Let's Go Blues

OS wrote:

Battra wrote:It's a simple point. You don't have a frame of reference to what a "true #1 is." You said it yourself...in your whole life of fandom, you've watched Future Hall of Famers play on the top and second pairings.

So I'm curious, those who say he's not a true number 1, show me what a NON-hall of famer number one is, or do you have to be a future hall of famer to be a true number one?

When Brew's paired with the right kind of partner, he's a much better player because he only has to do so much.

Edit:

You said:
The bottom line he isn't a # 1 or # 2 guy and is forced to play that role. As long as he is, he will get the scrutiny that comes with it. He will never thrive under that scrutiny. At least not in St. Louis where fans are used to having a legitimate #1 defensemen (or two).

So..I'm curious...aside from Future Hall of Famers...I'd like to know what the others ones are. This goes back to my point about how St. Louis fans don't know what a number one is. They know what a future hall of famer is.

There's this amazing thing that the NHL created for hockey fans, oh, 10 years ago called Center Ice. The cool thing about it is that if you subscribe, you actually get to watch other teams. You should check it out.

More logical fallacies...ahhh...the ad hominem attack.

The vast majority of Blues fans are just that, Blues fans. They are NOT hockey fans. Worcerster played a game in St. Louis a few years back and no one showed.

Nice try though.

Center Ice was great for me when I had the time to devote weekends and large portions of my free time to it. Now that NHL-Net shows Hockey Night In Canada, I'm good.

You're the last person that should be talking about logical fallacies. Let's sum up your argument in this thread...

1) Brewer is great because we don't have real evidence to back up our opinions of him.

2) Brewer is great because Blues fans never watch other hockey teams play and therefore can't possibly know how good Brewer is compared to other defensemen.

You are a complete failure at debating a topic. You have provided absolutely nothing to back up claims. Nothing. Please, stop wasting Curt's bandwidth unless you're going to bring something more substantial to the table than the bullshit that you've been spewing.

I guess I shouldn't renew Center Ice next season if I don't watch other teams. Thanks for letting me in on that info.

Battra wrote:I'd say on at least 15 NHL teams he's a top pairing defenseman.

That sure sounds like a wild unsubstantiated claim with no evidence to back it up. How about you tell us what 15 teams he'd be a top pairing D-man on?

OS wrote:You're the last person that should be talking about logical fallacies. Let's sum up your argument in this thread...

1) Brewer is great because we don't have real evidence to back up our opinions of him.

2) Brewer is great because Blues fans never watch other hockey teams play and therefore can't possibly know how good Brewer is compared to other defensemen.

You are a complete failure at debating a topic. You have provided absolutely nothing to back up claims. Nothing. Please, stop wasting Curt's bandwidth unless you're going to bring something more substantial to the table than the bullshit that you've been spewing.

OS, please quote for me, where I said either of those two things?

In this post, you've ascribed things to me that I've never said, and used another ad hominem attack.

Try again?

OS wrote:

Battra wrote:I'd say on at least 15 NHL teams he's a top pairing defenseman.

That sure sounds like a wild unsubstantiated claim with no evidence to back it up. How about you tell us what 15 teams he'd be a top pairing D-man on?

If you'd prefer, I can edit the post to "in my opinion," as that's what I meant by "I'd say."

I would say he'd be a top pairing defensemen on:

Phoenix, Toronto, New York Islanders, Tampa Bay, Atlanta, Colorado, Los Angeles, Nashville, and perhaps Carolina....

Hmm...apparently more like 9 teams. Keeping in mind, this is just an opinion, so, not it's not backed up by anything, and I could be forgetting people who are on certain teams.

So you think he's great because he'd be a top pairing defenseman on 9 teams, almost all of which are among the worst teams in the league.

Thanks for playing.

(Edit: Your inclusion of Nashville is hillarious)

OS wrote:So you think he's great because he'd be a top pairing defenseman on 9 teams, almost all of which are among the worst teams in the league.

Thanks for playing.

(Edit: Your inclusion of Nashville is hillarious)

OS, did you forget to quote where I said those things you were ascribing to me, or would you just prefer to ignore when your faslehoods are pointed out?

