2023-2024 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[BlueDream]

Whatever, Kapanen is just a seat warmer.

I want him jettisoned out of here as soon as Dean is ready.

 

[Xerloris]

Whatever, Kapanen is just a seat warmer.

I want him jettisoned out of here as soon as Dean is ready.

Kapanen played well for us last year. I hope he does the same this year and brings back a pick at the deadline. 2nd or 3rd would be realistic I hope.

 

[Majorityof1]

But you're leaving out the extremely important "and PP specialist" portion of his role.

Torey Krug at his best was arguably the best PP QB in the league. I think that ship sailed a few years ago, but I believe that he is still very much capable of being a top 10 PP QB in the league. That has real, tangible value that can't simply be ignored when talking about an NHL player. A 3rd pair D who is also a top 10-15 PP QB in the league is a much different conversation than simply a 3rd pair D.

He was 48th in points per game among D men with 10+ games played last year and that was getting squarely 3rd pair minutes at even strength. A return to form on the PP would get him inside the top 40 and potentially inside the top 30.

There is a good argument to be made that being a top 30-40 offensive D man in the league while playing a 3rd pair and top PP QB role is very good. I'd say it falls short of that into 'good' territory and the level of defensive lapses can push it down further. But you can't simply ignore what a player does best and focus only on the weaknesses when determining how he is compared to the rest of the league.

None of this is to say that Krug is worth his contract. None of this is to say that he's a lock to get back into this performance. But you have to factor in everything in a player's toolbox when examining him.

Edit: FWIW, I don't think that the ship has fully sailed on Krug being a positive contributor to the Blues. However, it demands that everything breaks perfectly without a significant roster change. First, a new D zone system needs to dramatically change the way we contest zone entries and protect the front of our net. Second, one of Scandella/Tucker has to play like a legit 3/4 D man while receiving 3/4 minutes./deployment. Third, having one of those guys playing like an actual defensively sound 2nd pair D man allows us to better balance the workload/deployment of Faulk and Parayko. I'm not holding my breath for the 2nd one, but it is within the realm of possibility. The 3rd one is contingent on the 2nd one, so everything has to break just right.

But IF all 3 of those happen and we are able to actually run two competent pairs in the top 4, then I think Krug can positively impact the game at even strength from a sheltered 3rd pair role.

I'm not sure for how many years that is sustainable. And that doesn't mean that he would be worth the cap allocation. And I still firmly believe that the team is best suited by moving him. But I do think it is premature to say that there is no chance he can positively contribute in a 3rd pair and top unit PP role.

Its a fair point that I am leaving out his PP ability. PP is important, but come playoffs, whistles are swallowed. I'd take a better 5v5 player if I had my say, unless they are elite. I don't know if Krug ever was. You say Krug was the best PP QB in the league? Was he? Or was he a good PP QB on Boston with Marchand, Pasta and Bergeron on the same PP. Going from 19-20 to 20-21, Boston's PP only dropped 3.3%. Our PP% also went down adding Krug.

So yea, Krug was a good PP QB, but he doesn't seem to have a huge effect on the results when looking at the team he left and the team he joined. There is a lot of caveats with that analysis, of course. The pandemic probably effected things, McAvoy is a nice guy for Boston to have step up for more PP minutes upon losing Krug, etc etc. But only a 3% decrease when losing the best PP QB in the league????. Is that realy going to bridge the gap to justify paying a 3rd pairing D $6.5 M?

 

[stl76]

FFS Kapanen

 

[Renard]

The reports I read didn't say anything about an accident or injuries - so Kapanen just has a DUI. Its not good news but not end of the world news either.

 

[Brian39]

Its a fair point that I am leaving out his PP ability. PP is important, but come playoffs, whistles are swallowed.

Whistles get put away in the sense that more infractions occur on the ice that go uncalled. However, the number of PP opportunities in the playoffs slightly increases in the playoffs.

Since the 2016 playoffs, there have been 3759 power-play opportunities in 589 playoff games, or 3.2 power plays per game. In the regular season over the same span, there have been just 3.0 power-play opportunities per game.

