It is currently Sun May 28, 2017 10:42 am

Board index » Let's Go Blues » St. Louis Blues Discussion

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:33 am 
Offline
Hockey God
Hockey God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 9:49 pm
Posts: 5571
Location: Jacksonville, FL
It's nice that someone can judge Allen on a miniscule body of work (a whole 11 playoff starts and one season as the clear #1 starter while judging the other goalie on his entire body of work. How about applying the same standard to Elliott that's been applied to Allen - judge Elliott on his first 147 games and 8 starts in the playoffs. But no... clearly goalies don't have any chance of improving over time, apparently. :roll:

Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
theohall wrote:


Clearly not keeping Elliott was the problem. :lol: :roll:


Clearly Yeo is a problem. :lol:

Sorry, couldn't help myself.


From https://www.nhl.com/news/brian-elliott- ... -281244182

*snip*

Elliott last season was 23-8-6, led the NHL with a .930 save percentage, and his 2.07 goals-against average was tied for second with John Gibson of the Anaheim Ducks and behind the League-best 2.06 of Ben Bishop of the Tampa Bay Lightning.

*snip*


And how about this season, eh? Nice that you didn't bring that up and had to rely on last season. Oh... that doesn't fit your narrative, since Allen and Elliott have darn near the same numbers this season.

_________________
Official LGB sponsor of Robby Fabbri 2016-2017 Season
Official LGB sponsor of Colton Parayko 2015-2016 Season
Official LGB Sponsor Dmitrij Jaskin 2014-2015 Season


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 7:44 am 
Offline
Hockey God
Hockey God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 9:49 pm
Posts: 5571
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Toasted Oates wrote:
You can list all those scores, but the Blues aren't the same team from those games. The teams you saw Tuesday are the ones you would see in a playoff series, barring injury. Of course, one game doesn't forecast a playoff series but it can provide a glimpse. I glimpsed a turnover prone, easily frustrated team that's only poised when they're front running (which they've done plenty of this season). You glimpsed it too.


Agreed on Boudreau not being Quenneville.

That highlighted part could be said of this current Blues squad. They have not played well when trailing for awhile - even after Yeo took over. When the Blues are tied or leading, they have been exceptional in locking down the opposition since Yeo took over. The problem is when the Blues get behind they don't seem capable of recovering due to the lack of offense. The Blues have recovered from a deficit and won the game once since Jan 1st and that was Plager night vs the Leafs when Toronto scored that 1st period goal and the Blues dominated the rest of the game. That's right. The Blues are 1-12 if Blues are trailing at some point in a game in 2017. So what happens when the Blues trail the Wild, which will happen?

_________________
Official LGB sponsor of Robby Fabbri 2016-2017 Season
Official LGB sponsor of Colton Parayko 2015-2016 Season
Official LGB Sponsor Dmitrij Jaskin 2014-2015 Season


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:14 am 
Offline
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 545
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?

_________________
Image
2016-2017 LGB sponsor of your boy, goaltender Jake Allen and a center for Vladi Tarasenko.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 8:40 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
theohall wrote:
It's nice that someone can judge Allen on a miniscule body of work (a whole 11 playoff starts and one season as the clear #1 starter while judging the other goalie on his entire body of work. How about applying the same standard to Elliott that's been applied to Allen - judge Elliott on his first 147 games and 8 starts in the playoffs. But no... clearly goalies don't have any chance of improving over time, apparently. :roll:

Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
theohall wrote:


Clearly not keeping Elliott was the problem. :lol: :roll:


Clearly Yeo is a problem. :lol:

Sorry, couldn't help myself.


From https://www.nhl.com/news/brian-elliott- ... -281244182

*snip*

Elliott last season was 23-8-6, led the NHL with a .930 save percentage, and his 2.07 goals-against average was tied for second with John Gibson of the Anaheim Ducks and behind the League-best 2.06 of Ben Bishop of the Tampa Bay Lightning.

*snip*


And how about this season, eh? Nice that you didn't bring that up and had to rely on last season. Oh... that doesn't fit your narrative, since Allen and Elliott have darn near the same numbers this season.


