2022-2023 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[PJJJP]

I think so also.

I'm watching headless chickens running around in the D zone who don't know where to go. I've seen so much hesitation in the D zone and players losing their men all the time. The Defense always seems to leave the front of the net like Mikkola on that play yesterday. The forwards have no idea what to do when the puck is being cycled up high and the defense always seems to double team the same person leaving the middle of the ice open for anyone

 

[PocketNines]

The Blues don't have the personnel to focus on D. Instead they have Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and Krug for the new NHL that Armstrong sees. Really powerful vision.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

Berube is a good coach who will probably get a quality job after he leaves the Blues. He’s also done a good job with developing young players.

But when you’re jettisoning your core and looking at some form of a rebuild, sometimes you just need new voices. No point in making a change now, but in the next year or so it may be smarter to bring in a new coach. Or perhaps changing assistants will be enough of a fresh voice.

 

[ChicagoBlues]

I'm watching headless chickens running around in the D zone who don't know where to go. I've seen so much hesitation in the D zone and players losing their men all the time. The Defense always seems to leave the front of the net like Mikkola on that play yesterday. The forwards have no idea what to do when the puck is being cycled up high and the defense always seems to double team the same person leaving the middle of the ice open for anyone

This certainly does happen. Can’t help to think it’s somewhat of a mixed-message coaching issue.

 

[Brian39]

The Blues don't have the personnel to focus on D. Instead they have Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and Krug for the new NHL that Armstrong sees. Really powerful vision.

Robert Thomas is a +5 at 5 on 5 this year and has had a positive goal differential at 5 on 5 in every season of his career. His overall +/- is -2 this year, which is 2nd only to Buch's -1 in our top 9. He has been very effective at stripping pucks off of guys (his 49 takeaways is 5th in the league) and while his raw possession numbers are underwhelming, his relative possession numbers are strong. He shouldn't be getting Selke attention this year, but he's a long ways away from being poor defensively.

He is currently set to be the 20th highest paid center in the league next season. There are 3 more guys coming in just behind him at exactly $8M AAV and it feels like we are likely to see a couple more guys join the $8M club since Horvat, Larkin and ROR are all pending UFAs and PL Dubois is a pending RFA.

Welcome to the below average 1C market. He is currently tied for 22nd in center scoring and holds his own defensively against top 6 competition. he is playing like a low end 1C, is currently wildly underpaid for that performance and he will be paid right in line with his current performance in year 1 of an extension that buys his entire prime and ends when he is just 31.

I don't see any argument at all that locking him up at his extension was poor vision by the GM.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Tucker down and Alexandrov back up. With borts back and Thomas hurt, hardly a surprise.

 

[PocketNines]

Robert Thomas is a +5 at 5 on 5 this year and has had a positive goal differential at 5 on 5 in every season of his career. His overall +/- is -2 this year, which is 2nd only to Buch's -1 in our top 9. He has been very effective at stripping pucks off of guys (his 49 takeaways is 5th in the league) and while his raw possession numbers are underwhelming, his relative possession numbers are strong. He shouldn't be getting Selke attention this year, but he's a long ways away from being poor defensively.

He is currently set to be the 20th highest paid center in the league next season. There are 3 more guys coming in just behind him at exactly $8M AAV and it feels like we are likely to see a couple more guys join the $8M club since Horvat, Larkin and ROR are all pending UFAs and PL Dubois is a pending RFA.

Welcome to the below average 1C market. He is currently tied for 22nd in center scoring and holds his own defensively against top 6 competition. he is playing like a low end 1C, is currently wildly underpaid for that performance and he will be paid right in line with his current performance in year 1 of an extension that buys his entire prime.

I don't see any argument at all that locking him up at his extension was poor vision by the GM.

He takes the puck off guys sticks and loses them two seconds later with his own turnover. He is terrible taking care of the puck and you can't build the team D that people were saying should be built if you are building around guys who very specifically are bad at maintaining puck possession. He is careless, he is a perimeter guy for the most part, he swoops and drop passes and is more than fine taking unacceptable risks as he tries to make fancy plays. He rarely shoots so he is easy to defend. He doesn't have the power to go through defenders so he has to trick and outskate them which involves spinning and swooping and looking for some cross ice pass through the middle of the box. Teams are just taking that away from him and he doesn't seem to have much of an offensive answer. His offensive pressing is leading to forcing plays and lots of turnovers. He cannot be in the 1C role on a team whose identity is team D and expect that to be contender level hockey.