Refs decline to call many things that would have been called in the regular season. However, the flip side to this coin is that the style of play at 5 on 5 changes in the playoffs. Teams are more physical, there is more obstruction, more cross checks, more pick plays, more stick work, etc. Being able to play through infractions at 5 on 5 becomes more important in the playoffs because more infractions take place.But even though it takes "more" to get called in the playoffs, there is still about the same amount of PP time in a playoff game as there is in a regular season game. And with the playoff margins often being more narrow in the playoffs, a quality PP is arguably more important in the playoffs than the regular season.

Boston rode a red-hot PP to game 7 of the Cup Final in 2019. We won that series on the thinnest of margins with an OT win, another 1 goal win, and a 2 goal win where the last one was an empty netter. It would be foolish to say that their playoff PP success wasn't important just because the fell just short.

You say Krug was the best PP QB in the league? Was he? Or was he a good PP QB on Boston with Marchand, Pasta and Bergeron on the same PP. Going from 19-20 to 20-21, Boston's PP only dropped 3.3%. Our PP% also went down adding Krug.

So yea, Krug was a good PP QB, but he doesn't seem to have a huge effect on the results when looking at the team he left and the team he joined. There is a lot of caveats with that analysis, of course. The pandemic probably effected things, McAvoy is a nice guy for Boston to have step up for more PP minutes upon losing Krug, etc etc. But only a 3% decrease when losing the best PP QB in the league????.

I wouldn't say he was the best, but there was an argument for it. I think he was certainly elite. But more importantly, you are massively downplaying what happened to Boston's PP with and without Krug. Boston's time as an elite PP unit almost directly syncs up with the years that Krug was the undisputed PP 1 QB.

The 3 years before Krug joined the team:

2020/11: 20th
2011/12: 15th
2012/13: 26th

Krug's first 2 years in the NHL when he was one of two D on the top unit (Chara then Hamilton was the other:

2013/14: 3rd. The unit consisted of Krug, Chara, Krejci, Iginla, and Lucic
2014/15: 18th. The unit consisted of Krug, Hamilton, Eriksson, Bergeron, and a rotating cast.

Then the Bruins moved to a 4F-1D setup with Krug as the undisputed PP1 QB

2015/16: 7th. The unit consisted of Krug, Krejci, Bergeron, Eriksson, and Spooner.
2016/17: 7th. Marchand and Pasta joined the top unit and the Krug, Bergeron, Marchand, Pasta group solidified.
2017/18: 4th
2018/19: 3rd
2019/20: 2nd

The Bruins PP was #1 in the league over this 5 year sample as a whole. #2 in the league over the last 3 years he was there.

Krug leaves in free agency

2020/21: 10th
2021/22: 15th
2022/23: 12th

The PP has been #12 in the league over this 3 year sample. You are very much downplaying the drop off in their PP. 3.3% is not a small drop. Going from truly elite to above-average is not a minor drop.

I also think you are slightly overstating his impact to our PP.

Our PP went down a bit too when adding Krug, but it was a small drop in year 1 and then a big improvement in year 2. Here is the Blues PP leading up to and following Krug:

2017/18: 30th
2018/19: 10th
2019/20: 3rd

Krug addition

2020/21: 6th
2021/22: 2nd
2022/23: 19th

Everyone agrees that he was noticeably worse last year. This conversation started with the idea that he needs to return to his previous form. He tangibly made Boston's PP much better. It fell off by a noticeable margin when he left (even though the Bergeron/Marchand/Pasta core has remained and McAvoy is as you said a pretty decent replacement). There was a tiny drop in our PP when he got to STL (falling from 3rd to 6th in the weird COVID year) and then the next season saw the best PP our organization has ever put on the ice.

He's been quarterbacking top units for 10 years in the NHL and he only has 2 seasons where his team's PP has been outside the top 7 in the league. He's gotten 3 completely separate groups of players to top 3 in the league (Chara/Krejci/Iginla/Lucic, Bergeron/Pasta/Marchand/rotating, and ROR/Tarasenko/Schenn/Perron). You can't just brush that off as happening to be there with good players.

