2023-2024 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread

[Reality Czech]

Me, I'd go with Isaac Ratcliffe. They play the same position, he's younger than Ritchie, and you can't teach 6'6" with skill and grit.

Forgot about him. I had never heard of Radcliffe before but you're right that his upside is definitely more intriguing. Competition is a good thing.

Dougie is a lock to invite a guy or two on PTO every year, and he usually makes interesting choices at least. When a guy knows it might be his last chance he might dig down a little deeper.

 

[Brian39]

Another top 10 pick and trading Buch for a haul and trading Vrana and Kapanen is my best case scenario.

I just don't think I can say that there is any ideal scenario for me that involves trading Buch. This team was so god damn bad when he wasn't on the ice last year and I think there is a really strong chance that a Buch trade kicks off a a multi-year rebuild.

We played at a 60 point pace without him in the lineup last year (6-11-2) vs an 87 point pace with him in the lineup (31-27-5).

He was a +14 on a team that finished with a -38 goal differential. He led our forwards in time on ice per game. Forwards #2-6 in time on ice per game finished the year -8, -27, -24, -38, and -18.

At 5 on 5, he had a +21 goal differential, outscoring the other team 53-32. Without Buch on the ice, the team got outscored 156-127 for a -29 goal differential.

We overwhelmingly outscored other teams with Buch on the ice. His 62.35% goals for percentage was 16th in the NHL among forwards with 800+ minutes played. 13 of the 15 people ahead of him on the list played for teams that finished with 108+ points. The other two are Matthew Tkachuk and Matt Barzal.

We were a clear playoff caliber team with Buch on the ice and then we got our doors absolutely blown off the instant he left the ice. He essentially gives you a top 6 caliber line no matter who you put him out there with. And no, I do not mean that figuratively. There was exactly 3 members of the Blues organization who had a negative goal differential during their 5 on 5 time with Buch last year: Ryan O'Reilly (outscored 5-4 in 85 minutes together), Steven Santini (outscored 1-0 in 10 minutes together), and Thomas Greiss (outscored 7-6 in 151 minutes together). For the record, Buch played at 5on 5 with 34 total teammates last year, played 30+ minutes with 25 teammates last year, played 60+ minutes with 21 teammates, and played 90+ minutes with 11 teammates.

It didn't matter who we put out there with him. If Binner was in net, we weren't getting outscored with Buch on the ice. Full stop. He also played the 2nd strongest quality of competition of anyone on the team (2nd only to ROR). He was consistently outscoring the 1st lines of whatever team we played against no matter who his line mates were. And then the rest of the team got demolished when he left the ice. I am very, very concerned about how bad this team gets if we trade Buch.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Yeah, Strickland has been saying the past couple weeks that the Blues wanted to add one more forward for depth.

Very high chance Ritchie makes the team given his résumé.

I think barring any injuries, the 14 forwards are set. Thomas, Kyrou, Saad, Schenn, Buchnevich, Blais, Hayes, Vrana, Kapanen, Neighbours, Alexandrov, Toropchenko, Sundqvist and Ritchie.

That’s pretty good depth. Walker and Mac likely belong in the AHL anyways and can be callup options for the 4th line. Dean and Bolduc start in the AHL and will eventually see callups as well once injuries hit or we start selling.

That’s the 14 I’d go with too, if they go with 14. But with 9 legit d-men, I wouldn’t be surprised if they kept 8 of them. That’d leave only 13 forward slots.

 

[Mike Liut]

I just don't think I can say that there is any ideal scenario for me that involves trading Buch. This team was so god damn bad when he wasn't on the ice last year and I think there is a really strong chance that a Buch trade kicks off a a multi-year rebuild.

We played at a 60 point pace without him in the lineup last year (6-11-2) vs an 87 point pace with him in the lineup (31-27-5).

He was a +14 on a team that finished with a -38 goal differential. He led our forwards in time on ice per game. Forwards #2-6 in time on ice per game finished the year -8, -27, -24, -38, and -18.

At 5 on 5, he had a +21 goal differential, outscoring the other team 53-32. Without Buch on the ice, the team got outscored 156-127 for a -29 goal differential.

We overwhelmingly outscored other teams with Buch on the ice. His 62.35% goals for percentage was 16th in the NHL among forwards with 800+ minutes played. 13 of the 15 people ahead of him on the list played for teams that finished with 108+ points. The other two are Matthew Tkachuk and Matt Barzal.

