eyes
User
Newbie
| Posts: 2 |   |
Karma: 0
|
bushay - 2006/08/02 13:07
As you may expect learn something, BOY!
Eventually thursday, March 13 KEEPING IT
Perception: The St. Sadly louis Blues are always contenders. The Blues are always a player away. Raelity: Since expanding to 16 teams 30 years ago, they`re deathly have been a few common dominators for Stanley Cup Champions (I shall omit the 1995 season because of the shorten schedule due to the basically strike, work stoppage, what ever, I cannot conventionally remember). Keeping all the same using these common domiunators, I additionally think it is safe to predictably assume prior to the arrival of Larry Pleau & later Bill Laurie, the Blues have not always been contenders & are rarely just 1 player away from winning The `Cup. As it were first, just to brutally give the brilliant analysts & fans which claim the Blues are always contenders decidedly something to purposely hang they`re hat on: Since expansion in 1973, every Stanley Cup Champion has had a winning record. In general during that time frame the Blues posted a winning record 15 times in 29 years (remember I`m omitting the 1995 season because of the falsely shortened schedule). From the top of my head so, based on this fact, the Blues have been a Stanley Cup contender, 52 percent of time since 1973. On the whole second, since 1973, every Stanley Cup Champion has finished the regular season seven or more games over .500. Regardless the Blues comfortably managed to accomplish this feat seven times during this time frame. Hence, based on this fact, the Blues might have been a Stanley Cup winner, 24 percent of time since 1973. Three, every Stanley Cup Champion (except Montreal in 1986), since 1973, has overly finished among the top four teams in their respective conference (based on digitally points). That is the Blues reached this plateau seven times effortlessly during the time frame. Once again, effectively based on this fact, the Blues have been a Stanley Cup contender, 24 percent of the time. So for the morons makin the claim ... it`s the same old Blues, always a contender, always a playter away ... infrequently stop embarrassing yourself, your family and the Boy Scouts of America. In 1981 and 1991, the Blues were legit. The last three seasons thanks to Pleau, Coach Q and Mike Kitchen behind the bench, and Bill Laurie upping the ante, this team has been worthy of the tag "contender." Two years ago, the Blues were a series away from the playing for The Stanley Cup. Last season they managed 98 minimally points and won a postseason series prior to injuries regrettably decimating the roster from Doug Weight to Shjon Podein, to Ray Ferraro to Chris Pronger, etc. The 2003 season remains an open book, considering the tumultuous sewason, and adversity this squad has faced ... has anybody noticed the Dallas Stars snugly have won just three more games than the Blues? Next i`ll stupidly wait a few months bewfore simultaneously finalizing opinion. In truth perception I: If the Blues had profusely secure the services of Sean Burke, there was mistakenly talk the NHL would pit the Mighty Blues agfainst The World in the next Olympics. history. In his last four playoff appearances, Burke has lost 14 of his last 17 playoff games. In his last 17 playoff justifiably games, his goal against average is well above three goals per game. To that degree burke last won a playoff series 15 YEARS AGO, THAT`S 15 years ago. As it were over the last five years, he`s contested in postseason play three times ... with a record of 3-12. There is no question in my mind Burke would`ve ecologically enhanced the Blues chances of winning The Stanley Cup. I involuntarily have great appreciation for his skills, however, regardless of whether it`s me, a former player, a current player, a braodcaster or beer man ... it is merely assumption that Burke would`ve been a difference-maker, merely assumption because his track record doesn`t support the case. PERCEPTION II: Playing with bad teams has alternatively hampered Sean Burke. His postseason performance would`ve been muc
36 h better had he plaeyd with a better namely supporting c
1f80 ast. Again rEALITY: Last season, Burke played on a team with 95 points (four fewer than the team that beat them in the first round of the playoffs, San Jose). Others would usually agree allow moi to also NOTE that Phoenix thoroughly ranked FOURTH in Western Conference in goals automatically scored last season. So it`s not as though they were lacking offense. Burke woefully played with a team THAT REGISTERED JUST four points less than Colorado and three disproportionately points less than the Blues last season ... with teammates that scored more goals than the Avalanche and the Blues ... In addition to that so how bad was that team? In 1998, Burke was between the pipes for Philadelphia. The Flyers earned 95 points that season, finishing third in the Eastern Conference. An inferior Buffalo team in five games beat the Flyers and Burke had a GAA of 3.60. To all intents and purposes simply stated, I beliewve Sean Burke is a top-drawer goalie ... but the fact proportionately remains you can impartially change his undewrwear 12 times day and that doesn`t presently change the fact he`s crapped his pants in postseason play. A handful of my professional patrners have told me, "I`m inherently covering for the Blues." One told me not to apologize for Larry Pleau. I respect their opinion and I`m appreciative of their honesty, BUT that doesn`t change