Is that realy going to bridge the gap to justify paying a 3rd pairing D $6.5 M?

I don't know how many times everyone has to agree that no, he is not worth the money. Has anyone said otherwise at any point in the last year? Once again, he is not worth the money. No one is arguing he is worth the money. We're talking about on-ice contributions. A guy can be a very meaningful contributor in a specific role while that role is still not worth the money.

Teams make it work around bad contracts every year in the NHL. A player positively contributing on-ice in a role worth less than his cap hit is a thing that happens all across the league. Players being good but still not worth the money is a common thing. Moving Krug is still going to require creativity due to the contract.

Maybe that is taking on another team's bad contract for a player that can still play a role we are in need of (see the Sanheim trade that fell through). Maybe it is taking on a player who is playing even further below his cap number than Krug but with shorter term. Maybe it is retention. Maybe it is giving up an asset. Maybe it is a combination. But all of these are more realistic avenues to a trade if Krug is effectively doing his job on the ice. And a 3rd pair, top end PP QB is a hell of a lot different of a job than just your average 3rd pair guy.

 

[Thallis]

Whistles get put away in the sense that more infractions occur on the ice that go uncalled. However, the number of PP opportunities in the playoffs slightly increases in the playoffs.

Since the 2016 playoffs, there have been 3759 power-play opportunities in 589 playoff games, or 3.2 power plays per game. In the regular season over the same span, there have been just 3.0 power-play opportunities per game.

Refs decline to call many things that would have been called in the regular season. However, the flip side to this coin is that the style of play at 5 on 5 changes in the playoffs. Teams are more physical, there is more obstruction, more cross checks, more pick plays, more stick work, etc. Being able to play through infractions at 5 on 5 becomes more important in the playoffs because more infractions take place.But even though it takes "more" to get called in the playoffs, there is still about the same amount of PP time in a playoff game as there is in a regular season game. And with the playoff margins often being more narrow in the playoffs, a quality PP is arguably more important in the playoffs than the regular season.

Boston rode a red-hot PP to game 7 of the Cup Final in 2019. We won that series on the thinnest of margins with an OT win, another 1 goal win, and a 2 goal win where the last one was an empty netter. It would be foolish to say that their playoff PP success wasn't important just because the fell just short.

On average it's true that there are slightly more calls in the playoffs than regular season, but what actually happens is that refs call a ton of penalties in games 1 and 2 and then less and less until very few happen in the final 3 deciding games, especially when you eliminate the automatic calls of puck over the glass. The statistic is incredibly misleading.

 

[Brian39]

On average it's true that there are slightly more calls in the playoffs than regular season, but what actually happens is that refs call a ton of penalties in games 1 and 2 and then less and less until very few happen in the final 3 deciding games, especially when you eliminate the automatic calls of puck over the glass. The statistic is incredibly misleading.

I'd suggest reading the article if you have an Athletic subscription. It is a very, very thorough breakdown. But I disagree that what I quoted is an incredibly misleading stat. A PP is a PP regardless of how you get it. Whether it is a brutal slash that leads to 2 minutes or a puck over the glass, your PP gets on the ice and has a chance to heavily impact a playoff game. For the purpose of valuing a guy who can make my PP lethal, I don't care how we get him a PP. I care about how many times we get him that PP. The fact that those opportunities are front loaded in the series means that special teams is even more important in those games than it is in the regular season. High end special teams can jump you out to a quick 2-0 series lead that is enormously helpful. Poor special teams can have you chasing in both of your opening round series. Winning game 1 gives you roughly a 70% chance of winning the series. Going up 2-0 increases that to 87%. Having your PP win you a couple early games in the first 2 rounds of the playoffs that are PP fests is hugely helpful to being a successful playoff team.