 

[Brian39]

He takes the puck off guys sticks and loses them two seconds later with his own turnover. He is terrible taking care of the puck and you can't build the team D that people were saying should be built if you are building around guys who very specifically are bad at maintaining puck possession. He is careless, he is a perimeter guy for the most part, he swoops and drop passes and is more than fine taking unacceptable risks as he tries to make fancy plays. He rarely shoots so he is easy to defend. He doesn't have the power to go through defenders so he has to trick and outskate them which involves spinning and swooping and looking for some cross ice pass through the middle of the box. Teams are just taking that away from him and he doesn't seem to have much of an offensive answer. His offensive pressing is leading to forcing plays and lots of turnovers. He cannot be in the 1C role on a team whose identity is team D and expect that to be contender level hockey.

He has just shy of twice the takeaways as he does turnovers. He has 26 giveaways, which is tied for 149th most in the NHL. He's no more careless with the puck than any other forward who is playing big minutes in an offensive role.

Here are some notably forwards with 30+ giveaways: Ovie, Eichel, Larkin, Kadri, Dubois, P Kane, Stamkos, Svechnikov, Huberdeau, Necas, Keller, Aho, Koptiar, Kuznetzov, Toews, Zibanejad, Crosby, Tavares, Robertson, Meier, Matthews, Trocheck, M Tkachuk, Marchand, J Hughes, Panarin, McDavid, Panarin, Marner, Kucheron, Draisaitl, Barzal, Malkin. and Pastrnak.

He's on pace for another 20 goal and 70+ point season despite not having much of an answer for the adjustments teams have made to him. The vast majority of 1Cs don't meet the criteria you seem to be placing on him and the ones who do are worth a hell of a lot more than the contract Thomas got. Guys pushing to point per game take chances with the puck. That is the reality of the NHL.

 

[Vladys Gumption]

Berube is a good coach who will probably get a quality job after he leaves the Blues. He’s also done a good job with developing young players.

But when you’re jettisoning your core and looking at some form of a rebuild, sometimes you just need new voices. No point in making a change now, but in the next year or so it may be smarter to bring in a new coach. Or perhaps changing assistants will be enough of a fresh voice.

I just wish the timing had worked out better so we could hire Montgomery. He was such a good addition to the staff.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Robert Thomas is a +5 at 5 on 5 this year and has had a positive goal differential at 5 on 5 in every season of his career. His overall +/- is -2 this year, which is 2nd only to Buch's -1 in our top 9. He has been very effective at stripping pucks off of guys (his 49 takeaways is 5th in the league) and while his raw possession numbers are underwhelming, his relative possession numbers are strong. He shouldn't be getting Selke attention this year, but he's a long ways away from being poor defensively.

He is currently set to be the 20th highest paid center in the league next season. There are 3 more guys coming in just behind him at exactly $8M AAV and it feels like we are likely to see a couple more guys join the $8M club since Horvat, Larkin and ROR are all pending UFAs and PL Dubois is a pending RFA.

Welcome to the below average 1C market. He is currently tied for 22nd in center scoring and holds his own defensively against top 6 competition. he is playing like a low end 1C, is currently wildly underpaid for that performance and he will be paid right in line with his current performance in year 1 of an extension that buys his entire prime and ends when he is just 31.

I don't see any argument at all that locking him up at his extension was poor vision by the GM.

Thomas is helluva player but he isn’t superstar. And he is paid fairly for that. But for us to contend again without superstar we need probably 5 guys up front st this level. We have 3 not counting ufas. So we we need a couple more, at least. Could be snuggly or Bolduc or this years 1st or whomever. So we are likely at least 2-3 years away from that realistically, even if we hit on our draft picks. In addition to having at least 2-3 d at this level (which we potentially have in Faulk and Parayko but haven’t gotten close to that level play this year). We get that level of talent and fill in depth we can contend. If we get much, much better coaching. So as you say, it seems silly for folks to pick on Thomas when he is one of few true core pieces we have.

 

[PocketNines]

He has just shy of twice the takeaways as he does turnovers. He has 26 giveaways, which is tied for 149th most in the NHL. He's no more careless with the puck than any other forward who is playing big minutes in an offensive role.

Here are some notably forwards with 30+ giveaways: Ovie, Eichel, Larkin, Kadri, Dubois, P Kane, Stamkos, Svechnikov, Huberdeau, Necas, Keller, Aho, Koptiar, Kuznetzov, Toews, Zibanejad, Crosby, Tavares, Robertson, Meier, Matthews, Trocheck, M Tkachuk, Marchand, J Hughes, Panarin, McDavid, Panarin, Marner, Kucheron, Draisaitl, Barzal, Malkin. and Pastrnak.