We were a clear playoff caliber team with Buch on the ice and then we got our doors absolutely blown off the instant he left the ice. He essentially gives you a top 6 caliber line no matter who you put him out there with. And no, I do not mean that figuratively. There was exactly 3 members of the Blues organization who had a negative goal differential during their 5 on 5 time with Buch last year: Ryan O'Reilly (outscored 5-4 in 85 minutes together), Steven Santini (outscored 1-0 in 10 minutes together), and Thomas Greiss (outscored 7-6 in 151 minutes together). For the record, Buch played at 5on 5 with 34 total teammates last year, played 30+ minutes with 25 teammates last year, played 60+ minutes with 21 teammates, and played 90+ minutes with 11 teammates.

It didn't matter who we put out there with him. If Binner was in net, we weren't getting outscored with Buch on the ice. Full stop. He also played the 2nd strongest quality of competition of anyone on the team (2nd only to ROR). He was consistently outscoring the 1st lines of whatever team we played against no matter who his line mates were. And then the rest of the team got demolished when he left the ice. I am very, very concerned about how bad this team gets if we trade Buch.

I don’t think we’ll be able to re-sign him. That’s why I want to trade him. His return package will be huge

 

[Bluesnatic27]

I’m happy the Blues have decided to focus on players well under 30 for PTOs. I like the attitude of looking at beyond this year if the guy plays well. And if the player doesn’t make the team, no harm done.

Good short and potential longer term outlook. Doesn’t mean I think any PTO player will last beyond this year, if at all. But the potential is there and I couldn’t ask for more.

 

[Spektre]

I just don't think I can say that there is any ideal scenario for me that involves trading Buch. This team was so god damn bad when he wasn't on the ice last year and I think there is a really strong chance that a Buch trade kicks off a a multi-year rebuild.

We played at a 60 point pace without him in the lineup last year (6-11-2) vs an 87 point pace with him in the lineup (31-27-5).

He was a +14 on a team that finished with a -38 goal differential. He led our forwards in time on ice per game. Forwards #2-6 in time on ice per game finished the year -8, -27, -24, -38, and -18.

At 5 on 5, he had a +21 goal differential, outscoring the other team 53-32. Without Buch on the ice, the team got outscored 156-127 for a -29 goal differential.

We overwhelmingly outscored other teams with Buch on the ice. His 62.35% goals for percentage was 16th in the NHL among forwards with 800+ minutes played. 13 of the 15 people ahead of him on the list played for teams that finished with 108+ points. The other two are Matthew Tkachuk and Matt Barzal.

We were a clear playoff caliber team with Buch on the ice and then we got our doors absolutely blown off the instant he left the ice. He essentially gives you a top 6 caliber line no matter who you put him out there with. And no, I do not mean that figuratively. There was exactly 3 members of the Blues organization who had a negative goal differential during their 5 on 5 time with Buch last year: Ryan O'Reilly (outscored 5-4 in 85 minutes together), Steven Santini (outscored 1-0 in 10 minutes together), and Thomas Greiss (outscored 7-6 in 151 minutes together). For the record, Buch played at 5on 5 with 34 total teammates last year, played 30+ minutes with 25 teammates last year, played 60+ minutes with 21 teammates, and played 90+ minutes with 11 teammates.

It didn't matter who we put out there with him. If Binner was in net, we weren't getting outscored with Buch on the ice. Full stop. He also played the 2nd strongest quality of competition of anyone on the team (2nd only to ROR). He was consistently outscoring the 1st lines of whatever team we played against no matter who his line mates were. And then the rest of the team got demolished when he left the ice. I am very, very concerned about how bad this team gets if we trade Buch.

How are the Blues not in a multi-year rebuild already? The youth movement is coming. Skip this year and go to 2024-25. Dvorsky, Bolduc, Neighbors, Toropchenko, Alexandrov, Dean, Thomas, Kyrou, Schenn, Hayes, & Buchnevich are 11 spots. With that much youth on the roster, how is it not a rebuild?

 

[Thallis]

How are the Blues not in a multi-year rebuild already? The youth movement is coming. Skip this year and go to 2024-25. Dvorsky, Bolduc, Neighbors, Toropchenko, Alexandrov, Dean, Thomas, Kyrou, Schenn, Hayes, & Buchnevich are 11 spots. With that much youth on the roster, how is it not a rebuild?

The language and expectations around it. Expectations are that the team will be competitive in the short-medium term and writers are communicating that with the careful usage of the word "retool".