FWIW here is part of the breakdown from the article:

The reality of the situation is that, while the number of power plays go up in the playoffs, it isn’t even across games. The games that are more likely to see more penalty calls than in the regular season are the first four games of the first two rounds. In those eight games, there are 3.5 power plays per team per contest, 17 percent more than the regular-season average. In the other 20 possible games in the playoffs, there are 2.8 power plays per game, seven percent lower than the regular-season average.

Again, the regular season average is 3.0 PP opportunities per game. You get an extra half PP vs the regular season in the opening half of the first 2 rounds where your PP guys can jump you out to a series lead. In the remaining games, you get .2 fewer opportunities per game vs the regular season. But it isn't like they disappear. That 7% dip is absolutely meaningful, but it isn't as if you're lucky to get 1 PP a game. Almost every series that goes 7 has multiple PPs where a team can take control of (or win) a series.

Special teams were crucial in game 6 of the Cup Final in 2019. There were 4 penalties called in the 1st period that night. We failed to convert early in the game. We took the next 2 penalties and unfortunately for us, our 2nd was a delay of game during a PK which gave Boston a 5-3. They scored to go up 1-0. We got a PP late in the 1st that we failed to convert. Then we got 2 more PPs in the 2nd period (within a few minutes of each other). We failed to convert on either and went to 2nd intermission down 1-0.

We had 4 chances to bury a PP goal in the first 40 minutes that night. Cup in the building with a chance to win the series at home and we went 0-4 on the PP while Boston went 1-2 on the PP in the first 40 minutes. Better execution on special teams and we are entering the 3rd period tied or with the lead and a home crowd that is blowing the f***ing roof off. Instead, we had a (great) crowd that got increasingly nervous and impatient through 40 minutes and then went (understandably) dead when Boston made it 2-0 early in the 3rd.

Game 6 vs Minnesota in 2022: Minnesota got 3 PPs in the first 25 minutes of the game and went 0-3. We had scored an even strength goal in the 1st to go up 1-0 and then went up 2-0 on our 2nd PP of the night midway through the 2nd. We put away the game about 10 minutes later on our 4th PP of the night (making it 4-0). All told, PPs were 6-5 in Minnesota's favor, but we won the special team's battle 2-0. We won even strength 2-1, so a swing the other direction in special teams would have had Minny right in that game instead of getting blown out.

Special teams is the only reason we clawed back in game 4 vs the Avs in 2022. We were down 4-1 (with the Avs scoring 4 goals in the first 8 minutes of the 2nd, ooph). And then clawed back into the game scoring on back to back PPs late in the 2nd. Each team got 3 PPs in game 5 and then each team got 2 PPs in game 6 (Colorado scored the game-tying goal midway through the 3rd on their 2nd PP of the night).

Now, a series goes to game 7? Special teams are very unlikely to be the difference in that game. But they absolutely make a huge difference on the long road there. In the last decade, the Blues and the 2015 Blackhawks are the only Cup winners to score fewer than 15 PP goals in the playoffs. All 8 of the other teams were above 20% on the PP and 7 of them were 22% or better. The PP is absolutely important in the playoffs.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Whistles get put away in the sense that more infractions occur on the ice that go uncalled. However, the number of PP opportunities in the playoffs slightly increases in the playoffs.

Since the 2016 playoffs, there have been 3759 power-play opportunities in 589 playoff games, or 3.2 power plays per game. In the regular season over the same span, there have been just 3.0 power-play opportunities per game.

Refs decline to call many things that would have been called in the regular season. However, the flip side to this coin is that the style of play at 5 on 5 changes in the playoffs. Teams are more physical, there is more obstruction, more cross checks, more pick plays, more stick work, etc. Being able to play through infractions at 5 on 5 becomes more important in the playoffs because more infractions take place.But even though it takes "more" to get called in the playoffs, there is still about the same amount of PP time in a playoff game as there is in a regular season game. And with the playoff margins often being more narrow in the playoffs, a quality PP is arguably more important in the playoffs than the regular season.

Boston rode a red-hot PP to game 7 of the Cup Final in 2019. We won that series on the thinnest of margins with an OT win, another 1 goal win, and a 2 goal win where the last one was an empty netter. It would be foolish to say that their playoff PP success wasn't important just because the fell just short.


