Army: Keep or Fire?

Discuss the St. Louis Blues, the NHL, or anything hockey. (Formerly the Blues News Forum)

Moderator: LGB Mods

Army?

Keep
17
68%
Fire
8
32%
 
Total votes: 25

flyingnote38
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:25 pm

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by flyingnote38 »

Slim wrote:Forgive me if I missed this, but I can't believe nobody mentioned it yet:

94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault.

Ok, how is this not the GM's fault? Didn't he put this team together? Isn't this a chronic issue with the Blues? If the Blues lead the league in shots attempted and are no where near the lead in shots on goal, don't we need to change the mix at forward? There is a talent involved in getting shots on goal which is why its tracked and why the guys who lead in shots ttend to lead in goals (adjusting by position of course). So this impressive amount of missed shots is a stastical composite of the lack of elite scoring talent. You know how you fix that? If you are Armstrong you trade for a goaltender and 'grit.'

Plus I bet alot of the missed shots are from the dmen because our point guys can't hit the broadsisde of a barn half the time. Compare anybody we have on d now with MacInnis or Pronger.
2016-7 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2017-8 sponsor of Tage Thompson
2018-9 sponsor of Ryan O'Reilly
2019-20 sponsor of old time hockey
2020-21 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2021-22 sponsor of Pavel Buchnevich
2022-23 sponsor of Brayden Schenn
2023-24 sponsor of Justin Faulk

User avatar
cprice12
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 21530
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 1:26 am
Location: Center Ice
Contact:

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by cprice12 »

flyingnote38 wrote:
Slim wrote:Forgive me if I missed this, but I can't believe nobody mentioned it yet:

94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault.

Ok, how is this not the GM's fault? Didn't he put this team together? Isn't this a chronic issue with the Blues? If the Blues lead the league in shots attempted and are no where near the lead in shots on goal, don't we need to change the mix at forward? There is a talent involved in getting shots on goal which is why its tracked and why the guys who lead in shots ttend to lead in goals (adjusting by position of course). So this impressive amount of missed shots is a stastical composite of the lack of elite scoring talent. You know how you fix that? If you are Armstrong you trade for a goaltender and 'grit.'

Plus I bet alot of the missed shots are from the dmen because our point guys can't hit the broadsisde of a barn half the time. Compare anybody we have on d now with MacInnis or Pronger.
I listed the moves Armstrong has made.
Trading up in the draft to get Tarasenko is reason enough all by itself to keep him on...not to mention the other good moves he has made.
If Armstrong fails to bring in some offensive help in the offseason, then I may be down on him a bit because that is our biggest need...and it's not even close.
Aside from getting our goaltending tandem set, that should be his only job this offseason.
We'll see what he does. There is every indication some moves will be made...and I'm looking forward to it.
LETS GO BLUES RADIO
LIVE weekly broadcasts on YouTube & http://www.LetsGoBlues.com/radio!
Twitter: https://twitter.com/curtprice
Lets Go Blues Radio Twitter: https://twitter.com/lgbradio
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cprice12/
Lets Go Blues Radio Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lgbradio/

User avatar
Kerfuffle
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
Posts: 911
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 8:18 am

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Kerfuffle »

Slim wrote:94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault. That is a team wide problem.
Agreed - you guys did have a lot of open nets that the shot wasn't even close on. In particular I have to call out Oshie on that - I saw multiple chances that guy had when he was open and his shots were all over the place. My take on him is he's an asset for the shootout in the regular season but aside from the moves he can do with that I wasn't impressed with his overall game.

cardsfan04
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by cardsfan04 »

Kerfuffle wrote:
Slim wrote:94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault. That is a team wide problem.
Agreed - you guys did have a lot of open nets that the shot wasn't even close on. In particular I have to call out Oshie on that - I saw multiple chances that guy had when he was open and his shots were all over the place. My take on him is he's an asset for the shootout in the regular season but aside from the moves he can do with that I wasn't impressed with his overall game.
Keep in mind he came back early from injury in game 2. Shootouts may be his forte, but you didn't see his true ability. In game 5, he should have had a hat trick.
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin
2017-2018 Official LGB Sponsor of Jake Allen

User avatar
Misc. Blues
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 7350
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:02 am
Location: In Hiding

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Misc. Blues »