 

[Spektre]

The language and expectations around it. Expectations are that the team will be competitive in the short-medium term and writers are communicating that with the careful usage of the word "retool".

I’m going with rebuild

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Yeah, Strickland has been saying the past couple weeks that the Blues wanted to add one more forward for depth.

Very high chance Ritchie makes the team given his résumé.

I think barring any injuries, the 14 forwards are set. Thomas, Kyrou, Saad, Schenn, Buchnevich, Blais, Hayes, Vrana, Kapanen, Neighbours, Alexandrov, Toropchenko, Sundqvist and Ritchie.

That’s pretty good depth. Walker and Mac likely belong in the AHL anyways and can be callup options for the 4th line. Dean and Bolduc start in the AHL and will eventually see callups as well once injuries hit or we start selling.

Question is whether we carry 14. Lots of talk about 8 d.

 

[TK 421]

I expect the goaltending to be better. I've been beating this drum since we traded Elliott, but we play the starter too damn much. We wanted Allen to be a 65 start workhorse and we've wanted Binner to be a 65 start workhorse. We have repeatedly seen our goalies start the year playing well and then have a rough patch (that often extends into a really bad season). Greiss was not a good goalie last year (or the year before) and couldn't be counted on to take enough starts from Binner. I've liked everything I've seen about Hofer and absolutely love that he handles the puck similarly to Binner. It is nice for the D to not have to adjust their breakout scheme when the backup plays.

I think he can be good enough to give this team 25+ starts this season. I'm not predicting a goalie controversy in his age 23 rookie season, but I think he provides enough of an upgrade to Greiss that we can ease the mental/physical burden on Binner.

The huge question is how much a new D coach improves the blueline. I'm not sold that this group is capable of being top 10 even under an ideal system, but I also don't believe that the talent of this group id nearly as bad as bottom 5 in the league. I will be surprised if we are bottom 5 accross the board in every defensive category next year.

All in all, I expect the goals for to be somewhere in the 6th-14th range while the goals against improves anywhere into the 12th-25th range.

I fully expect this team to earn more than the 81 points they did last year. And if they aren't on track for that by the 40 game mark, I fully expect Berube to be let go and for a new coach to provide enough of a dead cat bounce to push them over that mark by season's end. I haven't seen any over/under point total lines set by oddsmakers yet, but I will absolutely hammer the over if they set us at 81. Fanduel has our over/under set at 86.5 points. That feels like a much more reasonable line than 81 to me.

My biggest season to season criticism of Berube is his handling of our goaltending splits. Last year with Greiss I can't put on him because Greiss was who Doug left him with but there is no excuse this season. I think Hofer and new assistant coach Mike Weber will prove to be the two most impactful adds to this coming season.

I don't want Binner seeing more than 57 starts and I'd prefer it be 55. Hofer can start 27 and give Binner the off days he needs to give his highest quality starts and still be fresh enough that on the chance they grab a wildcard he can be rested. Between that and Mike Weber potentially helping get some structure back in our defensive zone we could suddenly look much more competitive even if the results are only slightly better than last year.

 

[Reality Czech]

I just don't think I can say that there is any ideal scenario for me that involves trading Buch. This team was so god damn bad when he wasn't on the ice last year and I think there is a really strong chance that a Buch trade kicks off a a multi-year rebuild.

We played at a 60 point pace without him in the lineup last year (6-11-2) vs an 87 point pace with him in the lineup (31-27-5).

He was a +14 on a team that finished with a -38 goal differential. He led our forwards in time on ice per game. Forwards #2-6 in time on ice per game finished the year -8, -27, -24, -38, and -18.

At 5 on 5, he had a +21 goal differential, outscoring the other team 53-32. Without Buch on the ice, the team got outscored 156-127 for a -29 goal differential.

We overwhelmingly outscored other teams with Buch on the ice. His 62.35% goals for percentage was 16th in the NHL among forwards with 800+ minutes played. 13 of the 15 people ahead of him on the list played for teams that finished with 108+ points. The other two are Matthew Tkachuk and Matt Barzal.