I wouldn't say he was the best, but there was an argument for it. I think he was certainly elite. But more importantly, you are massively downplaying what happened to Boston's PP with and without Krug. Boston's time as an elite PP unit almost directly syncs up with the years that Krug was the undisputed PP 1 QB.

The 3 years before Krug joined the team:

2020/11: 20th
2011/12: 15th
2012/13: 26th

Krug's first 2 years in the NHL when he was one of two D on the top unit (Chara then Hamilton was the other:

2013/14: 3rd. The unit consisted of Krug, Chara, Krejci, Iginla, and Lucic
2014/15: 18th. The unit consisted of Krug, Hamilton, Eriksson, Bergeron, and a rotating cast.

Then the Bruins moved to a 4F-1D setup with Krug as the undisputed PP1 QB

2015/16: 7th. The unit consisted of Krug, Krejci, Bergeron, Eriksson, and Spooner.
2016/17: 7th. Marchand and Pasta joined the top unit and the Krug, Bergeron, Marchand, Pasta group solidified.
2017/18: 4th
2018/19: 3rd
2019/20: 2nd

The Bruins PP was #1 in the league over this 5 year sample as a whole. #2 in the league over the last 3 years he was there.

Krug leaves in free agency

2020/21: 10th
2021/22: 15th
2022/23: 12th

The PP has been #12 in the league over this 3 year sample. You are very much downplaying the drop off in their PP. 3.3% is not a small drop. Going from truly elite to above-average is not a minor drop.

I also think you are slightly overstating his impact to our PP.

Our PP went down a bit too when adding Krug, but it was a small drop in year 1 and then a big improvement in year 2. Here is the Blues PP leading up to and following Krug:

2017/18: 30th
2018/19: 10th
2019/20: 3rd

Krug addition

2020/21: 6th
2021/22: 2nd
2022/23: 19th

Everyone agrees that he was noticeably worse last year. This conversation started with the idea that he needs to return to his previous form. He tangibly made Boston's PP much better. It fell off by a noticeable margin when he left (even though the Bergeron/Marchand/Pasta core has remained and McAvoy is as you said a pretty decent replacement). There was a tiny drop in our PP when he got to STL (falling from 3rd to 6th in the weird COVID year) and then the next season saw the best PP our organization has ever put on the ice.

He's been quarterbacking top units for 10 years in the NHL and he only has 2 seasons where his team's PP has been outside the top 7 in the league. He's gotten 3 completely separate groups of players to top 3 in the league (Chara/Krejci/Iginla/Lucic, Bergeron/Pasta/Marchand/rotating, and ROR/Tarasenko/Schenn/Perron). You can't just brush that off as happening to be there with good players.



I don't know how many times everyone has to agree that no, he is not worth the money. Has anyone said otherwise at any point in the last year? Once again, he is not worth the money. No one is arguing he is worth the money. We're talking about on-ice contributions. A guy can be a very meaningful contributor in a specific role while that role is still not worth the money.

Teams make it work around bad contracts every year in the NHL. A player positively contributing on-ice in a role worth less than his cap hit is a thing that happens all across the league. Players being good but still not worth the money is a common thing. Moving Krug is still going to require creativity due to the contract.

Maybe that is taking on another team's bad contract for a player that can still play a role we are in need of (see the Sanheim trade that fell through). Maybe it is taking on a player who is playing even further below his cap number than Krug but with shorter term. Maybe it is retention. Maybe it is giving up an asset. Maybe it is a combination. But all of these are more realistic avenues to a trade if Krug is effectively doing his job on the ice. And a 3rd pair, top end PP QB is a hell of a lot different of a job than just your average 3rd pair guy.

Thank you. While it hasn’t worked out for krug here, the amount of crap he takes on this board is insane. He is good player with valuable skill set that is overpaid and not great fit for our needs. But in the right situation he can still be key part of winning team.