Way to cover up for your inaccurate post! Pot, Kettle on line one :)

To note, we are discussing Brian Elliott's time AS A BLUE just like we discuss Jake Allen's time here. It doesn't matter what either have done on another team or at another point in time. I get where you're coming from, but Elliott was a shot in the dark when we got him, Jake Allen was supposed to be The Chosen One, so Jake is going to get judged a great deal harder than Elliott and Allen's contract is only going to magnify that. Which one has done more for the Franchise while here is the only question a Blues fan should care about. Anything else is another fanbase's delight or issue.

Seriously though, they have similar numbers, but it's important to note that Jake Allen's numbers dipped through the course of the season. Elliott helped dig himself a hole and rose out of it. We can credit/discredit the teams they play on for elements of that, but it wouldn't be too far from the truth to say that as we stand here this year, both are about even money.

As to the whole I didn't bring it up nonsense, I have actually noted several times that Elliott + Allen = Fire. If having them apart has shown anything (at least to me), it's that both netminders kind of need competition from within to get the best out of them. Elliott has had Chad Johnson to contend with, who threw up a .920 before regressing and Elliott taking the Helm. Jake has Carter Hutton, who if he played more games, might be that guy that does the same to him. Neither goaltender in my mind is a true starter, but if we're going to talk about who the better netminder based on their stats, hey, you want to disagree with NHL.COM, that's fine by me :)

Toasted Oates -- You mean there's a choice? >.>

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:24 am 
Offline
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 545
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?

_________________
Image
2016-2017 LGB sponsor of your boy, goaltender Jake Allen and a center for Vladi Tarasenko.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:46 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:49 am 
Offline
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am
Posts: 3934
Our issue in the playoffs isn't whether we can beat anybody or not. We'll be an underdog against just about anybody we can face, but it's hardly unrealistic that Allen and Tarasenko get hot and we steal a series. The issue is that there are four series, not just one. Even if we can steal one, we'd have to do it three more times for it to be meaningful. I'm not sure we have the scoring depth to do it four times.

_________________
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 9:52 am 
Offline
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am
Posts: 3934
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?

_________________
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:23 am 
Offline
Hockey God
Hockey God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 9:49 pm
Posts: 5571
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


At age 25, 11 games and 8 starts is enough? Seriously? :roll: By that standard, there are some damn fine goaltenders you would have quit on as playoff performers not knowing what they would do in the future.

_________________
Official LGB sponsor of Robby Fabbri 2016-2017 Season
Official LGB sponsor of Colton Parayko 2015-2016 Season
Official LGB Sponsor Dmitrij Jaskin 2014-2015 Season


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 10:34 am 
Offline
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 18, 2009 3:59 pm
Posts: 545
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?

Yes, poor choice of words on my part. I'd like to see him play a few more games in the playoffs before passing judgment.

On the playoffs, that's purely in regards to a 1st round opponent. After that, who knows? I agree, it doesn't look good as you suggest.

_________________
Image
2016-2017 LGB sponsor of your boy, goaltender Jake Allen and a center for Vladi Tarasenko.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:01 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?


*holds up Jake Allen's contract* I think so.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:06 am 
Offline
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am
Posts: 3934
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?


*holds up Jake Allen's contract* I think so.


He needs to earn the opportunity. He doesn't need to earn a reasonable standard of judgment. The idea that he needs to do something in order for people to use a reasonable standard when judging him is absurd. A reasonable standard should be used on any player regardless of what they've earned. Otherwise your judgment is meaningless. A small sample size of losses without an offense in front of him is not a reasonable standard. Worth noting he has a 2.29 GAA in the playoffs as well. That's also ~meaningless because 11 games. The point is that if you use 11 game samples to judge players, you're going to be wrong a lot.