We were a clear playoff caliber team with Buch on the ice and then we got our doors absolutely blown off the instant he left the ice. He essentially gives you a top 6 caliber line no matter who you put him out there with. And no, I do not mean that figuratively. There was exactly 3 members of the Blues organization who had a negative goal differential during their 5 on 5 time with Buch last year: Ryan O'Reilly (outscored 5-4 in 85 minutes together), Steven Santini (outscored 1-0 in 10 minutes together), and Thomas Greiss (outscored 7-6 in 151 minutes together). For the record, Buch played at 5on 5 with 34 total teammates last year, played 30+ minutes with 25 teammates last year, played 60+ minutes with 21 teammates, and played 90+ minutes with 11 teammates.

It didn't matter who we put out there with him. If Binner was in net, we weren't getting outscored with Buch on the ice. Full stop. He also played the 2nd strongest quality of competition of anyone on the team (2nd only to ROR). He was consistently outscoring the 1st lines of whatever team we played against no matter who his line mates were. And then the rest of the team got demolished when he left the ice. I am very, very concerned about how bad this team gets if we trade Buch.

Honestly the only thing that really matters is whether or not Buch wants to be here long term or not. If he's happy here and wants to be a part of the team going forward, then trading him would be dumb. If he says thanks for the memories but I'm gonna test the market then we'd be foolish not to trade him before that happens. It's as simple as that. Only Buch knows what he wants to do and how much money it would take to keep him here long term.

 

[Mike Liut]

Honestly the only thing that really matters is whether or not Buch wants to be here long term or not. If he's happy here and wants to be a part of the team going forward, then trading him would be dumb. If he says thanks for the memories but I'm gonna test the market then we'd be foolish not to trade him before that happens. It's as simple as that. Only Buch knows what he wants to do and how much money it would take to keep him here long term.

I doubt he wants to be a part of this rebuild at his age. These are his prime years.

 

[Brian39]

How are the Blues not in a multi-year rebuild already? The youth movement is coming. Skip this year and go to 2024-25. Dvorsky, Bolduc, Neighbors, Toropchenko, Alexandrov, Dean, Thomas, Kyrou, Schenn, Hayes, & Buchnevich are 11 spots. With that much youth on the roster, how is it not a rebuild?

I think it is way premature to assume all of Dvorsky, Dean, and Bolduc are full time NHLers by 2024/25. If you assume that we are gifting spots to non-ready players based on an acceptance of being bad, then yes you could classify it as a rebuild. But that is far from a given.

If the goal is a retool and still forcing players to earn spots in 2024/25, then I think it is unlikely that we have 3+ rookies on the team. The only way we would have that many is if they have actually earned their spots and then you are talking about being a young team that is trying to exit a retool/rebuild.

Unless you have a truly generational talent, I think the path to success out of a retool/rebuild is to surround your rookies with a roster that is trying to win games as they enter the league. I don't think that asking our pool of good (but no truly elite) prospects to come in and start taking over in 2024 or 2025 is a recipe for long term success. I think that leads to the rookies getting their doors blown off for 2-3 years, developing a losing culture, and jumping on the hamster wheel of losing that we've seen in Anaheim, Buffalo, Detroit, and Ottawa.

The odds of getting a truly generational talent by spending 5 years in the absolute basement are still not good and I don't believe such a guy exists in the 2024 or 2025 draft classes. I'm not really interested in playing 3 more years of meaningless games to get good lottery odds for Gavin McKenna. I'd rather try to put the best possible roster around our developing rookies with the goal of having the kids act as a good supporting cast to a decent roster starting in 2024/25 and eventually take over as the core.

My fear in trading Buch is that we set ourselves up for another 2-3 years of bad hockey starting in 2024/25. I don't have much interest in a rebuild where we don't start looking like present-day Detroit/Ottawa until 2027 or 2028.

 

[Brian39]

I don’t think we’ll be able to re-sign him. That’s why I want to trade him. His return package will be huge

Honestly the only thing that really matters is whether or not Buch wants to be here long term or not. If he's happy here and wants to be a part of the team going forward, then trading him would be dumb. If he says thanks for the memories but I'm gonna test the market then we'd be foolish not to trade him before that happens. It's as simple as that. Only Buch knows what he wants to do and how much money it would take to keep him here long term.

I agree that we should trade him if he expresses an unwillingness to extend here at a contract around market value. But that is my backup plan and not my ideal scenario of how this year plays out. In my ideal scenario, he wants to stay and we are able to get an extension signed in early July of 2024 when he is eligible to put pen to paper.

 

[Brian39]

My biggest season to season criticism of Berube is his handling of our goaltending splits. Last year with Greiss I can't put on him because Greiss was who Doug left him with but there is no excuse this season. I think Hofer and new assistant coach Mike Weber will prove to be the two most impactful adds to this coming season.