 

[Majorityof1]

Since the 2016 playoffs, there have been 3759 power-play opportunities in 589 playoff games, or 3.2 power plays per game. In the regular season over the same span, there have been just 3.0 power-play opportunities per game.
---

PP. 3.3% is not a small drop.

Ok, 3,3% is not a small drop. And there are 3.2 PP per game. So assuming you play the max games in the playoffs, get 3.2 PP per game and let's assume Krug is worth a humungous 5% better PP. He is good for 4.5 goals over the playoffs. And that is being very generous to him. How many goals is his atrocious defense going to cost?

I don't know how many times everyone has to agree that no, he is not worth the money. Has anyone said otherwise at any point in the last year? Once again, he is not worth the money. No one is arguing he is worth the money. We're talking about on-ice contributions. A guy can be a very meaningful contributor in a specific role while that role is still not worth the money.

Teams make it work around bad contracts every year in the NHL. A player positively contributing on-ice in a role worth less than his cap hit is a thing that happens all across the league. Players being good but still not worth the money is a common thing. Moving Krug is still going to require creativity due to the contract.

Maybe that is taking on another team's bad contract for a player that can still play a role we are in need of (see the Sanheim trade that fell through). Maybe it is taking on a player who is playing even further below his cap number than Krug but with shorter term. Maybe it is retention. Maybe it is giving up an asset. Maybe it is a combination. But all of these are more realistic avenues to a trade if Krug is effectively doing his job on the ice. And a 3rd pair, top end PP QB is a hell of a lot different of a job than just your average 3rd pair guy.

The statement that I responded to was in a discussion of whether we could trade Krug if he returned to form. Sure, every team works with a bad contract, but why would they trade for one? We would have to eat salary in some way to trade Krug unless some team thought he was worth his salary. You don't trade for an asset that is not worth the money unless you are offloading an equal amount of cap. We are not retaining on Krug to trade him this year. Its not Army's style to take on a debt obligation for an empty roster space for that amount of time. So how are we moving him if he is not worth his contract?

So here is the conversation:
A: Can we trade Krug this season if he plays better?
B: Sure, if he is utilized properly, he is a strong PP QB and 3rd pairing D.
C: That is not worth $6.5M though.

C is not out of line. When we tried to move Krug to a team he wanted to go to after the trade fell through, none of them wanted him. Him playing a little bit better in a 3rd pairing role isn't going to change that. There is still the impediment of his NTC and his salary. Philly isn't looking to compete for the next few years so they were fine taking it. But Krug doesn't want to go somewhere who doesn't want to compete. And if Philly was willing to retain to flip him as was rumored, nobody else was interested then either.

 

[tfriede2]

To the board (Sanka = Blues Board):

 

[stlbluz]

With the first preseason game slated for a week from Saturday why is there no news on the camp?

 

[STL fan in MN]

With the first preseason game slated for a week from Saturday why is there no news on the camp?

Fair question.

The Tom Kurvers Prospect Showcase is this weekend so my guess is main camp starts a week from today - 9/18.

 

[stlbluz]

Feels weird. Usually you'd hear about some of the younger guys showing up early to hit the gym & get their legs under them.

Or getting robbed on the Arch grounds . . .

 

[BlueDream]

Basically all the guys are in town skating and they just had their annual golf tournament.

There’s been lots of pictures posted by the Blues and the only players I haven’t seen a trace of so far are Leddy and Krug.

I think the Krug situation has potential to get weird. Perunovich is one of the guys that has been in town for a while and you’d think the Blues will want to give him a real shot this year. But with how bad we were defensively and on the PK last year, I really can’t fathom both Perunovich and Krug being in the lineup together. I don’t think it will work, so I have no idea what’s going to happen there.

 

[Renard]

I watched the highlights of the Blues cup winning game yesterday.

So many contributors and so many now gone. Perron, O' Reilly, Tarasenko, Schwartz, Pietrangelo, Bouwmeester. I like Thomas and Kyrou, but they have a big hill to climb to compensate for those loses.

 

[Xerloris]

I watched the highlights of the Blues cup winning game yesterday.