Do I think he's great? No, but again, you're putting words in my mouth. OS, why don't we just talk about the words we both say, or in this case type, as opposed to what we'd like to think the other said in order to win the internet?

On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Nik Lidstrom, 5 being average NHL defensemen, and 1 being 7th NHL defenseman on the worst team, I'd put him at about 7.5...

Upper third of the league, not the best, certainly not in the same class as the Lidstroms, the Prongers, etc.

However, he's an above average defensemen who's largely hated on home ice due to the very large expectations placed on him by the fans, and due to being spoiled by watching 4 of the best defensemen in a generation wear the Bluenote in from 1990-2004.
(Stevens, Housley, MacInnis, Pronger.)

OS wrote:

Battra wrote:I'd say on at least 15 NHL teams he's a top pairing defenseman.

That sure sounds like a wild unsubstantiated claim with no evidence to back it up. How about you tell us what 15 teams he'd be a top pairing D-man on?

ANA: Pronger, Niedermayer...NO
ATL: Enstrom, Salmela, Hainsey...Maybe
BOS: Chara, Wideman...NO
BUF: Lydman, Sekara, Spacek, Tallinder...NO
CAR: Pitkanen, Corvo, Seidenberg, Babchuk...Maybe
CBJ: Commodore, Heyda, Tyutin, Klesla...NO
CGY: Phaneuf, Regehr...NO
CHI: Keith, Campbell, Seabrook...HECK NO
COL: Hannan, Salei, Liles...Maybe
DAL: Daley, Robidas, Niskanen...Maybe
DET: Rafalski, Lidstrom...NO
EDM: Vishnovsky, Gilbert, Souray, Grebeshkov...NO
FLA: Bouwmeester, McCabe, Ballard...NO
LA: Quincy, O'Donnell, Doughty...Maybe this year, but when Doughty matures, no way
MIN: Johnsson, Burns, Zidlicky, Schultz...NO
MON: Komisarek, Markov, Schneider, Hamrlik...NO
NJ: Martin, Yoduya...NO
NSH: Weber, Suter...NO
NYI: Streit, Martinek, Gervais...YES
NYR: Staal, Roszival, Redden, Girardi...NO
OTT: Phillips, Volchenkov, Kuba...NO
PHI: Carle, Coburn...NO
PHX: Jovanovski, Michalek...Maybe
PIT: Orpik, Letang, Gonchar...NO
SJ: Vlasic, Boyle, Ehrhoff, Blake...NO
TAB: Meszaros, Eminger, Krajcek...Maybe
TOR: Schenn, Kubina, White, Kaberle...NO

I can only count 8 teams that he might be a top paring defenseman on.

Battra wrote:[On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Nik Lidstrom, 5 being average NHL defensemen, and 1 being 7th NHL defenseman on the worst team, I'd put him at about 7.5...

On a scale of 1 to 10, this is how I would rate our defensemen:

Colaiacovo - 6.5
Polak - 6.5
Jackman - 5.5
McKee - 5.5
Strachan - 5.5
Brewer - 5
Weaver - 4.5
Woywitka - 3.5

As for Johnson, I think I'd probably put him at a 6.0-6.5 based on what I saw from him last year with the ability to grow to a 10.

Battra wrote:However, he's an above average defensemen who's largely hated on home ice due to the very large expectations placed on him by the fans, and due to being spoiled by watching 4 of the best defensemen in a generation wear the Bluenote in from 1990-2004.
(Stevens, Housley, MacInnis, Pronger.)

Honestly, he's hated not because us Blues fans have been spoiled by top defensemen, but rather because he is not performing to the level of his contract. He is not worth $4.25MM/yr x 4 years. We could get better production for that money, and that is why we would like to get rid of him.

Woywitka is a zero.. I've yet to see any upside to him unless you count pinching in at bad times and making a crappy shot. He sucks and the fact that he's playing here and not Alaska pisses me off every game.