Kerfuffle wrote:
Slim wrote:94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault. That is a team wide problem.
Agreed - you guys did have a lot of open nets that the shot wasn't even close on. In particular I have to call out Oshie on that - I saw multiple chances that guy had when he was open and his shots were all over the place. My take on him is he's an asset for the shootout in the regular season but aside from the moves he can do with that I wasn't impressed with his overall game.
I think Oshie's problem was more about motor skills not working since he was coming back from a concussion.
2016-2017 official sponsor of Alex Pietrangelo (aka Captain Pie)
2015-2016 official sponsor of Jori Lehtera (aka Yorry)
2014-2015 official sponsor of Jay Bouwmeester (aka Jay-bo)
I hate the Shitcago "Black Holes"©®™...they really suck that much...
The Detoilet "dude bangs" ©®™... suck too...repeatedly and more often... ;)

User avatar
Portland Blues
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 5097
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 12:38 pm
Location: Portland Orygun

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Portland Blues »

Kerfuffle wrote:
Slim wrote:94 missed shots

That is not the coaches' nor the GM's fault. That is a team wide problem.
Agreed - you guys did have a lot of open nets that the shot wasn't even close on. In particular I have to call out Oshie on that - I saw multiple chances that guy had when he was open and his shots were all over the place. My take on him is he's an asset for the shootout in the regular season but aside from the moves he can do with that I wasn't impressed with his overall game.
C'mon! Have you not seen his skills in the Enterprise Rent A Car commercial. :wink:

flyingnote38
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:25 pm

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by flyingnote38 »

<<<I listed the moves Armstrong has made.
Trading up in the draft to get Tarasenko is reason enough all by itself to keep him on...>>>

you do realize he wasn't actually GM then? He was VP of player personnel at the time. Kudos to him on drafting Schwartz and Tarasenko. Doesn't look like we got much out of the 2009 or 2010 drafts he ran other than those two. And if you are drafting at 15 (and don't trade away your pick) you should get a good player.

As for his trades, Bouwmeester one was good.

Hard to see how people can simultaneously believe that 'Stewart sucks' so dealing him is no loss at all and the Johnson trade is a "home run" still. Looks pretty even at this point - net effect on both teams right now Aves get Johnson and a 1st (Siemens) and we get Shattenkirk and a 2nd (Rattie)

Miller one was bad, no two ways about it.

Leopold deal? Meh.

Rest were mostly salary dumps for picks.

so one trade in 4 years that adds a significant piece to the core?
Last edited by flyingnote38 on Fri May 02, 2014 1:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2016-7 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2017-8 sponsor of Tage Thompson
2018-9 sponsor of Ryan O'Reilly
2019-20 sponsor of old time hockey
2020-21 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2021-22 sponsor of Pavel Buchnevich
2022-23 sponsor of Brayden Schenn
2023-24 sponsor of Justin Faulk

User avatar
ViPeRx007
LGB Booster - Yellow
LGB Booster - Yellow
Posts: 9765
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 3:08 pm
Location: Billings, MT

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by ViPeRx007 »

His good moves far outweigh his bad ones. Watching his end-of-season presser just solidified to me his desire to win. The guy was almost in tears up there at times it looked like. You can't keep blowing things up and starting over all the time. Maybe I'm just a fool, but I STILL think we're only a couple moves away....Maybe I'll just keep saying this for the rest of my days on this Earth though, who knows.

Also, I still don't understand how people can label the Miller trade as bad. What makes you so sure that if we had kept Halak we'd be in a different spot? You're playing "Monday Morning Goalie"...oh, we didn't win so obviously if we had Halak it automatically would have been better. You don't know that for sure. All you can really do is call it neutral. Had we won it would have been the greatest trade ever made, but since we lost he's an easy scapegoat. We didn't lose because of Miller. It's that simple. Maybe we should have tried Miller on the powerplay...
2015-2016 Official LGB Sponsor of Jaden Schwartz (IR) & The Hockey Gods
2014-2015 Official LGB Sponsor of T.J. Oshie
2013-2014 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2012-2013 Official LGB Sponsor of Ryan Reaves
2011-2012 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Vladimir Tarasenko

User avatar
dmiles2186
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 7288
Joined: Mon Nov 20, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Selling Air Bombays--for kids who want to coach

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by dmiles2186 »

ViPeRx007 wrote:His good moves far outweigh his bad ones. Watching his end-of-season presser just solidified to me his desire to win. The guy was almost in tears up there at times it looked like. You can't keep blowing things up and starting over all the time. Maybe I'm just a fool, but I STILL think we're only a couple moves away....Maybe I'll just keep saying this for the rest of my days on this Earth though, who knows.

