Let's Go Blues

dmiles2186 wrote:I'm okay with the Elliott/Allen combo. More unproven goalies have won the Stanley Cup compared to those too. So the optimistic side says it can happen. But, I can never get over Elliott's really bad years in Ottawa and Colorado. I just feel like he's always got that lurking, like it could overtake him and he could lapse into that goalie again. I'm not saying it will happen, mind you. I know he's played great hockey for us. And there are plenty of goalies who shake off bad years in their careers to become good or even great goalies. I just am always worried about that.

But I'd rather go this route because, as I've stated before, it gives Allen a chance to grow in a backup role without being 'the guy.' And when he's ready to take over, he will.

You gotta fall before you can rise. I tend to trust Elliott a bit more because of his "bad years". He's gone through adversity yet is still standing there. He paid his dues. That's character.

That doesn't mean he's going to be lights out forever, but it does tell me that if his game falters, he's more apt to bounce back.

ViPeRx007 wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:I'm okay with the Elliott/Allen combo. More unproven goalies have won the Stanley Cup compared to those too. So the optimistic side says it can happen. But, I can never get over Elliott's really bad years in Ottawa and Colorado. I just feel like he's always got that lurking, like it could overtake him and he could lapse into that goalie again. I'm not saying it will happen, mind you. I know he's played great hockey for us. And there are plenty of goalies who shake off bad years in their careers to become good or even great goalies. I just am always worried about that.

But I'd rather go this route because, as I've stated before, it gives Allen a chance to grow in a backup role without being 'the guy.' And when he's ready to take over, he will.

You gotta fall before you can rise. I tend to trust Elliott a bit more because of his "bad years". He's gone through adversity yet is still standing there. He paid his dues. That's character.

That doesn't mean he's going to be lights out forever, but it does tell me that if his game falters, he's more apt to bounce back.

That's a good point on overcoming what he has. And you can clearly tell, the group in front of him loves playing for him. I know we discussed in a different thread, but after Ells re-signed, some of the quotes from the other guys on the team clearly showed how much they all respected him for how hard he works. I'm not saying I'm right for holding those years over his head, he's put up spectacular numbers for us. And he's technically in his prime right now. It's easy to forget that. I just always worry, but he keeps proving me wrong.

Looking back on it should we have kept 6'7" Bishop?

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Looking back on it should we have kept 6'7" Bishop?

No, hindsight is always going to change your perception. At the time, he couldn't crack the lineup behind Halak and Elliott. Remember, when we signed Elliott, it was a two way deal and we went to camp with Halak as our #1 and Bishop and Elliott left to battle it out for #2. Elliott won. Elliott was always the better of the two and even when Bishop did get called up, he didn't perform all that well. Mind you, he didn't play consistently while here, but still, he never had that one game that screamed he was ready to make the jump. At the time when we traded him, I thought we got a steal by getting a 2nd round pick for him. Even in Ottawa, his play was up and down. I'm happy for him down in Tampa, but I just don't think he fit here. We made the right choice and I'll stick with that even if he goes on to win a Vezina or two. I'm always going to pull for him.

A 6'7" goalie who can move is almost unheard of so in that sense I wish we didn't let him go. Wouldn't Bishop and Allen be just as good or better than Elliot and Allen?

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:A 6'7" goalie who can move is almost unheard of so in that sense I wish we didn't let him go. Wouldn't Bishop and Allen be just as good or better than Elliot and Allen?

Sure, they would. But at the time of the Bishop trade, would you have predicted he'd turn out as good as he did? His numbers with us were 4-5-1, .896, 2.83. Not terrible, not great.

His numbers in Peoria were up and down. Yeah, he had size, but at the time, he just couldn't crack the lineup. And when Allen was drafted in '08, he was tagged as the 'goalie of the future,' so Bishop was the 4th wheel in our goaltending crew at the time.

APOD wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:I can never get over Elliott's really bad years in Ottawa and Colorado. I just feel like he's always got that lurking, like it could overtake him and he could lapse into that goalie again.

He has only really had 2 bad years 2010-11(last year in Ottawa/First and last in Colorado) and 2012-2013 the lock out season I honestly think alot of goalies had issues that year no one expected a season so training was lax.

He didn't have a bad '12-'13 season. He had like 6 bad games early in the year.
People forget how that season actually went and just focus on those few games early in the year for some reason.

And his "bad years" in Ottawa and Colorado were early in his career.
He has played in the NHL for 6 seasons (I don't count the one game he played in 07-08) and over the last three years of his career, Elliott has averaged a .927 Save% and a 1.86 GAA. That's half of his career...he's 29 years old...so he should be entering his prime right now. But yeah, let's continue to focus on the first three years of his NHL career when he was younger and still learning/getting better.

