St. Louis Blues 2010 Regular Season Thread

[Lesson]

Must win tonight. Road trip in Canada starts Thursday. It seems like McRae is playing, which means no Cam. [expletive] yes.

[JackofDiamonds]

Appointment television, not a "must win," but they need the 2 points. I'll say Blues win, but our goalie situation is perplexing. Against Anaheim, Conklin lets in 3 goals, so Bishop steps in and posts a 2 period shutout. Against Chicago 2 days later, Bishop lets in 4 in the second, then Conklin keeps the net empty for the 3rd frame. Who starts? Do we just switch goalies every period? Every stoppage?

[Lesson]

Appointment television, not a "must win," but they need the 2 points. I'll say Blues win, but our goalie situation is perplexing. Against Anaheim, Conklin lets in 3 goals, so Bishop steps in and posts a 2 period shutout. Against Chicago 2 days later, Bishop lets in 4 in the second, then Conklin keeps the net empty for the 3rd frame. Who starts? Do we just switch goalies every period? Every stoppage?

Rutherford is reporting that Conklin is starting.

[MrCrowesGarden]

Didn't see the game thanks to some amazing work by Charter, but it sounds like the goaltending let us down again. I see EJ and Stewart both had goals (Shattenkirk an assist). But, I'm reading that EJ's goal was something of a softie.

[TheoSqua]

Some random thoughts from the game tonight cause I feel like rambling.

*Phil McRae may end up being a top six forward someday, or good enough to man a third scoring line, but he hasn't shown it yet. Tonight especially he seemed particularly slow, both in skating and reading the plays, the goal by Stasny (i think) was directly from him misreading the play, starting forward to the neutral zone and failing to turn around and backcheck before he got the puck. The result was Stasny having enough space to make something happen.

*Patrik Berglund has looked like a beast lately. He didn't have the problem McRae had, his legs didn't stop moving tonight which is a huge contrast to the games I went to a few months ago where he thought he was skating in Forest Park. He's got 18 points in his last 17 games and he absolutely deserves it. He seems to be using his size and a bit of hustle to get into positions where he can make a play much more than when he thought he needed to sit 4 feet past the blue line and wait until he had to back check.

*Same goes for Chris Stewart. I've been really impressed with him the last few games he has a level of talent that this team has lacked. Oshie/Berglund/etc. are great players to have and they have a great ceiling, but none of them are going to lead a team offensively. The Blues have never had a problem getting shots on goal or creating scoring opportunities the last few years. They almost always outwork opponents. They just have lacked the talent to convert the scoring chances into goals. The Blues have a lot of great pieces in place for a good offense, they've never been in need of a huge revamp. The different between a good offense and what we have now isn't huge, it's a goal or two every few games more than we're getting right now. Ten or so of the scoring chances this team has had over the season being converted into timely goals gives The Blues 4-5 more wins than they have now. That puts the team in 5th in the standings. Stewart is the type of player that can convert some of the scoring chances this team has had into goals. I don't think the team's problems going forward is going to be offense.

*Backes had a pretty poor game. He missed several great scoring opportunities and have several other just random blunders with the stick where he couldn't keep a puck in the zone or lost the puck and other weird mishaps. I doubt it's a trend, he just had a rough night.

*The Avalanche were lucky tonight and the Blues weren't. Several great scoring opportunites for the Blues had the puck flip into Budaj's glove or the rebound would go just wide of a Blues player. It's why teams play 82 games. Sometimes the better team doesn't win, and that's what happened tonight.

* That said no team ever goes on winning streaks without good goaltending and the goaltending the team is currently getting just doesn't cut it. At least two of the goals tonight could be considered goals that Conklin should have made. The SOG differential is a bit misleading...The Avalanche were trying to take away the middle of the zone and the Blues countered by taking a shot from the sides and then crashing the net hoping to bang in a rebound. It worked when Berglund scored and Stewart's was also from a side shot getting in. The Avalanche had a lot more "quality" scoring chances where they had the puck right in front of the net with room to create a scoring chance. Still, an above average goaltender should be able to take away a few of those opportunities and the Blues goalies aren't doing that. Budaj did tonight and that's the difference between two points.

* I think that even if Erik Johnson turns into the next Chris Pronger this was still a good trade. The only thing Johnson has shown is that he isn't that sort of player yet. If he ever becomes an elite player it'll be with enough time to develop into that. If the Blues had known it would take 5-6 years from their drafting him for him to turn into the sort of difference maker his ceiling projects I doubt they would have drafted him. The Blues are in a win-now mode and can't afford to continue waiting for all their players to "develop". I don't believe Ownership has enough money to extend the rebuilding any longer than it already has.

With this trade the Blues turned one player of Johnson's skill level into two who are at a minimum equal to his current skill. They have to win now and that trade does it. The 1st round pick they gave up could end up being the best player of the four, Johnson could end up becoming Chris Pronger. But the Blues can't afford to wait and see what develops, they gotta win now.