He's on pace for another 20 goal and 70+ point season despite not having much of an answer for the adjustments teams have made to him. The vast majority of 1Cs don't meet the criteria you seem to be placing on him and the ones who do are worth a hell of a lot more than the contract Thomas got. Guys pushing to point per game take chances with the puck. That is the reality of the NHL.

Step back and just think of the overall discussion we're on, about teamwide defensive identity. In watching every game, I find it noticeable how loosey goosey Thomas' play is. When he is in a more limited role and not THE guy, you can take this tradeoff more. OR, in the alternative, you can have a stout D whose specialty is quick reaction to turnovers when they occur. Blues have neither around him and so it's a bad vision. Those Bruin guys you mention have Lindholm; the Lightning guys have Hedman, mentioned Panarin twice, several of those guys are on teams with a similarly problematic lack of team D identity, etc..

I am saying that the overall vision Armstrong has been pushing toward, this seemingly more mobile attacking set of players to whom you're giving the minutes and dollars, is not in line with the discussion about being oriented toward team D. I do not see the Blues being a team with a team D identity behind Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and Krug, all players in the last few years that Armstrong has prioritized and elevated within the team's structure.

 

[Frobbo]

Step back and just think of the overall discussion we're on, about teamwide defensive identity. In watching every game, I find it noticeable how loosey goosey Thomas' play is. When he is in a more limited role and not THE guy, you can take this tradeoff more. OR, in the alternative, you can have a stout D whose specialty is quick reaction to turnovers when they occur. Blues have neither around him and so it's a bad vision. Those Bruin guys you mention have Lindholm; the Lightning guys have Hedman, mentioned Panarin twice, several of those guys are on teams with a similarly problematic lack of team D identity, etc..

I am saying that the overall vision Armstrong has been pushing toward, this seemingly more mobile attacking set of players to whom you're giving the minutes and dollars, is not in line with the discussion about being oriented toward team D. I do not see the Blues being a team with a team D identity behind Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and Krug, all players in the last few years that Armstrong has prioritized and elevated within the team's structure.

Obfusgate much? Two people can be right, you don't have to win every discussion, geez

 

[PocketNines]

Obfusgate much? Two people can be right, you don't have to win every discussion, geez

I am having literally a reasonable discussion. If you want to swoop in for an attack can you at least spell your attack word correctly? it is not too much to ask.

"Get a brain morans!"

 

[taylord22]

Step back and just think of the overall discussion we're on, about teamwide defensive identity. In watching every game, I find it noticeable how loosey goosey Thomas' play is. When he is in a more limited role and not THE guy, you can take this tradeoff more. OR, in the alternative, you can have a stout D whose specialty is quick reaction to turnovers when they occur. Blues have neither around him and so it's a bad vision. Those Bruin guys you mention have Lindholm; the Lightning guys have Hedman, mentioned Panarin twice, several of those guys are on teams with a similarly problematic lack of team D identity, etc..

While my view of Thomas as an individual player is more in-line with Brian, I think you've hit the crux of the issue. And would frankly treat Thomas and Kyrou as very separate instances from one another, to boot.

Thomas has no consistent outlets to fork up/out, and as you pointed out, little insulation for the high risk plays. The D bails on 70/30 plays and is still in a 50/50 race. I think Thomas is capable of playing a more simplified game, but driving Kyrou to do the same is not something he's accomplished. Buch and Thomas have executed simple plays well together, but none of them (and especially Kyrou) are rarely in a shooting position. And thus, forced plays. All three need to make changes, but they -and namely Thomas, IMO- did a fair job carrying the team for a stint.

In the future, I would expect to see a Neighbors/Buch-Thomas-Snuggles line that's perhaps a better balance.

Regardless, Armstrong got caught in a hedge that most of us could see coming from a mile away. Everything is built on a foundation of high-risk play, and the D is the root, for me. You can build around what we have up-front. But you can't do it with the D-core that we have. You need rangy D that can make small plays. If we had that, I'd bet you'd see more consistent cycle games (in addition to the transition game) from Thomas.

Regarding his overall 2-way ability, I'm reserving judgement. He defends VERY well in the NZ, but looks lost in the DZ far too often. My pause is simply due to the fact that O'Reilly and Accari have also looked lost in the DZ frequently.