Also, I still don't understand how people can label the Miller trade as bad. What makes you so sure that if we had kept Halak we'd be in a different spot? You're playing "Monday Morning Goalie"...oh, we didn't win so obviously if we had Halak it automatically would have been better. You don't know that for sure. All you can really do is call it neutral. Had we won it would have been the greatest trade ever made, but since we lost he's an easy scapegoat. We didn't lose because of Miller. It's that simple. Maybe we should have tried Miller on the powerplay...
Viper hits it spot on. And you aren't crazy, we are still only a couple moves away. 2 weeks ago, this team finished with 111 points and were a Cup favorite. People are ripping this team as if we are an awful team. We aren't. We're good. There's no sense to keep blowing it up and restarting. That gets you no where.

And I agree on the Miller trade. The only bad thing about it is that we didn't make it very far in the playoffs. Let's recap:

We traded Halak, a goalie that most Blues fans were ready to have gone. And then he gets traded 2 more times in 3 months, so apparently no one else wants him either. We traded Stewart, a forward that was so streaky and inconsistent, and most Blues fans wanted him gone. Carrier is a prospect that hasn't developed yet. Who knows how he'll turn out? Maybe he'll be a Lars Eller that chips in or he'll be an Aaron Palushaj, someone you never hear from again.

The gut punch is losing the 1st rounder. But again, who is to say that 1st rounder doesn't turn into Shawn Belle?

The trade didn't end in the result we wanted, no. The result was bad, yes. As with any trade, though, you can only judge the result down the line. If Carrier and the first rounder become the next Hull and Oates? Then, yeah, the trade will be bad.
Image

2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Not Ott, because he is a booger-eating dumb dumb

cardsfan04
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by cardsfan04 »

Here's how I see trades:

You judge the GM the second the trade is made.
You evaluate who won the trade down the road.

I think Armstrong passes with flying colors on the day the trade was made. As for evaluating the trade down the road, while it's not set in stone yet, it doesn't look good. He was traded for to get a Cup and we didn't get a Cup. But, this was a high risk-high reward trade. The high-reward didn't come in 2014. If he walks, it never will. If we bring him back and win the Cup next year, I think people will be doing a 180 on it.

Also, in regards to the Shattenkirk/Stewart trade. The reason I'm so high on that trade has absolutely nothing to do with Stewart. We got Shattenkirk. In trades like that, whoever gets the best player usually wins. Shattenkirk is better than McClement and Johnson.
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin
2017-2018 Official LGB Sponsor of Jake Allen

flyingnote38
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:25 pm

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by flyingnote38 »

ViPeRx007 wrote:His good moves far outweigh his bad ones. Watching his end-of-season presser just solidified to me his desire to win. The guy was almost in tears up there at times it looked like. You can't keep blowing things up and starting over all the time. Maybe I'm just a fool, but I STILL think we're only a couple moves away....Maybe I'll just keep saying this for the rest of my days on this Earth though, who knows.

Also, I still don't understand how people can label the Miller trade as bad. What makes you so sure that if we had kept Halak we'd be in a different spot? ...
at the very least we'd still have Stewart, Carrier, our 2015 #1 pick and our 2016 #3 pick.

For that matter, we could have played Stewart on the power play. Hard to see how he couldn't have out-produced Ott.

I don't think you grasp just how bad Miller was in the series. Some how people on this site crowed about Miller's .923 save percentage vs Halak's .917 at the time of the deal, but now don't think an .898 save percentage means anything.

And lastly, if your plan to win in the playoffs is to out goaltend your opponents then you need to have a goaltender who is better than the other team's. Miller was clearly not as good as Crawford in the series, and that's on Miller, but if Armstrong thinks Miller is better than Varlamov, Quick, Hiller, or Rask, ie the goalies we would have had to anticipate beating in the playoffs, he's nuts.
2016-7 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2017-8 sponsor of Tage Thompson
2018-9 sponsor of Ryan O'Reilly
2019-20 sponsor of old time hockey
2020-21 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2021-22 sponsor of Pavel Buchnevich
2022-23 sponsor of Brayden Schenn
2023-24 sponsor of Justin Faulk

ecbm
All-Star
All-Star
Posts: 1327
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 9:42 am

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by ecbm »

A request: can we get away from the misleading rhetorical trope of "who would you hire who's definitely better"?

