the year has gone along. He fits the system and has become a piece of the puzzle because of his smarts and positioning.
Tarasenko, on the other hand, I agree with you. I think is the elephant in the room up front that no one talks about. I've been quite underwhelmed by many aspects of his game. I think the only dynamic element in his arsenal this season has been his release.
Now I understand the transition was going to take some time, especially in a lockout year, and I think next season he is going to be much more effective on a nightly basis with a full offseason to grasp the system, the smaller surface, and the culture. But as far as this season is concerned, I think when he's been healthy he has played a role in the conversation about why the Blues allow more rush chances this season 5 on 5, why the gap closure isn't as good, why they aren't as defensively stifling at even strength, etc.
Tarasenko is on pace for 60 points in his first season in North America. I think there's more to him than his release...Especially his effort level and playmaking skills.
He exploded on to the scene in his first month like most Calder favorites but has gone 1-3-4 and -6 in 11 games since January. He shot total has gone down as team's started to study and key on him.
But really his stat line would be irrelevant to me if the guy was solid away from the puck or on the forecheck or had a great motor or brought anything else to the table other than a wicked shot. He was certainly not advertised as a guy who was a one-dimensional player but I feel like he has been for most of the season.
Now I gave some caveats about his game in my previous post and I'll add that he looked fatigued as hell before he got hurt with the condensed schedule but I've been underwhelmed by most parts of Vlady's game. That's all.
Tarasenko is on pace for 60 points in his first season in North America. I think there's more to him than his release...Especially his effort level and playmaking skills.
He gets open and when he gets the puck, he gets a great shot on net. I mean to be honest he doesn't have fantastic puck control, he is still get out muscled in any puck battle, a lot of his passes are never on our players tape and could work on that, and he floats a lot.
Obviously he has tremendous skill and I still expect him to put up a bunch of points even right now because of his ability to get open and that wicked shot he has. But in the future when he starts to mature and play the system and just generally grows as a player I could see him as an 80+ point player.
Schwartz on the other hand you can see is a very mature kid. He has a strong work ethic and playing udner Hitchcock can turn him into a great 2-Way playmaking winger which is rare. Along with Hitch's coaching and Jaden's smarts, I could see a 20-40 player while still playing a very hard 2-Way game.
I also do and don't like the idea of 3 scoring lines. I think in the next year or 2 we will need to trade off a lot of our forward corps we have now.
Once again, you're proving my point - in order to match the top 4 from last year's Cup-winning defensive corps, all we need is a Willie Mitchell-type. A 35-year-old injury-prone shut-down defensive defenseman, who managed to stay healthy long enough to put together a very impressive playoff run. That shouldn't be too hard to find.
The problem here is that P9's considers Willie Mitchel some kind of Elite physical Shut-Down D man that only a handful of players are comparable to. The numbers blow that opinion out of the water, but he holds it none the less.
Personally, I've never been overly high on Mitchell. He is capable of playing a good physical defensive game; but he's also extremely fragile, more than a little inconsistent, has poor mobility and is worse than Jackman with the puck on his stick. For all the whining people do about Jackman, Mitchell has consistently performed at a lower level than Jax over the last 5 years. Calling Mitchell an "Elite" anything is a gross exaggeration of his ability IMO. He is a good defensive D man who is best suited in a #4 role next to a true top 2 caliber PMD. He is not a guy you build around and he is certainly not a true top pairing guy.
Personally, I would take Robyn Regehr over Mitchell any day, even with Regehr's supposed decline.
No offense, but I'll side with poster PavelDatsyuk, who proved last year what a shrewd analyst he is when it comes to defensemen. Definitely one of the sharpest guys on hfboards, really deeply analyzes things. He has Willie Mitchell as elite. He and I agree.
Here's the main thread where it was discussed "who are the top 15 defensive defensemen in the league?"
Kimzey is a guy who thinks Cole is not an NHL player and is simply a piece of crap. So I kinda know where I'm siding on this one.
No offense, but I'll side with poster PavelDatsyuk, who proved last year what a shrewd analyst he is when it comes to defensemen. Definitely one of the sharpest guys on hfboards, really deeply analyzes things. He has Willie Mitchell as elite. He and I agree.
Here's the main thread where it was discussed "who are the top 15 defensive defensemen in the league?"
Kimzey is a guy who thinks Cole is not an NHL player and is simply a piece of crap. So I kinda know where I'm siding on this one.
1) Like I said; IF Mitchell is Elite, Jackman is Elite. Jackman was better in every category last year and both made Datsyuk's little list.
It is of interest to me why you say that Mitchell is an Elite defensive D man, but then downplay Jackman's role on the team.
2) Don't put words in my mouth.