 

[PJJJP]

While my view of Thomas as an individual player is more in-line with Brian, I think you've hit the crux of the issue. And would frankly treat Thomas and Kyrou as very separate instances from one another, to boot.

Thomas has no consistent outlets to fork up/out, and as you pointed out, little insulation for the high risk plays. The D bails on 70/30 plays and is still in a 50/50 race. I think Thomas is capable of playing a more simplified game, but driving Kyrou to do the same is not something he's accomplished. Buch and Thomas have executed simple plays well together, but none of them (and especially Kyrou) are rarely in a shooting position. And thus, forced plays. All three need to make changes, but they -and namely Thomas, IMO- did a fair job carrying the team for a stint.

In the future, I would expect to see a Neighbors/Buch-Thomas-Snuggles line that's perhaps a better balance.

Regardless, Armstrong got caught in a hedge that most of us could see coming from a mile away. Everything is built on a foundation of high-risk play, and the D is the root, for me. You can build around what we have up-front. But you can't do it with the D-core that we have. You need rangy D that can make small plays. If we had that, I'd bet you'd see more consistent cycle games (in addition to the transition game) from Thomas.

Regarding his overall 2-way ability, I'm reserving judgement. He defends VERY well in the NZ, but looks lost in the DZ far too often. My pause is simply due to the fact that O'Reilly and Accari have also looked lost in the DZ frequently.

tbf all of our players look lost in the DZ

 

[ChicagoBlues]

While my view of Thomas as an individual player is more in-line with Brian, I think you've hit the crux of the issue. And would frankly treat Thomas and Kyrou as very separate instances from one another, to boot.

Thomas has no consistent outlets to fork up/out, and as you pointed out, little insulation for the high risk plays. The D bails on 70/30 plays and is still in a 50/50 race. I think Thomas is capable of playing a more simplified game, but driving Kyrou to do the same is not something he's accomplished. Buch and Thomas have executed simple plays well together, but none of them (and especially Kyrou) are rarely in a shooting position. And thus, forced plays. All three need to make changes, but they -and namely Thomas, IMO- did a fair job carrying the team for a stint.

In the future, I would expect to see a Neighbors/Buch-Thomas-Snuggles line that's perhaps a better balance.

Regardless, Armstrong got caught in a hedge that most of us could see coming from a mile away. Everything is built on a foundation of high-risk play, and the D is the root, for me. You can build around what we have up-front. But you can't do it with the D-core that we have. You need rangy D that can make small plays. If we had that, I'd bet you'd see more consistent cycle games (in addition to the transition game) from Thomas.

Regarding his overall 2-way ability, I'm reserving judgement. He defends VERY well in the NZ, but looks lost in the DZ far too often. My pause is simply due to the fact that O'Reilly and Accari have also looked lost in the DZ frequently.

DA got caught in multiple hedges and lost.

 

[PocketNines]

While my view of Thomas as an individual player is more in-line with Brian, I think you've hit the crux of the issue. And would frankly treat Thomas and Kyrou as very separate instances from one another, to boot.

Thomas has no consistent outlets to fork up/out, and as you pointed out, little insulation for the high risk plays. The D bails on 70/30 plays and is still in a 50/50 race. I think Thomas is capable of playing a more simplified game, but driving Kyrou to do the same is not something he's accomplished. Buch and Thomas have executed simple plays well together, but none of them (and especially Kyrou) are rarely in a shooting position. And thus, forced plays. All three need to make changes, but they -and namely Thomas, IMO- did a fair job carrying the team for a stint.

In the future, I would expect to see a Neighbors/Buch-Thomas-Snuggles line that's perhaps a better balance.

Regardless, Armstrong got caught in a hedge that most of us could see coming from a mile away. Everything is built on a foundation of high-risk play, and the D is the root, for me. You can build around what we have up-front. But you can't do it with the D-core that we have. You need rangy D that can make small plays. If we had that, I'd bet you'd see more consistent cycle games (in addition to the transition game) from Thomas.

Regarding his overall 2-way ability, I'm reserving judgement. He defends VERY well in the NZ, but looks lost in the DZ far too often. My pause is simply due to the fact that O'Reilly and Accari have also looked lost in the DZ frequently.

But how do you get all of that out of my obvious "obfusgation"

 

[taylord22]

But how do you get all of that out of my obvious "obfusgation"

I've been a passive fan of reading yours and Brian's responses to one another, this year. Better than what I pay the Athletic for, currently. You two are never far off from one another — but I enjoy the debate when subtle details are coming from slightly different bases.