People think that Allen played out of this world in 2012-2013. He didn't.
People think Elliott sucked that season. He didn't.
Elliott finished with a better GAA and a better Save% than Allen that year (but people will say Allen was outstanding and Elliott was horrible). If you toss out those 5 or 6 games early in the year, Elliott would have finished with the best numbers in the NHL.

And in the playoffs in '12-'13, he had a 1.90 GAA vs. the Kings.
In those 6 games, he allowed 1 goal three times and 2 goals twice and 4 goals once. He was certainly more than good enough to win that series.
We all know what the real problem was, and it was finally, hopefully, addressed this offeason.

People don't seem to have the confidence in Elliott apparently because of a 6 game stretch he had two years ago to start the season coming off of a lockout.
I don't get that at all. Why not focus on what he has done over the 2nd half of his career instead of the first half? I mean, that is how he is playing right now.

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

flyingnote38 wrote:Strong start by Armstrong. All he needs to do is finish his remaining tasks on time and he gets an "A"

obvious positives
cost effectively addressed goaltending situation
signed badly needed scoring line center
kept draft picks and scored big on first 2 picks with badly needed center prospects

ancillary positives
restored forward depth adding 2 probable top 6 forwards and an additional top 12 forward without subtracting from our top 9 or near NHL ready forward prospects (Jaskin, Rattie)
perhaps heisted a dman from Toronto while adding an additional pick
maybe showing an interest in advanced metrics? of the 7 Blues regulars with goal for percentage below 50 last season, 3 are gone and the rest are seemingly moving down the depth chart. Both Stastny and Gunarsson were among the best possession players on their teams. Blues quickly lost interest in Ott (who sucks at hockey) after hiring Corsi - coincidence?
satisfied need to acquire former Dallas Star player who is washed up and can't play hockey anymore by signing one as a coach.

left to do
sign Schwartz and Sobotka

Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

WaukeeBlues wrote:

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

flyingnote38 wrote:Strong start by Armstrong. All he needs to do is finish his remaining tasks on time and he gets an "A"

obvious positives
cost effectively addressed goaltending situation
signed badly needed scoring line center
kept draft picks and scored big on first 2 picks with badly needed center prospects

ancillary positives
restored forward depth adding 2 probable top 6 forwards and an additional top 12 forward without subtracting from our top 9 or near NHL ready forward prospects (Jaskin, Rattie)
perhaps heisted a dman from Toronto while adding an additional pick
maybe showing an interest in advanced metrics? of the 7 Blues regulars with goal for percentage below 50 last season, 3 are gone and the rest are seemingly moving down the depth chart. Both Stastny and Gunarsson were among the best possession players on their teams. Blues quickly lost interest in Ott (who sucks at hockey) after hiring Corsi - coincidence?
satisfied need to acquire former Dallas Star player who is washed up and can't play hockey anymore by signing one as a coach.

left to do
sign Schwartz and Sobotka

Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

Guys, I share your sentiment completely, so I wasn't asking how you felt about it. I was asking if you think the management may make him part of a move. Of course the question is where and for what. We may be just stacking up at center, who knows, but even counting Backes and Berglund as wings, we now have 5 centers in Stastny, Lehtera, Sobotka and Lidstrom and Lapierre. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the master plan is. Cause I believe there's a master plan.

ComradeT wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

flyingnote38 wrote:Strong start by Armstrong. All he needs to do is finish his remaining tasks on time and he gets an "A"

obvious positives
cost effectively addressed goaltending situation
signed badly needed scoring line center
kept draft picks and scored big on first 2 picks with badly needed center prospects

ancillary positives
restored forward depth adding 2 probable top 6 forwards and an additional top 12 forward without subtracting from our top 9 or near NHL ready forward prospects (Jaskin, Rattie)
perhaps heisted a dman from Toronto while adding an additional pick
maybe showing an interest in advanced metrics? of the 7 Blues regulars with goal for percentage below 50 last season, 3 are gone and the rest are seemingly moving down the depth chart. Both Stastny and Gunarsson were among the best possession players on their teams. Blues quickly lost interest in Ott (who sucks at hockey) after hiring Corsi - coincidence?
satisfied need to acquire former Dallas Star player who is washed up and can't play hockey anymore by signing one as a coach.

left to do
sign Schwartz and Sobotka

Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

Guys, I share your sentiment completely, so I wasn't asking how you felt about it. I was asking if you think the management may make him part of a move. Of course the question is where and for what. We may be just stacking up at center, who knows, but even counting Backes and Berglund as wings, we now have 5 centers in Stastny, Lehtera, Sobotka and Lidstrom and Lapierre. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the master plan is. Cause I believe there's a master plan.

