If Tarasenko's on the down curve, I think it has more to do with 3 shoulder surgeries basically one on top of the other. Schwartz to me, is still an effective player. Injury-prone at times, yes. But he's been very good in the recent past in the playoffs, so let's see what happens the rest of the way here. But your overall questions are valid. The league does seem to be getting younger and faster. I'm not saying the Blues are there yet, but they could be approaching kind of a roster crossroads in some areas.
For sure. In the playoffs, Game 2 has nothing to do with what happened in Game 1. We saw that a couple of times, as you mentioned during the Cup run. In the Western Conference finals, I remember some of the San Jose writers predicting a short series after the Sharks trounced the Blues in Game 1. I heard some talk about a Boston sweep after the Blues lost Game 1 to the Bruins. So we'll see what happens tonight.
Nice recall. Yes, he did so in both of the late April victories over Colorado in St. Louis - April 24 and April 26. With Bortuzzo as the seventh D on April 24 and Santini as the seventh D (with Parayko out) on April 26. On April 24, I think the rational was to give his top forwards more minutes. As for tonight, we'll see.
Yes. That's still their M.O.
I don't think so. The officiating certainly wasn't the reason why the Blues lost.
Hah. No, Maroon is pretty much one of a kind.
I haven't watched a ton of the other games. Pretty busy covering the Blues. And my hotel TV doesn't get all the channels that are showing games. But I'm intrigued by Minnesota-Vegas. The Wild sure give the Golden Knights a tough time.
Before Perron showed up on the COVID list, I thought the Avs would win in 7. Once Perron showed up on the list, maybe Avs in 6. The Blues are still a resilient bunch, so I'm expected them to get swept even if they lose tonight. I think how this series plays out will affect how Armstrong approaches this offseason. So let's see how it plays out.
Good question. Again, part of playing a heavy game isn't just the physical contact. It's hounding pucks, winning puck battles, puck possession, crashing the net. And I'm not sure if they have quite enough of those types on the current roster (w/a lineup minus Perron and Sundqvist) to consistently play that way over the course of a game.
Nothing yet today. Team doesn't hit the ice for another hour.
Not sure what you're getting at. I was asked a hockey question. I provided a hockey answer.
I think you've summarized something that is on a lot of people's minds, and is kind of coming more to the forefront as the season progresses. All along, I thought this would be a transition season for Tarasenko. And that if we were going to see a return to past form by Tarasenko, it probably wouldn't happen this season. He has simply missed too much time - 4 games played, I believe - over the past 1 1/2 years. The risk, of course, is that you expose a perennial 30-goal scorer (in the past, I get that) and Seattle plucks him, he returns to form, and you get nothing in return. Armstrong seems to have a good sense on when to cut ties with players (Backes). But this isn't an easy decision.
Again, all I can say is it's a lot of work for something that's not going to happen. Even at Makar for $10M a year, the Avs figure to have enough money to re-sign Landeskog and Grubauer.
Have not heard anything final on this. I wonder if a hub city-type arrangement in a U.S. city is possible for the Canadian team that wins the division.
Faulk has been the Blues best defender this year, and much improved over last year. He may not be tall. But he is not tiny. He has thick frame. Krug has come on lately and I don't think you pull the plug on him after one year.
Thanks. Yeah, I've seen the statement.
He always seems willing to stand up for himself and his teammates. And I think they feed off that.
Sorry to cut this short. But have to go. Thanks as always for participating.