I haven't posted as much in recent years due to some settings/compatibility issues with HF and my set-up. Changed recently. And perfect timing — things are going to be interesting around here over the coming year.

 

[PocketNines]

I've been a passive fan of reading yours and Brian's responses to one another, this year. Better than what I pay the Athletic for, currently. You two are never far off from one another — but I enjoy the debate when subtle details are coming from slightly different bases.

I haven't posted as much in recent years due to some settings/compatibility issues with HF and my set-up. Changed recently. And perfect timing — things are going to be interesting around here over the coming year.

Thanks, I appreciate that someone understands I'm here to have a detailed and challenging discussion on Blues topics and I do it in good faith and don't need the endless stream of bad faith attacks, but an endless stream of bad faith attacks is all life is. This is why I spend time ranking noir films. A genre that gets people in their essence.

You should post more here, as one of the sharpest observers and writers.

 

[BadgersandBlues]

I think Taylord22 hits it right - I think Brian39's opinion of Thomas in specific is more in line with mine, but the overall "core" that we've transitioned to of Thomas/Faulk/Kyrou/Krug is just simply not it, as P9's puts.

It's a pickle, to be sure. Watching JC last night was fun - I mean, I can't see a better option than him to return us to competitiveness. Well, that and maybe a much better coaching staff (Not Berube). It's a pretty damn straight line looking at our success last year and now Boston's success this year to Montgomery. Not to mention he was getting great results in Dallas with that team (Heiskanin in particular).

 

[joe galiba]

Krug has his own faults, but his outlet passes along with his movement and passing on the PP, since his return, really highlights how average to poor to abysmal the rest of our D is at that part of the game

 

[LGB]

It's a shooting gallery between the dots. Also on offense we don't get shots around the blue paint.

 

[oPlaiD]

View attachment 642627

It's a shooting gallery between the dots. Also on offense we don't get shots around the blue paint.

Looking at that heat map is annoying when you consider the Blues aren't even aggressive stopping zone entries. So they're letting the other guy skate it into the zone uncontested, yet they aren't even protecting the middle of the ice. So what's the point of ceding the zone if you aren't keeping shots to the outside?

 

[Brian39]

Step back and just think of the overall discussion we're on, about teamwide defensive identity. In watching every game, I find it noticeable how loosey goosey Thomas' play is. When he is in a more limited role and not THE guy, you can take this tradeoff more. OR, in the alternative, you can have a stout D whose specialty is quick reaction to turnovers when they occur. Blues have neither around him and so it's a bad vision. Those Bruin guys you mention have Lindholm; the Lightning guys have Hedman, mentioned Panarin twice, several of those guys are on teams with a similarly problematic lack of team D identity, etc..

I am saying that the overall vision Armstrong has been pushing toward, this seemingly more mobile attacking set of players to whom you're giving the minutes and dollars, is not in line with the discussion about being oriented toward team D. I do not see the Blues being a team with a team D identity behind Thomas, Kyrou, Faulk and Krug, all players in the last few years that Armstrong has prioritized and elevated within the team's structure.

I totally agree with you that the overall vision hasn't put enough emphasis on team D and I very much dislike the composition of the blueline.

But Thomas isn't part of that problem. Thomas is better defensively than most young 1Cs. His defensive reputation as a prospect was good. He's improved defensively at the NHL level and is as good or better defensively as most top 6 centers. Avoiding drafting him over his defensive game would have been a mistake. Stunting his offensive development over his defense would have been a mistake. Not giving him minutes this year because of his defense while he's been better defensively than Schenn and our perennial Selke candidate has completely lost his game would have been a mistake. And moving him or bridging him to UFA because he's not a top 10 1C would have been a mistake.

Thomas was a good pick, he's been developed well, he's made tangible improvements to his defensive game and the contract he was given is currently good value for what he is as a player. His existence on the team, in our lineup and within our cap structure is not a reason to critique the vision. He doesn't belong in the critique of the roster construction. Drafting and developing a top 6 C of any style and then paying him what he is worth is what every GM in the league should try to do.

 

[Brian39]

I've been a passive fan of reading yours and Brian's responses to one another, this year. Better than what I pay the Athletic for, currently. You two are never far off from one another — but I enjoy the debate when subtle details are coming from slightly different bases.

I think @PocketNines and I both have fairly similar argumentative writing styles and are both a bit too condescending for our own good. Usually makes for fun conversations.