1.) Nobody ever suggested getting somebody who is "definitely better" because who is better than whom in a job is impossible to know until you observe them do it. What I'd like to see (I honestly don't know if it would help, I 'm at a bit of a loss as to how to improve this team) is getting someone with a different approach in hope of a different result.

2.) It's not up to me to decide who fills this position. The Blues brass make that decision and they're far more qualified than any of us. Should Armstrong be retained (and I imagine he will), I have to hope it means said brass believe we can get better results from the same approach (I'm dubious about that) rather than thinking high points totals in the regular season and early playoff exits are fine, just fine.

flyingnote38
1st Line Sniper
1st Line Sniper
Posts: 738
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2003 9:25 pm

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by flyingnote38 »

not_a_wings_fan wrote: Game three was 1-0 until the ENG sealed it. You can NEVER blame a goalie for not pitching a shutout. Never. You can blame your offense for not doing their job. That game was all on the team in front of Miller. (Missed open looks, lack of movement side to side, poor powerplay... etc.).

If you think Game 3 is on Miller - Even if he had stepped out of the way of a shot (which he didn't, it's just an extreme example) - you have unreasonable expectations for the position.
So since Hitch and Army described Miller as a goalie they thought could "steal" a game for us, did they have unreasonable expectations of the position? Is the goalie 100% completely blame free for any 1-0 loss? Doesn't matter if its a great goal or a softie? Doesn't matter if he does a Jacques Caron and accidently plays the puck into his own net for the only goal of the game? Doesn't matter if his team outshoots the opponent 50-5?

Miller was acquired to win exactly those type of games. The sad fact is, that was actually his best game in the series and he still gave up a bad goal that lost the game. I am not saying that game 3 was all his fault. But he was not free from any blame in that loss, becasue it wasn't a good goal..

And why doesn't anyone comment on how the offense saved his bacon in game 1?
2016-7 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2017-8 sponsor of Tage Thompson
2018-9 sponsor of Ryan O'Reilly
2019-20 sponsor of old time hockey
2020-21 sponsor of Jaden Schwartz
2021-22 sponsor of Pavel Buchnevich
2022-23 sponsor of Brayden Schenn
2023-24 sponsor of Justin Faulk

User avatar
Oaklandblue
All-Star
All-Star
Posts: 1423
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 11:20 pm

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Oaklandblue »

flyingnote38 wrote:
not_a_wings_fan wrote: Game three was 1-0 until the ENG sealed it. You can NEVER blame a goalie for not pitching a shutout. Never. You can blame your offense for not doing their job. That game was all on the team in front of Miller. (Missed open looks, lack of movement side to side, poor powerplay... etc.).

If you think Game 3 is on Miller - Even if he had stepped out of the way of a shot (which he didn't, it's just an extreme example) - you have unreasonable expectations for the position.
So since Hitch and Army described Miller as a goalie they thought could "steal" a game for us, did they have unreasonable expectations of the position? Is the goalie 100% completely blame free for any 1-0 loss? Doesn't matter if its a great goal or a softie? Doesn't matter if he does a Jacques Caron and accidently plays the puck into his own net for the only goal of the game? Doesn't matter if his team outshoots the opponent 50-5?

Miller was acquired to win exactly those type of games. The sad fact is, that was actually his best game in the series and he still gave up a bad goal that lost the game. I am not saying that game 3 was all his fault. But he was not free from any blame in that loss, becasue it wasn't a good goal..

And why doesn't anyone comment on how the offense saved his bacon in game 1?
Because he's Ryan Miller, of course. He's a 6m a year netminder, he has to be good. Right? ....Right?

Somewhere on Long Island, Halak is laughing.
2017-2018 LGB Sponsor of Alexander Steen
2017-2018 LGB Sponsor of Jaromir Jagr, Calgary Flames
2016-2017 LGB Sponsor of Brian Elliott, Calgary Flames
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Ryan "Turn that leaf on the wind into a shrimp on the bar-bee" Reaves
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Obviously Not Steve Ott
2015-2016 LGB Sponsor of Steve "Chirps-A-Lot" Ott
2015 LGB Supporter of the New York Rangers
2014-2015 LGB Sponsor of Patrik "No-Timer" Berglund
2013-2014 LGB Sponsor of Derek "In The Middle" Roy
2012-2013 LGB Sponsor of Chris "NO SLEEP TIL THE CUP!" Stewart - Shhhhh!!!

glen a richter
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 11410
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 8:02 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by glen a richter »

Oaklandblue wrote:
flyingnote38 wrote:
not_a_wings_fan wrote: Game three was 1-0 until the ENG sealed it. You can NEVER blame a goalie for not pitching a shutout. Never. You can blame your offense for not doing their job. That game was all on the team in front of Miller. (Missed open looks, lack of movement side to side, poor powerplay... etc.).