_________________
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:07 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
cardsfan04 wrote:
Our issue in the playoffs isn't whether we can beat anybody or not. We'll be an underdog against just about anybody we can face, but it's hardly unrealistic that Allen and Tarasenko get hot and we steal a series. The issue is that there are four series, not just one. Even if we can steal one, we'd have to do it three more times for it to be meaningful. I'm not sure we have the scoring depth to do it four times.


Thing is, we have scoring depth, it's the playbook strategy that is hindering it. Hitchcock is gone and his strategy should have followed him out the door. While a solid Defense is pretty important, it's about time to open up the strategy so the Forwards can create and finish scoring chances. I have seen too much emphasis on Defense being the first priority.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:10 am 
Offline
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am
Posts: 3934
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Our issue in the playoffs isn't whether we can beat anybody or not. We'll be an underdog against just about anybody we can face, but it's hardly unrealistic that Allen and Tarasenko get hot and we steal a series. The issue is that there are four series, not just one. Even if we can steal one, we'd have to do it three more times for it to be meaningful. I'm not sure we have the scoring depth to do it four times.


Thing is, we have scoring depth, it's the playbook strategy that is hindering it. Hitchcock is gone and his strategy should have followed him out the door. While a solid Defense is pretty important, it's about time to open up the strategy so the Forwards can create and finish scoring chances. I have seen too much emphasis on Defense being the first priority.


That could be true. I know that's the common critique on Yeo. Maybe I phrased it poorly, but what I was trying to say is that we haven't seen evidence that the team will score well enough to win 4 consecutive playoff series. I don't think it's crazy to steal a series, because anything can happen in a 7 game series. To do it 4 times in a row, something has got to get better than it currently is.

_________________
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:14 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?


*holds up Jake Allen's contract* I think so.


He needs to earn the opportunity. He doesn't need to earn a reasonable standard of judgment. The idea that he needs to do something in order for people to use a reasonable standard when judging him is absurd. A reasonable standard should be used on any player regardless of what they've earned. Otherwise your judgment is meaningless. A small sample size of losses without an offense in front of him is not a reasonable standard. Worth noting he has a 2.29 GAA in the playoffs as well. That's also ~meaningless because 11 games. The point is that if you use 11 game samples to judge players, you're going to be wrong a lot.


Management signed him to a contract that his stats don't hold water for. He's the future, that's fine, but show me where in those stats does it scream "Hey, I'm worth 4m". The same brand of logic that went into that contract is the same one that went into Lehtera's. I feel Allen should have been bridged and if he continued to do well or improved or whatever, then absolutely pay him.

I think we can all agree on both sides of the discussion that the sample size simply isn't big enough to make that kind of leap.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
Hockey God
Hockey God
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 9:49 pm
Posts: 5571
Location: Jacksonville, FL
And yet other teams have made the similar leap on just as small of a sample size with similar aged goaltenders and it paid off for them. You're assuming it won't pay off for the Blues based on a tiny amount of data.

_________________
Official LGB sponsor of Robby Fabbri 2016-2017 Season
Official LGB sponsor of Colton Parayko 2015-2016 Season
Official LGB Sponsor Dmitrij Jaskin 2014-2015 Season


Last edited by theohall on Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Our issue in the playoffs isn't whether we can beat anybody or not. We'll be an underdog against just about anybody we can face, but it's hardly unrealistic that Allen and Tarasenko get hot and we steal a series. The issue is that there are four series, not just one. Even if we can steal one, we'd have to do it three more times for it to be meaningful. I'm not sure we have the scoring depth to do it four times.


Thing is, we have scoring depth, it's the playbook strategy that is hindering it. Hitchcock is gone and his strategy should have followed him out the door. While a solid Defense is pretty important, it's about time to open up the strategy so the Forwards can create and finish scoring chances. I have seen too much emphasis on Defense being the first priority.


That could be true. I know that's the common critique on Yeo. Maybe I phrased it poorly, but what I was trying to say is that we haven't seen evidence that the team will score well enough to win 4 consecutive playoff series. I don't think it's crazy to steal a series, because anything can happen in a 7 game series. To do it 4 times in a row, something has got to get better than it currently is.