So many contributors and so many now gone. Perron, O' Reilly, Tarasenko, Schwartz, Pietrangelo, Bouwmeester. I like Thomas and Kyrou, but they have a big hill to climb to compensate for those loses.

Well you're comparing losing 6 to only having 2. You also forgot Steen, Eddy, Dunn.

 

[Linkens Mastery]

Scandella and Perunovich (and maybe Krug) are gonna be broken by week 2.

Krug has fallen, I repeat Krug has fallen

 

[Meatball]

Well you're comparing losing 6 to only having 2. You also forgot Steen, Eddy, Dunn.

Barby too.

Best 4th line in team history!

 

[Mike Liut]

2024 Blues… better or worse than 2023 Blues with 81 points?

 

[Majorityof1]

2024 Blues… better or worse than 2023 Blues with 81 points?

That is really hard to say. It really, really depends on Mike Weber. Full stop. If he can fix team defense, we will be better. If not....it could get ugly.

I say we are slightly worse point wise,but it is close and we look better overall. I think Weber takes steps to fix it, but can't completely. We still have personnell issues on D. We also don't have the forwards we did last year either. So defense is a bit better, offense is a bit worse. Its a positive direction, but we still get a top 10 pick.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

2024 Blues… better or worse than 2023 Blues with 81 points?

I say better. Last year was a disaster. We played well under our true talent level (even if we had overachieved the year prior) because we couldn't/wouldn't play defense or, really, work hard enough to deserve to win. I expect with coaching changes, personnel changes, and attitude adjustments we will improve. And if we don't, Berube will pay the price.

 

[Majorityof1]

I say better. Last year was a disaster. We played well under our true talent level (even if we had overachieved the year prior) because we couldn't/wouldn't play defense or, really, work hard enough to deserve to win. I expect with coaching changes, personnel changes, and attitude adjustments we will improve. And if we don't, Berube will pay the price.

We played below the talent level but the talent level is also below what the talent level was last year. Do you think Hayes,Blias, Kapanen, Vrana, are better than Tarasenko, ROR, Acciari and Barbashev from a true talent level standpoint? Those guys, aside from acciari, underachieved for sure. They were part of the reason why we were worse than our talent level. Vrana, Kap, Blais all overachieved down the stretch for us too. They played above their talent level. IF they play at what you would expect, even a optimistic expectation, we are still below the talent level for last year's roster.

 

[izzy]

Our D-core is extremely underwhelming. Also all over the age of 30 with no real reinforcements on the way.

I would love to see what Perunovich could do when healthy but that won't happen.

 

[BlueDream]

We played below the talent level but the talent level is also below what the talent level was last year. Do you think Hayes,Blias, Kapanen, Vrana, are better than Tarasenko, ROR, Acciari and Barbashev from a true talent level standpoint? Those guys, aside from acciari, underachieved for sure. They were part of the reason why we were worse than our talent level. Vrana, Kap, Blais all overachieved down the stretch for us too. They played above their talent level. IF they play at what you would expect, even an optimistic expectation, we are still below the talent level for last year's roster.

Depends, because we still have so many guys that have more to give. Thomas and Kyrou still have room for growth. This is the season we need to start getting some production from Neighbours. If others like Alexandrov or Dean could surprise and contribute, that’s a plus too. So it’s really hard to compare talent levels when so many guys are question marks, and so many guys underachieved. I think when you take everything you can into account, the talent difference is basically a wash, and the determining factor will more so be Mike Weber and our new defensive system, as well as effort.

I also think Binnington won’t be overworked and him and Hofer will make for a better tandem than what we had last year. Greiss was respectable behind the team we had but I think Hofer could really push to steal some starts from Binner so I’m excited about those two.

All in all, I think we’ll be better than last year. I still don’t think we will be that good and I don’t consider us to be a threat, but I can’t envision this team playing worse than they did last season. We have a lot of veteran players that have a lot of pride and I don’t think they’ll let it happen. But, if we were to get one more top 10 pick before turning it around in 24-25, I would be completely fine with that.