If you think Game 3 is on Miller - Even if he had stepped out of the way of a shot (which he didn't, it's just an extreme example) - you have unreasonable expectations for the position.
So since Hitch and Army described Miller as a goalie they thought could "steal" a game for us, did they have unreasonable expectations of the position? Is the goalie 100% completely blame free for any 1-0 loss? Doesn't matter if its a great goal or a softie? Doesn't matter if he does a Jacques Caron and accidently plays the puck into his own net for the only goal of the game? Doesn't matter if his team outshoots the opponent 50-5?

Miller was acquired to win exactly those type of games. The sad fact is, that was actually his best game in the series and he still gave up a bad goal that lost the game. I am not saying that game 3 was all his fault. But he was not free from any blame in that loss, becasue it wasn't a good goal..

And why doesn't anyone comment on how the offense saved his bacon in game 1?
Because he's Ryan Miller, of course. He's a 6m a year netminder, he has to be good. Right? ....Right?

Somewhere on Long Island, Halak is laughing.
Now that Halak is an Islander, we'll be neighbors--more or less. Maybe I can go find him and ask his opinion of the whole thing.
Sponsor of Joel "Future" HOFer 2023-2024

User avatar
Misc. Blues
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 7350
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:02 am
Location: In Hiding

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Misc. Blues »

4 out of 6 games went to OT. We won 2 and they won 2...

Our Power Play sucked...2-1000??? Just pathetic

Miller was good in game 1 after period 1 and was great in game 3 but was Just ok in game 5
Gm1 GAA 3 SV% .929 3OT W
Gm2 GAA 3 SV% .893 OT W
Gm3 GAA 1 SV% .958 SO L
Gm4 GAA 4 SV% .882 OT L
Gm5 GAA 3 SV% .900 OT L
Gm6 GAA 5 SV% .815 Smoked L
2016-2017 official sponsor of Alex Pietrangelo (aka Captain Pie)
2015-2016 official sponsor of Jori Lehtera (aka Yorry)
2014-2015 official sponsor of Jay Bouwmeester (aka Jay-bo)
I hate the Shitcago "Black Holes"©®™...they really suck that much...
The Detoilet "dude bangs" ©®™... suck too...repeatedly and more often... ;)

glen a richter
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 11410
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 8:02 am
Location: Long Island, NY

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by glen a richter »

No argument that the PP was hideous. It was almost Andy Murray-esque.
Sponsor of Joel "Future" HOFer 2023-2024

User avatar
cprice12
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 21530
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 1:26 am
Location: Center Ice
Contact:

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by cprice12 »

flyingnote38 wrote:Is the goalie 100% completely blame free for any 1-0 loss?
Yes. If your team gets shutout and you only allow 1 goal, you blame the team for not scoring. Blaming your goalie and saying he should have shut them out, is ridiculous and lazy. You have to score to win. Period.
Doesn't matter if its a great goal or a softie?
Nope.
In game #3 for example, it was a soft goal, but he made a number of great saves later in the game...so he made up for it. Period.
Doesn't matter if he does a Jacques Caron and accidently plays the puck into his own net for the only goal of the game?
Nope. See above about the need to score at least 1 goal to win a game. If you get shutout, you deserve to lose.
Doesn't matter if his team outshoots the opponent 50-5?
Nope.
In a case like that, you tip your cap to the other goalie.
Miller was acquired to win exactly those type of games.
And had we won 2-1, that game would have qualified as "one of those games". He stood on his head after that bad goal.
The sad fact is, that was actually his best game in the series and he still gave up a bad goal that lost the game.
The offense lost the game. Not Miller.
I am not saying that game 3 was all his fault. But he was not free from any blame in that loss, because it wasn't a good goal.[\quote]
If you want to hand out partial blame, I guess you could say it was 5% his fault...or whatever. But at that point, why are we even talking about Miller? The focus should be on the offense in that game and nothing else. That game ended up being HUGE. Had we won that game, the series would have been basically over...we'd have been up 3-0. The Hawks would have been done.
And why doesn't anyone comment on how the offense saved his bacon in game 1?
They did save him in game #1...but after the first period, he stood on his head...so he was a big part of the win as well.