Even then he's just doesn't seem to be progressing. People love to mention that Chris Pronger didn't become elite until his mid-20s but look at his age 22 season. He started the first 40 games a -2 and with 13 points (.32ppg) and in his last 39 games he was +17 with 22 points (.56ppg). He wasn't elite, but he made progress. You can compare any season he had and see progress in the two halves of the season. Even at Johnson's age. Also it's not like a 22 year old can't be an elite player. Look at these age 22-23 seasons:

Al MacInnis: 68 points +22
Ray Bourque: 78 points +49
Rob Blake: 59 points +18
Mike Green: 73 points +24
Dion Phaneuf: 59 points +12
Ryan WHitney: 56 points +9
etc. etc. etc.

In all there's about 20 players since 1995 who have played in the NHL at their age 22 season and scored at least 40 points with a positive +/-. That includes high round picks, low round picks, players on good teams, players on bad teams. Etc. Bottom line is Erik Johnson's expectation was that he would become one of the players that is good quickly. Players have done it before and he couldn't.

*That said, I'm starting to think that Johnson was doomed to failure from the start. He was the consensus best player in the 2006 draft but I think it was more a lack of better options:

Jordan Staal - People like to say that Staal has low point totals due to Crosby/Malkin. The last 2 months both of missed significant playing time and Staal has been given over 20 minutes of ice time 17 times over the last two months. This is his 5th season on the NHL, he's a second overall pick that's finally getting the playing time to prove that he can become the elite player he was drafted to be. He's repsonded by putting up 14 points in 22 games. Not exactly the sort of response you'd expect from a cornerstone #1 overall player.

Jonathan Toews - A great player on a great team. He's had a ton of offensive weapons in Chicago and I think it can be argued he wouldn't have performed like he has in Chicago if he were in St. Louis. If you have to risk between as slow developing center and a slow developing Defenseman you have to go with the latter. I don't blame the Blues taking the safer route. Towes just wouldn't have worked in this pick.

Phil Kessel & Nicklas Backstrom both had big question marks. Backstrom was a swedish center, the sort of player that is really hit or miss and not easy to bet your franchise on. Kessel's streakiness and attitude problems didn't just magically appear once he entered the NHL, taking him would have been a huge gamble the team couldn't have afforded.

Point is Johnson was the obvious choice and they had to take him, there weren't any better options. He was the best option in a weak draft and nothing more. If Pietrangelo had been a few years older and a part of the 2006 draft I could easily see him being the #1 overall pick. From 2005 Bobby Ryan and Jack Johnson both would have been taking over Erik. From 2007 Patrick Kane would have been taken over Johnson. Same for 2003 (Eric Staal), 2004 (Ovechkin/Malkin), 2008 (I would bet Johnson would be 5th at best in this draft)

Pietrangelo eventually becoming better than Johnson shouldn't be a shocking surprise. He likely would have been more highly acclaimed if they were both in the same draft.

[thrill]

Jonathan Toews - A great player on a great team. He's had a ton of offensive weapons in Chicago and I think it can be argued he wouldn't have performed like he has in Chicago if he were in St. Louis. If you have to risk between as slow developing center and a slow developing Defenseman you have to go with the latter. I don't blame the Blues taking the safer route. Towes just wouldn't have worked in this pick.

While I agree that EJ was the correct choice, I disagree that taking Toews would have been that much riskier. I remember the conversations people were having at the time and there was plenty of support for a Toews pick.

[MrCrowesGarden]

Jonathan Toews - A great player on a great team. He's had a ton of offensive weapons in Chicago and I think it can be argued he wouldn't have performed like he has in Chicago if he were in St. Louis. If you have to risk between as slow developing center and a slow developing Defenseman you have to go with the latter. I don't blame the Blues taking the safer route. Towes just wouldn't have worked in this pick.

While I agree that EJ was the correct choice, I disagree that taking Toews would have been that much riskier. I remember the conversations people were having at the time and there was plenty of support for a Toews pick.

I was one of the few at the time that was still on board for taking Kessel over EJ, Staal, Toews and Backstrom. Part of me still thinks he's the best player of that group (although I couldn't argue with Toews either).

[TheoSqua]

Jonathan Toews - A great player on a great team. He's had a ton of offensive weapons in Chicago and I think it can be argued he wouldn't have performed like he has in Chicago if he were in St. Louis. If you have to risk between as slow developing center and a slow developing Defenseman you have to go with the latter. I don't blame the Blues taking the safer route. Towes just wouldn't have worked in this pick.

While I agree that EJ was the correct choice, I disagree that taking Toews would have been that much riskier. I remember the conversations people were having at the time and there was plenty of support for a Toews pick.

Mine was more of a hindsight discussion. I don't think Toews has turned into the sort of player that would have been worth taking over Johnson's potential. Same for Kessel.

And at the time you had to take the defenseman over the offensive player. None of the forwards available were ever as highly touted as a Malkin, Ovechkin, Crosby or Stamkos and that was the biggest problem of the draft.

[MrCrowesGarden]

It's easy to see why the Canucks are the top team in hockey, but if I could only pick one guy from their team to have on ours, it'd be Ryan Kesler. I love Steen because he does everything well; Kesler's the same way except he does everything better.

[Lesson]

It's easy to see why the Canucks are the top team in hockey, but if I could only pick one guy from their team to have on ours, it'd be Ryan Kesler. I love Steen because he does everything well; Kesler's the same way except he does everything better.

The Blues almost signed Kesler a few years ago, IIRC.