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:[On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Nik Lidstrom, 5 being average NHL defensemen, and 1 being 7th NHL defenseman on the worst team, I'd put him at about 7.5...

On a scale of 1 to 10, this is how I would rate our defensemen:

Colaiacovo - 6.5
Polak - 6.5
Jackman - 5.5
McKee - 5.5
Strachan - 5.5
Brewer - 5
Weaver - 4.5
Woywitka - 3.5

As for Johnson, I think I'd probably put him at a 6.0-6.5 based on what I saw from him last year with the ability to grow to a 10.

I think Weaver has been better than a 4.5, he has been pretty solid back there for most of this season, he has been a big surprise. And dude is only 5'9..

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:[On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Nik Lidstrom, 5 being average NHL defensemen, and 1 being 7th NHL defenseman on the worst team, I'd put him at about 7.5...

On a scale of 1 to 10, this is how I would rate our defensemen:

Colaiacovo - 6.5
Polak - 6.5
Jackman - 5.5
McKee - 5.5
Strachan - 5.5
Brewer - 5
Weaver - 4.5
Woywitka - 3.5

As for Johnson, I think I'd probably put him at a 6.0-6.5 based on what I saw from him last year with the ability to grow to a 10.

I'd agree with all of it except for your assessment of Brewer.

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:However, he's an above average defensemen who's largely hated on home ice due to the very large expectations placed on him by the fans, and due to being spoiled by watching 4 of the best defensemen in a generation wear the Bluenote in from 1990-2004.
(Stevens, Housley, MacInnis, Pronger.)

Honestly, he's hated not because us Blues fans have been spoiled by top defensemen, but rather because he is not performing to the level of his contract. He is not worth $4.25MM/yr x 4 years. We could get better production for that money, and that is why we would like to get rid of him.

If you think he's not worth his contract, then you're not seeing what he brings to the table and you're watching with clouded eyes...that's really all I can say.

He's largely invisible, excepting when he makes a stupid mistake.

section319 wrote:

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:[On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Nik Lidstrom, 5 being average NHL defensemen, and 1 being 7th NHL defenseman on the worst team, I'd put him at about 7.5...

On a scale of 1 to 10, this is how I would rate our defensemen:

Colaiacovo - 6.5
Polak - 6.5
Jackman - 5.5
McKee - 5.5
Strachan - 5.5
Brewer - 5
Weaver - 4.5
Woywitka - 3.5

As for Johnson, I think I'd probably put him at a 6.0-6.5 based on what I saw from him last year with the ability to grow to a 10.

I think Weaver has been better than a 4.5, he has been pretty solid back there for most of this season, he has been a big surprise. And dude is only 5'9..

I think he has been above average defensively, I just docked him for having zero offensive contribution. I was debating whether or not to give him a 5 instead.

Battra wrote:However, he's an above average defensemen who's largely hated on home ice due to the very large expectations placed on him by the fans, and due to being spoiled by watching 4 of the best defensemen in a generation wear the Bluenote in from 1990-2004.
(Stevens, Housley, MacInnis, Pronger.)

b.

Again, I completely agree with you there. But to think Blues fans shouldn't have high expectations for their defensemen is sort of ridiculous. Yes, we were spoiled by previous players. When this team had that kind of defensemen, they were successful. Now they don't and are struggling to MAYBE make the playoffs. One of the biggest issues this team has is the production it gets from the defense... and that is in large part because they don't have a #1 blueliner capable of matching up against opposing teams' top lines AND contributing to the offensive flow of the game. They just don't have that. And the dislike from Brewer stems because Murry holds him out as such a capable player and he just never seems to actually succeed in that role.

I can tell you right now I never look at Brewer and see the spare change we got for Pronger. I see Brewer. And I see him struggle to be a #1. All you are doing is making it worse by saying that Phoenix, Toronto, NYI, Tampa, Atlanta, Colorado, Los Angeles and Carolina would let Brewer be in their top pairing. Thats absolutely not the type of company we should want the Blues' #1 to be. (I completely left out Nashville because their inclusion had to have been a mistake - I would very much like to have Nashville's top pairing).