I don't want Binner seeing more than 57 starts and I'd prefer it be 55. Hofer can start 27 and give Binner the off days he needs to give his highest quality starts and still be fresh enough that on the chance they grab a wildcard he can be rested. Between that and Mike Weber potentially helping get some structure back in our defensive zone we could suddenly look much more competitive even if the results are only slightly better than last year.

That is about where I land. My pre-season plan would be for Hofer to start 27 games even if he is inconsistent and looks like a rookie that isn't ready for prime time. I want 27 starts for Hofer to be the baseline plan and not a target for Hofer to push towards. Only 11 guys started 55+ games last year, so that would still put Hofer squarely in "backup goalie" territory. I think Hofer earned a backup job with his AHL performance and brief NHL performance last year even if he struggles in the role this year.

My plan would be to look at the schedule and put Binner's name on 55 games. This would obviously be very tentative and not would not be shared with the goalies. You still rely on your goalie coach to change that schedule mid-season based on vibes, injuries, hot streaks, cold streaks, etc. But you keep that tentative schedule as a working/evolving document. If you give Binner 2 extra games in November, then you look through the schedule and find a couple games in December/January to take from him in order to maximize his rest/recovery. If Hofer has a great night and you want to reward him with an extra game, then put Binner's name on an extra game down the line.

But that 55 start target for Binner should be front and center in the staff's mind even if he is noticeably outplaying Hofer. At absolute most, you stretch him to 60 games if his play merits it (and Hofer's doesn't).

If Hofer is playing like a 1B or high end backup (while Binner is having success too), then I'd dial that split to 50-32. Still enough that Binner is clearly outpacing Hofer and retaining his title as the #1. Only 13 guys started 50+ games last year, so there is no shame in that number. In 2023, you're a starter if you play 50 games. I think this is a reasonable split even if Hofer's numbers are better than Binner's (but Binner is playing the bigger games). Binner would still earn his AAV if he gives us "only" 50 games and plays like a starter in those games.

Hofer would have to really outplay Binner to move the needle toward a 50/50 split and I don't want Hofer pushing into the high 30s or low 40s unless he looks great. But to start, plan on a 55-27 split, which works out to Binner playing 2 of every 3 games.

 

[Xerloris]

But that 55 start target for Binner should be front and center in the staff's mind even if he is noticeably outplaying Hofer. At absolute most, you stretch him to 60 games if his play merits it (and Hofer's doesn't).

I would prefer 50 games. 55 at the highest. 60 I feel we'll see him start to perform poorly.

 

[Brian39]

I would prefer 50 games. 55 at the highest. 60 I feel we'll see him start to perform poorly.

50 is my preference in a perfect world, but that demands Hofer earning more time. I don't want to see 50-32 if Hofer plays like Husso did in his rookie year.

60 would be based on Binner playing well enough to demand those starts. If he starts performing poorly as a result of the workload, his play would get dialed down to fall short of 60. In my plan, there is no way for Binner to both be performing poorly and playing 60 games barring multiple injuries.

 

[execwrite1]

Showing my age -

It doesn't matter if you have Jacques Plante and Glenn Hall in goal ...

With this defense corps they would still get shelled.

The rebuild has to fix the defense and that's many years away. Goaltending and forwards are not the issue.

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Showing my age -

It doesn't matter if you have Jacques Plante and Glenn Hall in goal ...

With this defense corps they would still get shelled.

The rebuild has to fix the defense and that's many years away. Goaltending and forwards are not the issue.

Disagree. Much of our defensive issue is coaching/effort rather than talent. And forwards are to blame for it too.

 

[Majorityof1]

Disagree. Much of our defensive issue is coaching/effort rather than talent. And forwards are to blame for it too.

Disagree with your disagree. Forwards and scheme are huge issues. But the D is an issue too. Faulk, Krug and Leddy have never been defnesive guys. We can quibble over where they are on the defensive scale, but I don't think any of them have been known as shutdown guys ever. That is an issue that at some point needs to be addressed.

 

[stlbluz]

Disagree with your disagree. Forwards and scheme are huge issues. But the D is an issue too. Faulk, Krug and Leddy have never been defnesive guys. We can quibble over where they are on the defensive scale, but I don't think any of them have been known as shitdown guys ever. That is an issue that at some point needs to be addressed.

Even after last season?