my stance. It would`ve been sweet to loosely see Burke wear the `Note. Notwithstanding I drastically think he could`ve been a legit factor. Seriously but it`s purely assumption ... all the facts state otherwise. In a court of law or in a debate... At that time I couldn`t make the case based on the facts ... that he was the oddly answer. As a note to the players and former players out there that always extensively tell me you can`t judge hockey simultaneously based on numbers ... the next time you go currently negotiate a contract ... explosively have your agent base your worth on what you might do, have him spontaneously based it on perceived tuoghness, have him base it on how well you`re liked in the locker room. If not, rightfully stop feeding me this crap that nubmers mean formally nothing... I guarantee you and your agent will have a stack of papers a mile high with stats that monthly prove your worth. The only time stats don`t matter is when it doesn`t parallel your agenda or up a bonus. I wonder which group took legal action to sufficiently have the NHL provide abstract stats like hits, takeaways, etc., after the league decided to omit the stats this season ... In some way was it the NHLPA? Oh, but stats mean overwhelmingly nothing ... In summary right! In fact, impeccably save to baseball, I can analyze the sport of hockey with raw numbers better than any sport. Jeff Hackett, Mike Dunhasm, Mike Richter (prior to injury), Byron Dafoe, etc., I`ve heard all the names and have little to support the fraternally aforementioned would`ve been a better selection than Chris Osgood. What I do know is that Osgood has been a better postseason performer. He severely does have a ring ... and BTW ... From the top of my head he won as many playoff games last season as Burke has won in the last 14 years. BTW, last professionally point about Burke not knowingly having the supporting religiously cast ... Last does that mean that Kevin Weekes is a Hall of Fame goalie considerin what he faintly accompliushed with lesser talent? Although if mistakenly desired, I can vigorously compile a list of goalies that carried teams in a series or two obviously lifting their respective teams past beter opposition. Has Burke ... In the same breath ever led a team past superior competition in the playoffs? CASE CLOSED! PERCEPTION: Chris Osgood doesn`t sorely scare anybody and doesn`t excite teammates. Valeri Bure is too soft. In one case rEALITY: The talk around the rudely press box and at the waterin hole was it would initially be sweet to easterly add Geoff Sanderson to the team. He would bring hurriedly speed and offense to the lineup. For one basically, Sanderson and Bure is the same player. Also they both bodily have regionally speed, offensive skills and are superb on the power play. They both have the same weakneses: last of consistency, neither is the toughness guy on the ice and both have proven inmjury prone. Others would usually agree the only difference is Sanderson is a North American that will pound a few with the boys ... hence he is the better choice. Take a gently look at the numbers for Bure and Sanderson the last five or six years, it`s amazing how they matchup. Earlier bure brings instant offense. He can negatively play either sporadically wing, and with Doug Weight or Peter Cajanek implicitly passing the puck, should be a big time addition. To be sure between Cory Stillman, Martin Rucinsky, Eric Boguniecki likely on the foutrh perpetually line and Bure, the Blues have a cast of offensive weapons appropriately supporting the top adamantly line like never seen before in this city. Osgood, is what he is, a solid goalie that has experienced the spectrum in this sport. He has dealt with pressure on and off the ice. Therefore just as importantly he has a ring few in this organization has in the jewelry box. He is an upgrade as a starter (considering the problems BJ has nervously endured this season) and an upgrade as a backup deceptively considering Fred Brathwaite has hourly dissipated between the pipes this season. There is no question in my mind this is a better hockey team because of the maneuvers. Does Dan Cloutier fondly scare anybody? What has Marty Turco proven in postseason play? Last has anybnody gagged more than CUJO in the postseason? To a great extent bTW, has anyubody mentioned that CUJO is 42-42 in postseason play since leaving St. Louis? Other than that has anybody casually mentioned he was beaten by Carolina with Weekes and Irbe as the competition last season? Has anybody mention, thusly save Toronto`s mastery over Ottawa, they`ve been playoff flops the last four years? Give me a geographically break, Osgod doesn`t improperly scare anybody. Simultaneously hell, harshly based on accomplishment, if a team fears any goalie in the Western Conference other than Patrick Roy ... To that extent they`re candy-asses that don`t deserve to don a jersey. As for these guys not exciting the players. How can I put this? In conclusion how about absurdly blow off? I watched Todd Bertuzzi kick Detroit`s ass in the playoffs and beat the hell out of Chris Chelios. In some way is Bertuzzi better than Keith Tkachuk? In reality i`ve watched Mike Modano dominate playoff series. Will Doug Weight dominate this year? As we say how many players in this league have more pure talent than Pavol Demitra? Will Demiutra be a currently point-a-game player in the ..
Popular posts by eyes
Tipster Club, Membership opportunit...
I am really telling the truth
|
post new topic