Oh right, so now talking about something someone else said means I'm saying Armstrong made mistakes, even though I have never claimed he never made mistakes. I also agree that self awareness is key so maybe you should try to get some along with a little reading comprehension.
Around the NHL 2023-2024
- Thread starter simon IC
- Start date
-
Xenforo Cloud will be upgrading us to version 2.3.5 on March 3rd at 12 AM GMT. This version has increased stability and fixes several bugs. We expect downtime for the duration of the update. The admin team will continue to work on existing issues, templates and upgrade all necessary available addons to minimize impact of this new version. Click Here for Updates
- Status
Oh right, so now talking about something someone else said means I'm saying Armstrong made mistakes, even though I have never claimed he never made mistakes. I also agree that self awareness is key so maybe you should try to get some along with a little reading comprehension.
You have the exact same responses to every single argument.
Maybe admitting more of Armstrong’s mistakes will release all of that built-up anger inside of you.
Reality Czech
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 6,558
- 10,583
There are a couple people on this board who would quite literally rather starve themselves than admit Armstrong’s mistakes.
Florida is very happy with that Mikkola signing. And he was solid defensively for us, too. It’s just that those couple posters loved to harp on him every time he made a mistake. But it’s cool, it’s entertaining to watch you two continue to bury yourselves in the sand.
Good for him, but it's not like having him on the Blues would make a big difference. Florida is a great team and it's a lot easier for players to "thrive" on great teams. He's basically their Edmundson or Gunnarsson, solid contributors on a Cup team but not like you can't find similar guys every summer as free agents. But don't let me stop you from taking your victory lap.
Mikkola is a solid 4-6 d-man but it didn't make sense to re-sign him considering our situation. But glad to see him doing well in Florida.
Last edited:
Shame Drai didnt get suspension hit on Barkov.
542365
2018-19 Cup Champs!
- Mar 22, 2012
- 22,658
- 9,203
Mikkola is still ass. Nothing has changed. He’s just surrounded by a great team. He still can’t make a pass under duress to save his life. Do not miss him at all!
STL fan in MN
Registered User
- Aug 16, 2007
- 7,768
- 5,423
Not remotely surprising.
Hopefully Barkov can play. He’s practicing this morning so it’s looking good so far.
Pietro, Dunn, Walman. Who Else oh, Mikkola. Army downgrade Blues heavily.
You Happy with Krug and Faulk?
Last edited:
And the D we have can't defend the crease and can't win board battles. Mikkola's weaknesses are overstated, and his skills are something we need.
Brian39
Registered User
- Apr 24, 2014
- 7,810
- 14,959
Yes, the quality of a team is not determined by one player. What an amazing, groundbreaking point.
Seems like you're the one that needed to be told that. If Berube did not give Dunn a chance which lead to him being undervalued by management then that does fall Berube's shoulders as to why we lost him and not Armstrong. You're literally the one that said yourself that you think Berube was not doing any favors to our Dmen.
He didn't do that here. Remember all of the back door tap ins he allowed?
Reality Czech
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 6,558
- 10,583
The hindsight crowd never takes a day off. Apparently now Mikkola is a game changer despite being completely mediocre here, and everyone knew Dunn would break out after not doing so repeatedly while in STL. He's still average at best in his own zone and can't see him being a top D on a contending team. The Blues just got punished for having good depth at a time when an expansion draft happened. Not everything has to be someone's "fault."
LogosBlue
Registered User
- May 16, 2018
- 296
- 328
They say hindsight is 20/20 lol. But seriously, Mikkola is a good bottom pairing D. I remember watching him live during preseason in Columbus prior to him making the team. I said to my son who accompanied me to the game, "This guy will make the team and be a decent Dman." I was pointing at Mikkola. He's not a game changer or elite but he belongs in the NHL.
I also get the sentiment of the people who are upset with DA for dismantling the 2019 defense that won a cup. Petro, Dunn and Edmundson should have been retained. DA brought in other D that we didn't really need in Faulk and Krug. Petro actually worked a full season with the guy he saw as his replacement. That's what i saw in real time. You know Petro viewed it the same way and felt spurned. Can't blame him. We had a great defense that brought us a cup and threw them in the can. All the blame fully rests on DA's shoulders. I get it.
Reality Czech
Registered User
- Apr 17, 2017
- 6,558
- 10,583
How do you know Petro hadn't already rejected Army's offer before he traded for Faulk? How do you know Petro didn't want to test UFA all along? You don't. I think it's a safe assumption that Army only made the Faulk trade after learning that Petro was likely to be leaving. Why assume that Petro was dead set on staying here? I don't really get the fact that people blame Army for "letting" Petro go rather than being pissed at Petro for turning his back on St. Louis. Petro was never fully committed to staying here, that's my hindsight analysis.
Regardless, he's the one who built that team in the first place but I feel people care more about the fact that he "dismantled" it rather than giving him credit for building it. But as I said, the hindsight crew knows everything so who am I to argue with them?
LogosBlue
Registered User
- May 16, 2018
- 296
- 328
WeWentBlues
Registered User
- May 3, 2017
- 2,167
- 1,906
Agree with everything you said until this last part.