Absolutely agree. I think Yeo needs to adapt. When he has, it's been great for the Blues. When not it's like he's standing in Hitch's shadow and doing a poor job of that. Not a good thing at all.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
theohall wrote:
And yet other teams have made the similar leap on just as small of a sample size with similar aged goaltenders and it paid off for them. You're assuming it won't pay off for the Blues based on a tiny amount of data.


Those teams have had an offense strategy and let their guns do the talking. If we did that, we could take the Cup with Allen, whether he's lights out or not. That has less to do with Allen and more to do with utilizing the assets we have to create offense (Schwartz, Steen, Tank, etc.)

If the Blues don't get away from the full-on Defense first strategy it won't matter who is in goal.

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:29 am 
Offline
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame

Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am
Posts: 3934
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
cardsfan04 wrote:
Oaklandblue wrote:
Toasted Oates wrote:
Yeah, the Blues are what they are. I was more measuring the Wild against the Hawks. It's not that I necessarily believe they'd beat either team, just who they might have a better chance against. It's just purely opinion based. You could be on the money; we'll see.

Oakland--you think we could give Allen a bigger sample size before we torpedo his postseason prowess?


I think he's been "Given" enough already. At this point he needs to earn it.


He needs to earn being judged by a reasonable standard?


*holds up Jake Allen's contract* I think so.


He needs to earn the opportunity. He doesn't need to earn a reasonable standard of judgment. The idea that he needs to do something in order for people to use a reasonable standard when judging him is absurd. A reasonable standard should be used on any player regardless of what they've earned. Otherwise your judgment is meaningless. A small sample size of losses without an offense in front of him is not a reasonable standard. Worth noting he has a 2.29 GAA in the playoffs as well. That's also ~meaningless because 11 games. The point is that if you use 11 game samples to judge players, you're going to be wrong a lot.


Management signed him to a contract that his stats don't hold water for. He's the future, that's fine, but show me where in those stats does it scream "Hey, I'm worth 4m". The same brand of logic that went into that contract is the same one that went into Lehtera's. I feel Allen should have been bridged and if he continued to do well or improved or whatever, then absolutely pay him.

I think we can all agree on both sides of the discussion that the sample size simply isn't big enough to make that kind of leap.


Those are two different arguments though. The first, that Army gave him a contract before he proved it (while not quite that simple) is reasonable. He definitely got paid before showing he could handle being a number 1. That's not even an opinion. It's just a fact when looking at the timeline of events. I agree with what Army did (more or less), but yeah, he hadn't been a number 1 yet when he was given that contract which adds a pretty big layer of risk.

The second discussion, and this is where I disagree with what you have said, is about whether he's a good playoff goalie or not. I tend to think too much is made of how players perform in the playoffs vs regular season, but if we're going to judge his playoff performance in isolation, we have an 11 game sample to work with. There are too many random variables to draw significant conclusions on 11 games.

_________________
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2017 11:44 am 
Offline
All-Star
All-Star
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm
Posts: 1401
cardsfan04 wrote:
The second discussion, and this is where I disagree with what you have said, is about whether he's a good playoff goalie or not. I tend to think too much is made of how players perform in the playoffs vs regular season, but if we're going to judge his playoff performance in isolation, we have an 11 game sample to work with. There are too many random variables to draw significant conclusions on 11 games.


In my opinion the team has far more than enough regular season success and has a team right now that can make the playoffs yearly and I don't think it's a flippant thing to say. For a franchise that has been there more than enough times that effort should be put in to help this team go all the way. It's a 'chicken or egg' kind of argument anyway, but like the rest of us, I'd love to see the Blues 'finish' what they started..


As to whether Jake = Playoff Goalie or not, I pose this question: If the team stays as they are, then at what point do you hold the goaltender accountable? On one end, Allen could post a .920 and stand on his head and the team loses. On another account, he could post .880 behind a horrible defense. At what point or place would we agree on that he is accountable?

_________________
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 103 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Board index » Let's Go Blues » St. Louis Blues Discussion

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 48 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group