Putting all of the blame on Miller for the series loss is just taking the easy way out when breaking down the series. It's lazy analysis IMO. Folks like to focus on a few soft goals and ignore the other great saves he made. Miller had, what, 2 bad periods in the series? And one soft goal outside of those two bad periods? And blaming him for the game #3 loss is insane. Let's say he did make that save and we go to OT...who's to say we still don't win BECAUSE WE COULDN'T SCORE A (Franking) GOAL.
If you were to be told before the game that the Hawks would only score one goal in game #3, how much would you have bet we would win that game? And then you find out we didn't score? Yeah. Blame the offense, credit Crawford...or whatever. But blaming Miller?? That's insane.

Crawford isn't a great goalie. He's just not. You don't need stellar goaltending all series long to win a series. Goalies are going to allow soft goals in the playoffs. It happens...they all do it. Every one...Miller included. Miller was good enough for us to win this series. Our offense wasn't.

I'm not sure I want Miller back or not though...and it has nothing to do with his playoff performance...it has to do with how much $$ he wants. If he takes less, like $5-ish million, I'd welcome him back in a second. If he wants $7 million...then I'd have to look at Elliott or someone else, because we need some money to add to the offense...and tying up $7 million for Miller might not allow us to do that without trading away some salary.

I'd bet money that Armstrong will make moves to improve the offense in the offseason. He has to.
LETS GO BLUES RADIO
LIVE weekly broadcasts on YouTube & http://www.LetsGoBlues.com/radio!
Twitter: https://twitter.com/curtprice
Lets Go Blues Radio Twitter: https://twitter.com/lgbradio
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/cprice12/
Lets Go Blues Radio Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/lgbradio/

cardsfan04
Hall Of Fame
Hall Of Fame
Posts: 4027
Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 12:43 am

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by cardsfan04 »

I'm really curious to see if we spend to the cap again. I think it's supposed to be $71.1 mil up from $64.3 mil(?). Something like that, don't have it in front of me.

If I'm right on the cap numbers and we do end up spending to the cap again (don't know what to expect there, probably spend like $65 mil?), I don't really mind going after Miller even if he wants a ton. I'm more concerned with his salary with respect to the cap than I am with respect to his value. If we can sign him for $7 mil without it restricting our ability to go after a top-line scorer, I don't mind giving him that, even if he's only worth $5 mil or whatever.
2010-2011 Official LGB Sponsor of Kevin Shattenkirk
2016-2017 Official LGB Sponsor of Dmitri Jaskin
2017-2018 Official LGB Sponsor of Jake Allen

User avatar
Misc. Blues
Hockey God
Hockey God
Posts: 7350
Joined: Thu Feb 20, 2003 10:02 am
Location: In Hiding

Re: Army: Keep or Fire?

Post by Misc. Blues »

cardsfan04 wrote:I'm really curious to see if we spend to the cap again. I think it's supposed to be $71.1 mil up from $64.3 mil(?). Something like that, don't have it in front of me.

If I'm right on the cap numbers and we do end up spending to the cap again (don't know what to expect there, probably spend like $65 mil?), I don't really mind going after Miller even if he wants a ton. I'm more concerned with his salary with respect to the cap than I am with respect to his value. If we can sign him for $7 mil without it restricting our ability to go after a top-line scorer, I don't mind giving him that, even if he's only worth $5 mil or whatever.
The Blues will be down to about 50-52M after they re-sign Tarasenko and Sobotka (edit: and Schwartz). If they spend to 65M they can get scoring and a goalie...

Oh and everyone bitching about Miller's salary at 6.25M has to remember the Blue only payed 5M and Sabres picked up 1.5M of his money. Yes I know 5M and picks Blah Blah Blah. Hindsight is 20-20 move on and deal with what is and not bitch about what isn't...
2016-2017 official sponsor of Alex Pietrangelo (aka Captain Pie)
2015-2016 official sponsor of Jori Lehtera (aka Yorry)
2014-2015 official sponsor of Jay Bouwmeester (aka Jay-bo)
I hate the Shitcago "Black Holes"©®™...they really suck that much...
The Detoilet "dude bangs" ©®™... suck too...repeatedly and more often... ;)

Post Reply