Tracking the Improbable...

OS · Post by OS » Tue Jan 16, 2007 8:02 pm

Even though I think they shouldn't throw away the season, the one player they should move without question is Brewer. Defensemen are high in demand and he should bring back a king's ransom and we simply don't need him next year.

deadphish · Post by **deadphish** » Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:19 pm

OS wrote:Even though I think they shouldn't throw away the season, the one player they should move without question is Brewer. Defensemen are high in demand and he should bring back a king's ransom and we simply don't need him next year.

Have you noticed how many injuries our D has taken in the last 5-6 years? We may need him. I agree though that Brewer would fetch something significant. A king's ransom? Which king?

OS · Post by OS » Tue Jan 16, 2007 9:48 pm

The injuries have sucked, but there's only so much money in the budget and this team needs forwards more than it needs to retain Brewer.

As for his return...there is only ONE team right now that thinks they are out of the playoffs.... which means that there are VERY FEW sellers.... low supply, high demand equals good news for the Blues.

YouTube · Post by **cprice12** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:25 am

OS wrote:Even though I think they shouldn't throw away the season, the one player they should move without question is Brewer. Defensemen are high in demand and he should bring back a king's ransom and we simply don't need him next year.

Gotta agree there.
If not Brewer, another defenseman.

Winning Unlimited · Post by **Winning Unlimited** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:41 am

We are no longer last in the league in scoring!!

bamabluesfan · Post by **bamabluesfan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 7:56 am

Over their last 17 they are 10-3-4, assuming shootout losses and OT losses are counted as ties. Either way they have 24 pts (1.41 per game) over their last 17, a record of 11-5-1 would yeild 23 pts.

execwrite · Post by **execwrite** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:06 am

Pre-season odds of New Orleans Saints winning the Super Bowl -

120 to 1.

OS · Post by OS » Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:36 am

BringBackZezel wrote:Based on averages, to get to within 6 points of 8th place by the trade deadline, the Blues will have to go 11-5-1 over the next 17.

To update this...

Minnesota is on pace for 68 points now.

So (still based on averages), the Blues need 20 points in 16 games to be within 6 points at the deadline.

frivolousz21 · Post by **frivolousz21** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:03 am

the Blues need 20 points in 16 games to be within 6 points at the deadline

not bad at all.

8-4-4 would do that..

9-5-2 would be close.

10-6 as well.

but Minnesota might not get as hot as everyone thinks.

the other Northwest teams might slow each other down as well

BringBackZezel · Post by **BringBackZezel** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:21 am

frivolousz21 wrote:
the Blues need 20 points in 16 games to be within 6 points at the deadline
not bad at all.

8-4-4 would do that..

9-5-2 would be close.

10-6 as well.

but Minnesota might not get as hot as everyone thinks.

the other Northwest teams might slow each other down as well

Counting on teams to falter on a team-by-team basis isn't necessarily a bad thing...but counting on 5 or so teams to all falter between now and then isn't a safe bet.

You're right about teams playing each other, but also don't forget that there are two points and sometimes 3 to be had in every game. Someone has to win.

execwrite · Post by **execwrite** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:44 am

Step Number One - Get to .500

Step Number Two - Catch the three teams ahead of us

Step Number Three - Think about the playoffs

ksbluesfan · Post by **ksbluesfan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 10:52 am

Since Murray took over, the Blues are 10-4-4. That's 1 1/3 points per game. If Murray would have been head coach from the start of the season (assuming the same points-per-game pace), the Blues would still be 3rd in the division and 6th in the conference with 61 points.

F Keenan · Post by **F Keenan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:09 pm

[img:130:97]http://sjl-static12.sjl.youtube.com/vi/ ... nDrM/3.jpg[/img]
PLAYOFFS!?!

YouTube · Post by **cprice12** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:16 pm

ksbluesfan wrote:Since Murray took over, the Blues are 10-4-4. That's 1 1/3 points per game. If Murray would have been head coach from the start of the season (assuming the same points-per-game pace), the Blues would still be 3rd in the division and 6th in the conference with 61 points.

IF, they had that pace from the start of the season the end...they'd finish with about 110 pts.

Trevalin · Post by **Trevalin** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:54 pm

F Keenan wrote:[img:130:97]http://sjl-static12.sjl.youtube.com/vi/ ... nDrM/3.jpg[/img]
PLAYOFFS!?!

deadphish · Post by **deadphish** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 2:00 pm

Trevalin wrote:
F Keenan wrote:[img:130:97]http://sjl-static12.sjl.youtube.com/vi/ ... nDrM/3.jpg[/img]
PLAYOFFS!?!

[/quote
I was wondering when his pic would show up in this thread. Was too lazy myself to post it...heh.

Storm13 · Post by **Storm13** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:25 pm

ksbluesfan wrote:Since Murray took over, the Blues are 10-4-4. That's 1 1/3 points per game. If Murray would have been head coach from the start of the season (assuming the same points-per-game pace), the Blues would still be 3rd in the division and 6th in the conference with 61 points.

I'm too lazy to look it up and even begin to calculate it, but that doesn't take into account the reduction in points those teams above the Blues would have due to not having beaten the Blues.

ksbluesfan · Post by **ksbluesfan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 3:44 pm

Storm13 wrote:
ksbluesfan wrote:Since Murray took over, the Blues are 10-4-4. That's 1 1/3 points per game. If Murray would have been head coach from the start of the season (assuming the same points-per-game pace), the Blues would still be 3rd in the division and 6th in the conference with 61 points.

I'm too lazy to look it up and even begin to calculate it, but that doesn't take into account the reduction in points those teams above the Blues would have due to not having beaten the Blues.

How do you take that into account? Suppose all of their losses came against the teams currently higher in the standings. There's no way to know who they would have beat.

Aode · Post by **Aode** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:11 pm

46 games played, we have 42 points. Assuming that the 94 pt. platform is still ideal, here's what I got (if I'm incorrect in any of this, let me know)

We have 36 games to play and 52 points to collect in order to reach that mark.

SO, we're at a total of an average of 1.4444444 pts per game to hit that mark.

I'll try to keep track and re-tabulate every game to see where we're at.

A good indication of how close we are getting is if the 1.44444 shrinks lower and lower as games go on. If the average gets above 2 at any point, we're screwed. So right now, we're...

36 games to play and up 1.43% (2pointspergame possible/pts needed per game)

if the percentage hits lower than 1%- we're f*cked...

not_a_wings_fan · Post by **not_a_wings_fan** » Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:46 pm

Aode wrote:A good indication of how close we are getting is if the 1.44444 shrinks lower and lower as games go on. If the average gets above 2 at any point, we're screwed. So right now, we're...

36 games to play and up 1.43% (2pointspergame possible/pts needed per game)

if the percentage hits lower than 1%- we're f*cked...

Wow, you really worked hard on that one.. .

If the number is greater than two points per game, then you are correct, we have no shot at making that 94pt mark that seems to be nearly consensus for what is needed to get in; however, that number could go up or down depending on the overall play of the WC in the remaining games.

I have no idea what you mean about if the percentage hits lower than 1%...

There are several ways to calculate it, but if the pts needed pergame drops, it means we are making progress towards the goal. If it drops below a pt/game, then we have loses to burn. I don't think we are going to see it go below a pt/game unless we win like 25 games in a row and need just a couple of pts in the remaining 10 games or so.

My heart tells me that I think we have a shot, but my head says it is highly unlikely that we do anything other than screw ourselves out of a higher draft position.