Let's Go Blues

cardsfan04 wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

cprice12 wrote: He wasn't back, so we can put that nonsense to bed. But, if he was, it would not in any way be indicative that he was faking it. This is not an intelligent post.

The point was that if he came back that early after all the drama, the suspension, and the calls for blood and revenge, then it would have been a strong indicator that the whole thing was overblown. And yes that would lead to suspicion about the extent of the injury. As I said before I believe the injury was LEGIT and that Backes was NOT faking it. And that is why I did not think we would see him back this early.

Kerfuffle wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

cprice12 wrote: He wasn't back, so we can put that nonsense to bed. But, if he was, it would not in any way be indicative that he was faking it. This is not an intelligent post.

The point was that if he came back that early after all the drama, the suspension, and the calls for blood and revenge, then it would have been a strong indicator that the whole thing was overblown. And yes that would lead to suspicion about the extent of the injury. As I said before I believe the injury was LEGIT and that Backes was NOT faking it. And that is why I did not think we would see him back this early.

You misquoted me. I didn't say what you quoted me as saying.

But anyway, explain what you mean by "that would lead to the SUSPICION about the extent of the injury". I'm curious as to what you mean because the Blues have never discussed the extent of the injury. They've only said that it was an upper body injury. That's it.

Kerfuffle wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

cprice12 wrote: He wasn't back, so we can put that nonsense to bed. But, if he was, it would not in any way be indicative that he was faking it. This is not an intelligent post.

The point was that if he came back that early after all the drama, the suspension, and the calls for blood and revenge, then it would have been a strong indicator that the whole thing was overblown. And yes that would lead to suspicion about the extent of the injury. As I said before I believe the injury was LEGIT and that Backes was NOT faking it. And that is why I did not think we would see him back this early.

I don't see how only missing 1 game in the playoffs would lead to suspicion of this being overblown. That indirectly touches on a pet peeve of mine. I hate the idea of punishing based on injury. Punish the action, not the result. The action was bad, and the extent of Backes' injury (with respect to how big of a deal is made about this) is irrelevant. I agree with you that it being as bad as it looked on the ice (i.e. him not faking it) made it seem unlikely we would see him back for game 4. But, if he did come back, I don't see how that would change anything.

goon attack wrote:I agree.... glen a richter was never cool.

bullshit. he was at least a little cool, before he caught the fever.








The bieber fever, that is.

cprice12 wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:But anyway, explain what you mean by "that would lead to the SUSPICION about the extent of the injury". I'm curious as to what you mean because the Blues have never discussed the extent of the injury. They've only said that it was an upper body injury. That's it.

The team is never gonna say until the season is over but it 'looked' like a concussion and I believe it was one. But if Backes had come back last night I would be suspicious and think twice about what I thought was a concussion. Some have posted on either here or other NHL sites I'm on about this just being a neck injury and that he just had the wind knocked out of him. I believe he was concussed, but if I saw him in the lineup last night or the rest of this series I would have my suspicions. That's just my opinion - I understand you disagree and that's fine.

Kerfuffle wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

Kerfuffle wrote:

cardsfan04 wrote:But anyway, explain what you mean by "that would lead to the SUSPICION about the extent of the injury". I'm curious as to what you mean because the Blues have never discussed the extent of the injury. They've only said that it was an upper body injury. That's it.

The team is never gonna say until the season is over but it 'looked' like a concussion and I believe it was one. But if Backes had come back last night I would be suspicious and think twice about what I thought was a concussion. Some have posted on either here or other NHL sites I'm on about this just being a neck injury and that he just had the wind knocked out of him. I believe he was concussed, but if I saw him in the lineup last night or the rest of this series I would have my suspicions. That's just my opinion - I understand you disagree and that's fine.

That makes a little more sense. If he only missed 1 game, it probably lowers the likelihood that he had a concussion. But, I don't think the specific injury he had is relevant to how big of a deal was made of it. If he had a bruised neck or something instead, that's just fortunate that it wasn't worse, not an indication that the hit wasn't as bad as it appeared.

Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

Hitch said Kane is the most dangerous player in the league on the rush and Engblom on NBC said basically the same.

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

dmiles2186 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

What else is new?

cprice12 wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

What else is new?

More to come....

dmiles2186 wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

What else is new?

More to come....

breaking tweet from Strickland: "Water is wet"

beat2life wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

What else is new?

More to come....

breaking tweet from Strickland: "Water is wet"

Strickland is like a wet/dry vacuum...he sucks...

Misc. Blues wrote:

beat2life wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

cprice12 wrote:

dmiles2186 wrote:

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strickland just said on 550am the Hawks have game breakers like Kane and Toews that the Blues don't have but he said Tarasenko is becoming that type of player. He said the Blues play more of a team game.

He also said the Hawks are one of the most dangerous teams in the league on the rush with players like Keith, Seabrook, and even Oduya jumping in on the play.

So Strickland basically said what anyone who follows hockey already knows?

What else is new?

More to come....

breaking tweet from Strickland: "Water is wet"

Strickland is like a wet/dry vacuum...he sucks...

Best addition to the shitshow FSMW production since the FSMW sluts debuted. Strickland is a hack!

Strick was right on.

Toews is a game breaker and he just showed why. Like I said in the GDT thread Kane and Toews are the best 1-2 punch in the league only next to Crosby & Malkin!

On the KMOX postgame show they just said they are getting texts from fans that the Blues are the Cubs of hockey. WRONG! The Blues are more like the Astros of hockey.

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:Strick was right on.

Toews is a game breaker and he just showed why. Like I said in the GDT thread Kane and Toews are the best 1-2 punch in the league only next to Crosby & Malkin!

On the KMOX postgame show they just said they are getting texts from fans that the Blues are the Cubs of hockey. WRONG! The Blues are more like the Astros of hockey.

...and on a side note you sir are an idiot...