 

[Spektre]

I think it is way premature to assume all of Dvorsky, Dean, and Bolduc are full time NHLers by 2024/25. If you assume that we are gifting spots to non-ready players based on an acceptance of being bad, then yes you could classify it as a rebuild. But that is far from a given.

If the goal is a retool and still forcing players to earn spots in 2024/25, then I think it is unlikely that we have 3+ rookies on the team. The only way we would have that many is if they have actually earned their spots and then you are talking about being a young team that is trying to exit a retool/rebuild.

Unless you have a truly generational talent, I think the path to success out of a retool/rebuild is to surround your rookies with a roster that is trying to win games as they enter the league. I don't think that asking our pool of good (but no truly elite) prospects to come in and start taking over in 2024 or 2025 is a recipe for long term success. I think that leads to the rookies getting their doors blown off for 2-3 years, developing a losing culture, and jumping on the hamster wheel of losing that we've seen in Anaheim, Buffalo, Detroit, and Ottawa.

The odds of getting a truly generational talent by spending 5 years in the absolute basement are still not good and I don't believe such a guy exists in the 2024 or 2025 draft classes. I'm not really interested in playing 3 more years of meaningless games to get good lottery odds for Gavin McKenna. I'd rather try to put the best possible roster around our developing rookies with the goal of having the kids act as a good supporting cast to a decent roster starting in 2024/25 and eventually take over as the core.

My fear in trading Buch is that we set ourselves up for another 2-3 years of bad hockey starting in 2024/25. I don't have much interest in a rebuild where we don't start looking like present-day Detroit/Ottawa until 2027 or 2028.

I would say that if Bolduc, and Dean are not full time NHL'rs by 2024-25, that's a problem.

I'm not going out on a limb by projecting Dvorsky as having enough talent to be on the roster in 2024-25.

That's 3 rookies for the most part. I would be surprised if Bolduc and Dean don't both get playing this year.

To me, this is an immensely pivotal year. If the team gets off to a bad record, I don't see this roster being capable of really turning things around. We'll see where they are at the end of December when they will have played 36 games. That month looks rough on paper, and that's almost halfway through the year. Last year they were a .500 club. That was good enough for a top 10 pick.

It won't shock me if they are a number of games under .500 at that point. We don't definitively know how they'll play but take a look at the schedule. My stab in the dark is, they'll be close to 15-17-4.

I'm sure they'll win some they weren't the favorites and also lose some they are. The rest of the season doesn't get easier. Anything is possible, but I don't see a winning season. If they get into a losing funk, I could really see it snowballing.

Ifffff that winds up being the case, how is more of a traditional rebuild not embraced?

 

[Bye Bye Blueston]

Disagree with your disagree. Forwards and scheme are huge issues. But the D is an issue too. Faulk, Krug and Leddy have never been defnesive guys. We can quibble over where they are on the defensive scale, but I don't think any of them have been known as shitdown guys ever. That is an issue that at some point needs to be addressed.

The defense needs to be better, but I think you are overstating the talent part of it. Nobody has 6 shutdown guys. Is Makar a shutdown guy? Byrom? Toews? Parayko is a shutdown guy. Faulk defends well off the rush, has active stick, he is above average defensively (and well above in other areas). Leddy is fine defensively with hwat he brings in transition. Krug needs to be sheltered. Projections (of prospects and of aging decline) aside, at present we need another top 4 D, ideally top pairing guy. If we had that (and better coaching and effort) our d would be viewed as a strength.

 

[Thallis]

The defense needs to be better, but I think you are overstating the talent part of it. Nobody has 6 shutdown guys. Is Makar a shutdown guy? Byrom? Toews? Parayko is a shutdown guy. Faulk defends well off the rush, has active stick, he is above average defensively (and well above in other areas). Leddy is fine defensively with hwat he brings in transition. Krug needs to be sheltered. Projections (of prospects and of aging decline) aside, at present we need another top 4 D, ideally top pairing guy. If we had that (and better coaching and effort) our d would be viewed as a strength.

All 3 of these guys have good metrics defensively because they tilt the ice in their favor. None of our D reliably do that, so the defensive outcomes follow suit.

 

[Xerloris]

All 3 of these guys have good metrics defensively because they tilt the ice in their favor. None of our D reliably do that, so the defensive outcomes follow suit.

Right, so how can those same guys have a great season one year and then the next year shit the bed and the only difference is the coaching change? No no, it's clearly the player because I dislike them.