I don't think he'll be a part of a move. Compare him to Berglund. Boat had 9 g, 24 a for 33 points in 61 games. In 78 games, Berglund had 14 g, 18 a for 32 points. I'm not saying it's that cut and dry, but I think management knows what an asset Boat is to our team. As you guys have mentioned, the dude doesn't quit. Personally, I consider him one of our 2 or 3 better overall players of the last 2 seasons. If we were to trade him, it would gut me. But I just don't think it will happen.

ComradeT wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

flyingnote38 wrote:Strong start by Armstrong. All he needs to do is finish his remaining tasks on time and he gets an "A"

obvious positives
cost effectively addressed goaltending situation
signed badly needed scoring line center
kept draft picks and scored big on first 2 picks with badly needed center prospects

ancillary positives
restored forward depth adding 2 probable top 6 forwards and an additional top 12 forward without subtracting from our top 9 or near NHL ready forward prospects (Jaskin, Rattie)
perhaps heisted a dman from Toronto while adding an additional pick
maybe showing an interest in advanced metrics? of the 7 Blues regulars with goal for percentage below 50 last season, 3 are gone and the rest are seemingly moving down the depth chart. Both Stastny and Gunarsson were among the best possession players on their teams. Blues quickly lost interest in Ott (who sucks at hockey) after hiring Corsi - coincidence?
satisfied need to acquire former Dallas Star player who is washed up and can't play hockey anymore by signing one as a coach.

left to do
sign Schwartz and Sobotka

Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

Guys, I share your sentiment completely, so I wasn't asking how you felt about it. I was asking if you think the management may make him part of a move. Of course the question is where and for what. We may be just stacking up at center, who knows, but even counting Backes and Berglund as wings, we now have 5 centers in Stastny, Lehtera, Sobotka and Lidstrom and Lapierre. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the master plan is. Cause I believe there's a master plan.

I think he is untouchable only because of his game compared to his contract. You simply can't afford to give him away.

STLADOGG wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

flyingnote38 wrote:Strong start by Armstrong. All he needs to do is finish his remaining tasks on time and he gets an "A"

obvious positives
cost effectively addressed goaltending situation
signed badly needed scoring line center
kept draft picks and scored big on first 2 picks with badly needed center prospects

ancillary positives
restored forward depth adding 2 probable top 6 forwards and an additional top 12 forward without subtracting from our top 9 or near NHL ready forward prospects (Jaskin, Rattie)
perhaps heisted a dman from Toronto while adding an additional pick
maybe showing an interest in advanced metrics? of the 7 Blues regulars with goal for percentage below 50 last season, 3 are gone and the rest are seemingly moving down the depth chart. Both Stastny and Gunarsson were among the best possession players on their teams. Blues quickly lost interest in Ott (who sucks at hockey) after hiring Corsi - coincidence?
satisfied need to acquire former Dallas Star player who is washed up and can't play hockey anymore by signing one as a coach.

left to do
sign Schwartz and Sobotka

Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

Guys, I share your sentiment completely, so I wasn't asking how you felt about it. I was asking if you think the management may make him part of a move. Of course the question is where and for what. We may be just stacking up at center, who knows, but even counting Backes and Berglund as wings, we now have 5 centers in Stastny, Lehtera, Sobotka and Lidstrom and Lapierre. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the master plan is. Cause I believe there's a master plan.

I think he is untouchable only because of his game compared to his contract. You simply can't afford to give him away.

Agreed. While his production could technically be replaced, it would be hard to do so far what we're paying him. He made $1.4 mil last year. He'll get a raise, but I'm sure it will still be below his actual value to the team.

cardsfan04 wrote:

STLADOGG wrote:

ComradeT wrote:

WaukeeBlues wrote:

Misc. Blues wrote:

ComradeT wrote:
Maybe a scary thought here... But with the abundance at center, could it be possible that Boat is surplus to requirements?

No

This. Sobotka is my man crush. Guy never takes a shift off, hits hard, has some talent to chip in offensively from time to time... any team in this league is lucky to have him and I'd be pissed if we let him walk.

Guys, I share your sentiment completely, so I wasn't asking how you felt about it. I was asking if you think the management may make him part of a move. Of course the question is where and for what. We may be just stacking up at center, who knows, but even counting Backes and Berglund as wings, we now have 5 centers in Stastny, Lehtera, Sobotka and Lidstrom and Lapierre. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the master plan is. Cause I believe there's a master plan.