I do not think Cole is a piece of crap, I just don't think he has done anything to earn a regular spot in the lineup(what do you know; Hitchcock agree's with me). Right now Cole is a fringe 6/7 guy who, based on his age, might be better served in Peoria getting more experience. His defensive game is wildly inconsistent, his physical game has disappeared since his hit on Kronwall, his offensive game is mediocre at best and his confidence has disappeared since his suspension last year. He clearly has talent, but there are too many things he needs to improve on before he is worthy of a regular lineup spot; and he needs to raise his ENTIRE game before he can be considered an actual partner for Pietrangelo.
The kid might have talent, but it is an absolute joke for you or anybody else to tout this guy as a potential partner for Pietrangelo given what he has displayed thus far in the NHL. He has yet to even reach Colaiacovo's level of play; and Cola proved he wasn't good enough when it came to crunch time last year.
Last edited by EastonBlues22: 03-21-2013 at 08:59 PM.
Reason: inflammatory hyperbole
I didn't "scream" Mitchell's an elite defensive dman. I simply typed it. Not even caps. When challenged, I held to my opinion. You'll notice in that thread a fair number of other decent posters had Mitchell in the top 15 in the league. I've also said Jackman is pretty darn good as a defensive defenseman.
This whole thing came up because the insistence was that last year's Kings were a one-defenseman team. Doughty and that's it. But Voynov really emerged in the postseason and is flourishing this year as a top-pairing caliber player. Mitchell was simply a monster in the playoffs last year, and I'd laugh at anyone who would suggest otherwise.
Kimzey himself agrees with me that the Blues' #1 priority is a legit LHD, but decided to go all-in on an attack over Willie Mitchell? Bizarre.
Also the word "agrees" doesn't have an apostrophe in it. Just because a word ends in s doesn't mean an apostrophe goes in front of it. I honestly don't even know how that happens.
Last edited by EastonBlues22: 03-21-2013 at 08:59 PM.
Reason: flame
No offense, but I'll side with poster PavelDatsyuk, who proved last year what a shrewd analyst he is when it comes to defensemen. Definitely one of the sharpest guys on hfboards, really deeply analyzes things. He has Willie Mitchell as elite. He and I agree.
Here's the main thread where it was discussed "who are the top 15 defensive defensemen in the league?"
Fair enough. But then, you'd have to put Jackman on the same level, because he was also on that list.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimzey59
1) Like I said; IF Mitchell is Elite, Jackman is Elite. Jackman was better in every category last year and both made Datsyuk's little list.
It is of interest to me why you scream that Mitchell is an Elite defensive D man, but then downplay Jackman's role on the team.
So, I'll give P9s the benefit of the doubt here in saying Mitchell is elite. But I'll also allow for Kimzey pointing out that Jackman is of a similar level. So let's go back to P9s list:
Based on the "Datsyuk list", I'll place Jackman and Mitchell as equals. Therefore, all we need to match the Kings is a Rob Scuderi-type, isn't that true? That is simply all I'm saying.
Well no, you'd have to get Jackman to play out of his mind in the playoffs. Mitchell was a beast last year. If Pietrangelo, Shattenkirk and a beastly Jackman perform in the playoffs and remain healthy, yeah, the Blues don't really need to add much. Do you think Jackman will be a playoff beast? I'd rather add someone.
Everyone that earns a paycheck for playing hockey on this team needs to play harder. EVERYONE. It's their only job and they have all been playing since they could walk so there is no excuse, ever. Taking "20 minutes off" in a 60 minute hockey game is so ridiculous. My god, I hear that excuse after every loss. Most guys don't even play 20 minutes in any game...sheesh. Go out there, give positive support to each other (who ever it is in the lineup), and run that other team into the ground because that is what they get paid to do. Every player has to play harder than the other team to win, plain and simple. Some guys may not like each other personally, I get that, but on the ice that doesn't matter; they earn their living playing a game. Play it like you don't want to work the night shift at McDonald's next week. Hell, I don't and I PAY to play the sport.
Trades? Who's got time for trades? We know how well this team can play when they put in the effort.
Wait, now Tarasenko is going to be the new whipping boy?
A rookie making the transition to North America whose training camp was pissed away by the lockout and still made a huge splash? A guy whose showing a great attitude and desire to learn?
I don't disagree that he's been caught floating at times, but if anyone on the roster deserves a bye for a few mistakes its Tarasenko. The guy is going to be a brilliant star, and he'll be defensively sound once he gets adjusted. Anything he does this season is bonus in my opinion....and the way he draws attention should create some more opportunities for other lines.
Right? We expected some growing pains and (over 82) 30 or so points. 40 if he had a good year. Since the growing pains began, he's been on that 30 point pace...But when he's been ON it's another story. The struggles we see are the perfect time to teach the kid how to play the right way. He's open and EAGER to do just that according to Pang. This kid is growing...Let's enjoy watching an offensive star blossom and not expect him to be Oshie just yet.