I just don't understand what you are trying to prove? You said it... he's a 7.5 (at best I would say). He's "only above average", as you say, and the description of a #1 should read better than that. And to call Blues fan's "spoiled" like its a bad thing doesn't make any sense to me either. How is that a bad thing? Blues fans know a good thing when they see it. You want everybody to lower their standards for Brewer? Sorry, not going to happen.

Hall of fame defensemen would by definition have to be considered #1 pairing material. Not all #1 defensemen are hall of fame material. They have to have longevity in their careers in maintaining a high level of play. I would think this is obvious. There are plenty of #1 guys out there that probably won't make the hall of fame, but should absolutely be considered #1s. To throw Brewer into that mix... well, sorry, I'm a spoiled Blues fan and I want a better defenseman (or two) to be the #1 guy.

Battra wrote:If you think he's not worth his contract, then you're not seeing what he brings to the table and you're watching with clouded eyes...that's really all I can say.

He's largely invisible, excepting when he makes a stupid mistake.

I look at things with objective eyes. Stats are objective. He has consistently allowed 3+ goals/60min TOI at even strength (that's horrible). I don't want to hear that he plays against opponents top lines. A statistician will tell you that will only skew the numbers slightly over the course of a season. Go email Tom Awad at the Puck Prospectus and get his GVT rating (a value versus replacement metric) since he's been with the Blues. That is as OBJECTIVE a rating as you can possibly get. Barret Jackman has averaged a GVT of about 3 over the past two seasons (meaning his value over a replacement translates to an increased goal differential of 3 over the entire length of the season, about the value of a #4-5 defenseman), and I guarantee you that Brewer's GVT is lower than that.

I have watched Brewer play, and my evaluation only confirms the statistical analysis. What are you basing your evaluation on?

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:If you think he's not worth his contract, then you're not seeing what he brings to the table and you're watching with clouded eyes...that's really all I can say.

He's largely invisible, excepting when he makes a stupid mistake.

I look at things with objective eyes. Stats are objective. He has consistently allowed 3+ goals/60min TOI at even strength (that's horrible). I don't want to hear that he plays against opponents top lines. A statistician will tell you that will only skew the numbers slightly over the course of a season. Go email Tom Awad at the Puck Prospectus and get his GVT rating (a value versus replacement metric) since he's been with the Blues. That is as OBJECTIVE a rating as you can possibly get. Barret Jackman has averaged a GVT of about 3 over the past two seasons (meaning his value over a replacement translates to an increased goal differential of 3 over the entire length of the season, about the value of a #4-5 defenseman), and I guarantee you that Brewer's GVT is lower than that.

I have watched Brewer play, and my evaluation only confirms the statistical analysis. What are you basing your evaluation on?

Mine is not expecting him to be Chris Pronger.

I watch what he does. I see him objectively and I like what I see for the money he costs.

Battra wrote:

JWatt (formerly PMS) wrote:

Battra wrote:If you think he's not worth his contract, then you're not seeing what he brings to the table and you're watching with clouded eyes...that's really all I can say.

He's largely invisible, excepting when he makes a stupid mistake.

I look at things with objective eyes. Stats are objective. He has consistently allowed 3+ goals/60min TOI at even strength (that's horrible). I don't want to hear that he plays against opponents top lines. A statistician will tell you that will only skew the numbers slightly over the course of a season. Go email Tom Awad at the Puck Prospectus and get his GVT rating (a value versus replacement metric) since he's been with the Blues. That is as OBJECTIVE a rating as you can possibly get. Barret Jackman has averaged a GVT of about 3 over the past two seasons (meaning his value over a replacement translates to an increased goal differential of 3 over the entire length of the season, about the value of a #4-5 defenseman), and I guarantee you that Brewer's GVT is lower than that.

I have watched Brewer play, and my evaluation only confirms the statistical analysis. What are you basing your evaluation on?

Mine is not expecting him to be Chris Pronger.

I watch what he does. I see him objectively and I like what I see for the money he costs.

Are we supposed to put a lot of value on the opinion of a guy with multiple Curtis Sanford jerseys?