I think he is untouchable only because of his game compared to his contract. You simply can't afford to give him away.

Agreed. While his production could technically be replaced, it would be hard to do so far what we're paying him. He made $1.4 mil last year. He'll get a raise, but I'm sure it will still be below his actual value to the team.

He led the league in Face-off %. He plays like he's 6'5" and he can play left wing if needed. He trains in MMA and that's why he hits so explosive. He has the heart the size of Backes's head and leaves every bit of his soul on the ice every game. I think he's untouchable and deserves a good raise.

You guys got the coveted free agent your GM wanted so I think one would have to give an 'A' for accomplishing the off season goals. It wasn't like this team needed an overhaul. The only question is your goaltending now - which is the same question mark for our team as well.

Kerfuffle wrote:You guys got the coveted free agent your GM wanted so I think one would have to give an 'A' for accomplishing the off season goals. It wasn't like this team needed an overhaul. The only question is your goaltending now - which is the same question mark for our team as well.

You think Crow is a question mark? He won 1 Cup and got to another conference final. Blues fans would KILL for that!

Crow has been inconsistent - he personally lost the 2012 playoffs for us by allowing 2 OT goals in back-to-back games in which the Coyotes just skated down the ice and skated the puck through him without a shot. He redeemed himself in 2013 with a great playoffs but in 2014 he returned to his 2012 form. He needs to be a lot better - especially for the money we are paying him.

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:You guys got the coveted free agent your GM wanted so I think one would have to give an 'A' for accomplishing the off season goals. It wasn't like this team needed an overhaul. The only question is your goaltending now - which is the same question mark for our team as well.

You think Crow is a question mark? He won 1 Cup and got to another conference final. Blues fans would KILL for that!

You obviously don't watch many Hawks games.
Crawford is inconsistent. He can have great stretches and bad stretches.
But with the team the Hawks have in front of their goalie, they could win with a number of guys back there. I think if you put Crawford on an average team, his numbers will suffer greatly.

I'd rather have Elliott.

cprice12 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:You guys got the coveted free agent your GM wanted so I think one would have to give an 'A' for accomplishing the off season goals. It wasn't like this team needed an overhaul. The only question is your goaltending now - which is the same question mark for our team as well.

You think Crow is a question mark? He won 1 Cup and got to another conference final. Blues fans would KILL for that!

You obviously don't watch many Hawks games.
Crawford is inconsistent. He can have great stretches and bad stretches.
But with the team the Hawks have in front of their goalie, they could win with a number of guys back there. I think if you put Crawford on an average team, his numbers will suffer greatly.

I'd rather have Elliott.

I'd be willing to bet if you put Crawford on our team the past 3 seasons we'd still have 0 cups. Goaltending hasn't been our issue. I feel like a broken record...

ViPeRx007 wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:You guys got the coveted free agent your GM wanted so I think one would have to give an 'A' for accomplishing the off season goals. It wasn't like this team needed an overhaul. The only question is your goaltending now - which is the same question mark for our team as well.

You think Crow is a question mark? He won 1 Cup and got to another conference final. Blues fans would KILL for that!

You obviously don't watch many Hawks games.
Crawford is inconsistent. He can have great stretches and bad stretches.
But with the team the Hawks have in front of their goalie, they could win with a number of guys back there. I think if you put Crawford on an average team, his numbers will suffer greatly.

I'd rather have Elliott.

I'd be willing to bet if you put Crawford on our team the past 3 seasons we'd still have 0 cups. Goaltending hasn't been our issue. I feel like a broken record...

Don't need to look any further than the previous two champions, the Hawks and Kings. Neither one had lights out goaltending and went on to win cups. Miller wasn't THE reason we lost in the playoffs last year. Quick wasn't THE reason the Kings won. As long as Elliott/Allen are decently solid goaltending is not going to be the reason this team doesn't go deep into the playoffs.

WaukeeBlues wrote:Don't need to look any further than the previous two champions, the Hawks and Kings. Neither one had lights out goaltending and went on to win cups. Miller wasn't THE reason we lost in the playoffs last year. Quick wasn't THE reason the Kings won. As long as Elliott/Allen are decently solid goaltending is not going to be the reason this team doesn't go deep into the playoffs.

I agree. Both Niemi and Crawford were very good for us in 2010 and 2013 but neither was great nor elite. They were basically just 'good enough' and we won with the team around them. I would say however that Quick was the sole reason the Kings won in 2012 with his .946 SVP. Take any team in the league and put a goalie in there with that kind of performance and they will likely win the cup. The Kings cup this year was more of a team effort though and not decided by Quick alone.