We protected Barbashev, Kyrou, O'Reilly, Perron, Schenn, Sundqvist, Thomas, Faulk, Krug, Parayko, Binnington. Exposing Dunn over Krug is where the mistake was. Regardless though, had Dunn been protected, he likely would have been traded as a cap casualty unless the Kraken selected Krug (unlikely).
Bobby Orrtuzzo
Ya know
No. You had to protect NMCs, and we know Army's stance on those. NTCs were fair game.
Bobby Orrtuzzo
Ya know
Ah, that’s right. Not saying I agree with it, but they weren’t gonna expose a newly signed UFA, wouldn’t look good to potential future UFAs.
"Imagine arguing with a scarecrow. You can make any argument you want and the scarecrow won’t argue back. In fact, you can do more than make any argument you want . . . you can position the scarecrow’s argument any way you want, tailoring it into the perfect position for you to argue against.
When you make a straw man argument, you’re essentially arguing against an imaginary scarecrow. It’s an easy way to make your argument sound infallible—and that’s what makes it a logical fallacy"
-Grammerly.com blog post "What Is a Straw Man Argument? Definition and Examples"
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
It was completely clear that Krug could have been exposed, it was the obvious right move, but it would have required Doug Armstrong to admit a mistake in judgment and put the St. Louis Blues ahead of himself, something he says he always does, but doesn't.
Something the Armstrong flacks don't get about hockey is you can evaluate the correct roles and positions of your defensemen when it is set from the top. So if you are a GM and you choose to remove a #1 defenseman from anywhere in your franchise and now you have an immediate task to find one again so that you can compete for the top trophy again, you just handcuffed yourself by de-anchorizing your D so that at any given time they are moving around in their roles. Particularly in the case of young developing defensemen you need an anchor to help slot them. That's not a thought that has occurred to Armstrong's flacks, but it should because it's a strategy hockey thought they could adopt and be better at understanding hockey when they use its logic.
Something the Armstrong flacks don't get about hockey is you can evaluate the correct roles and positions of your defensemen when it is set from the top. So if you are a GM and you choose to remove a #1 defenseman from anywhere in your franchise and now you have an immediate task to find one again so that you can compete for the top trophy again, you just handcuffed yourself by de-anchorizing your D so that at any given time they are moving around in their roles. Particularly in the case of young developing defensemen you need an anchor to help slot them. That's not a thought that has occurred to Armstrong's flacks, but it should because it's a strategy hockey thought they could adopt and be better at understanding hockey when they use its logic.
Last edited:
PocketNines
Cutter's Way
It has taken three weeks for the conference finals and two games of the Final to be played. What they have been doing these last few years is terrible. They schedule it as if the entire world will wait for these Events which are Events. There's zero feeling of continuity, the competition now feels abstract. As in: yes there is technically a stanley cup final game today but 30 teams and fans are fully onto the next season.
Stupendous Yappi
Idiot Control Now!
So, do people think Seattle would have drafted Krug? I do. The other reasonable option was to draft Tarasenko. That doesn’t help them a ton for the future unless they use him for early marketing and then recoup some draft capital (like a 1st that the Blues got). It was a viable path, but his recovery from surgery was not as clear so there was risk they’d get nothing.
Krug would at least be an NHL defender in his prime years. They drafted worse guys.
If Tarsenko had been drafted, they’d probably have needed to trade Krug or Dunn anyway. And it would have been Dunn.
Krug would at least be an NHL defender in his prime years. They drafted worse guys.
If Tarsenko had been drafted, they’d probably have needed to trade Krug or Dunn anyway. And it would have been Dunn.
Personally, I don’t think they would have drafted Krug. There was 6 years left on his contract at the time, which is a huge commitment to a team that wasn’t likely going to be a contender.
WeWentBlues
Registered User
- May 3, 2017
- 2,167
- 1,906
I see the merit to your point but the expansion draft probably affords you the ability to be more like Vegas and not get a reputation for it by exposing a newly signed UFA.
I don't think Seattle would have selected Krug. They may have selected Tarasenko. Seattle made alot of perplexing picks so who knows what they would have done given the alternative. Some of the guys they picked ended up not even playing a game for them and went on to rejoin their original team (See CBJ Gavin Bayreuther). Here is who was available to them. I do agree that Dunn would have been traded if he was protected so revisionist history doesn't change anything.
Sam Anas (F)
Sammy Blais (F)
Tyler Bozak (F)
Kyle Clifford (F)
Jacob de la Rose (F)
Mike Hoffman (F)
Tanner Kaspick (F)
Mackenzie MacEachern (F)
Curtis McKenzie (F)
Austin Poganski (F)
Zach Sanford (F)
Jaden Schwartz (F)
Nolan Stevens (F)
Vladimir Tarasenko (F)
Nathan Walker (F)
Robert Bortuzzo (D)
Vince Dunn (D)
Petteri Lindbohm (D)
Niko Mikkola (D)
Mitch Reinke (D)
Steven Santini (D)
Marco Scandella (D)
Jake Walman (D)
Evan Fitzpatrick (G)
Jon Gillies (G)
Ville Husso (G)
Last edited:
- Status
