cprice12
-
Content Count
317 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by cprice12
-
-
I see no issue with the goal. When a player breaks his stick and doesn't drop it, the refs more often than not warn the player before they call a penalty. The stick break and goal all happened so quick it is irrelevant really.
You see no issues with the goal?
The refs do not give warnings. If a player plays a puck with a broken stick, and the ref sees it, it is always a penalty. ALWAYS. Even if the player doesn't know the stick is broke. They may yell at the player to drop his stick immediately (because the player might not know it is broke) and if he doesn't drop it right away, it is a penalty...but there is never a warning given.
A player can't even skate around with a broken stick. He has to drop it immediately or it is a penalty.
It doesn't matter if the play happened fast or not, or if he was slashed or not (he wasn't), the correct call is still a no goal and a penalty.
-
My thoughts...
I thought it was a pretty entertaining game. Not as intense as our game against the Jets the other night, but it was a good game.
Blues fans, including myself, are obviously a bit frustrated at the types of goals that went in against us (especially after 5 of the 6 goals the Wild scored on us on Saturday were goofy goals as well). The shot off of Butler's face that squirts right to Cole who chips it in with a wedge, and of course the goal that shouldn't have counted by Abdelkader in OT. It really is a joke that that kind of play isn't reviewable. We discussed this at length last night on our podcast about it being a clear no goal that isn't subjective at all.
I know the league doesn't want the war room getting into the business of calling penalties (they've said as much), which is what would have happened if they were able to review the goal...goal is waived off and Abdelkader goes in the box for playing the puck with a broken stick and it's 3 on 3 with the Blues getting a short PP after that. But why shouldn't they call penalties on plays like that? I think especially in situations where a goal is scored, it should be a reviewable play. But even if you think the war room shouldn't be calling penalties, they could at least say that goals scored with a possible broken stick are reviewable plays, but no penalty will be granted and the faceoff goes down to the other end or something. Of course, I'm sure you'll get guys bolting to the bench to hide the broken stick after scoring a goal with it...but with all of the cameras out there, they couldn't get away with that very easily.
The sad part is that Toronto did review the goal. They review every goal to make sure it's legit. So they very much indeed saw that the goal shouldn't have counted...but they couldn't say anything about it.
That's just wrong.
It might be a while before you see a goal like that again...they aren't common. But it wouldn't hurt to have that rule in the rulebook just in case. The NHL doesn't want the Stanley Cup decided on another goal that shouldn't have counted.
I think you guys can understand that we feel we deserved a better fate in this game. Just got a bit unlucky on the first goal, and then flat out hosed on the 2nd goal.
But hey, maybe we can get some revenge when we meet the Wings in the finals. I know that I speak for just about every Blues fan when I say that I would LOVE to meet the Wings in the finals. (but let's be honest...we'd love for the Blues to meet anyone in the finals)
Good game
Good game
Good game
Good game
F*ck you
Good game
Good game
-
The Blues biggest star is for sure Alex Pietrangelo and the problem I could see is like you've mentioned whom are you going to play? Hawks have been overused other than them I don't know who's your most hated rival and where would you play it ? I guess the Rams stadium ? I really don't know but I think new teams would be nice but it needs to be a rivalry and at least one team has to have a huge fanbase Oshie is a shootout superstar but I doubt he is a house hold name like mentioned Alex P. Or Backes
Pietrangelo? Our biggest star?
Nope.
Why do people think that?
Tarasenko is our biggest star right now. It's not even close really.
Petro was supposed to be our biggest star by now as there was a ton of hype around him and he got off to a nice start his first year or two, but he hasn't played that well the last two seasons at all. He has played better of late though, maybe the last 8 games or so...but some think that is a byproduct of the team playing really well around him. Petro isn't even our best defenseman. That honor belongs to Shattenkirk, who is having a great year and has been very good for us ever since we acquired him from Colorado in the Erik Johnson trade. I'd put him behind Bouwmeester as well on our depth chart, even though a lot of people think Petro is our top D-man, when that just isn't the case right now. He plays against the other team's top lines and get's #1 minutes...but trust me, he isn't a #1 guy right now. He'll show flashes of great play, then make a bonehead mistake that leads to a goal. It happens a lot. He really needs to find some consistency in his game. The talent is there though, no doubt.
The Rams play indoors. So that isn't a possibility for an outdoor game.
The venue would be Busch Stadium if it was held in St. Louis.
-
You were losing me when you said Oshie was a household name. I was lost when you said it was because of a shootout.
Hopefully the rest made more sense.
Really? The winter olympics...the shootout in the USA vs. Russia game when Oshie took like 8 (or however many) shootout attempts in a row. That doesn't ring a bell? It was a pretty big deal.
-
Let me ask you guys this...
Over at my forum we've talked for a few years now about how we'd really like to see the Blues get into an outdoor game.
In our biased view, it seems the Blues are a no-brainer to be in one of these things (especially since Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, etc. have all been in multiple games already), but it just hasn't happened yet.
Our reasoning...
- We have the household name in Oshie because of the shootout in the Olympics vs. Russia...so there is a storyline there.
- We have the budding superstar in Tarasenko...another storyline, and a player that would certainly draw international viewers.
- We are a high scoring team, so that would be a plus for viewers.
- St. Louis is one of the best teams in the NHL and has been for a few years now.
- We have the stanley cup winning coach (not that that means anything for the outdoor game...but it's something).
- We have some heated rivalries with Chicago, Detroit (much lesser now that you guys are in the East) LA ...and now Nashville. Our rivalry with Chicago is brutal...which you guys are familiar with as they are/were (still are?) your biggest rival as well.
- The Blues have traditionally faired very well in the ratings in games that are televised nationally.
I think a Blues - Hawks outdoor game would be killer...and that probably should have happened this year instead of Washington being in it. That makes no sense.
I get that Washington was promised an outdoor game that they could host, (for some reason), and they got one...but against Chicago? I think that was a waste of the Hawks...and now they won't be in it for at least a few years. They should have saved the Hawks for a Blues - Hawks matchup next year, or had the Blues in it this year and let Washington host a stadium series game this year or next.
What do you guys think about the Blues being in an outdoor game? Is that something that you would like to see? And if so, who would you like to see them play?
I'm curious to what other fans think about that.
They say that Colorado and Minnesota are going to host next year's stadium series games, with their opponents yet to be announced. The Blues could be announced as the opponent in either of those games...and a Blues - Wild outdoor game has been talked about before, which I'd be happy about, but I would question why the Wild and not a real rival.
I still like the outdoor games and I'm really looking forward to Montreal @ Boston next year. That one is a great matchup that was long overdue to happen. It really should have been one of the first ones.
-
Geez, stick around and talk more!
Maybe I'll check in every now and then. But only if I get to subtly rip on the Wings a bit.
-
I haven't see CPRICE12 around these parts for a LONG time! He was our resident Blues fan...maybe he got tired of getting beat all the time?
Ha!
I haven't been here because there hasn't been much Blues-Wings stuff to discuss since you guys moved to the East.
But I was bored so I decided to jump over and see what you guys had to say about the game. I haven't even visited in a while.
My generalized and overall obvious take on the game...
The Blues deserved better. They really controlled play the first half of the game and didn't let Detroit do anything, but Mrazek played really, really well. He made some huge saves. Including a great blocker save in OT. That was impressive.
Wings came on in the 2nd half of the game and played much better than they did early.
Elliott gave up a softy to Datsyuk in OT. Unless he was partially screened, he really should have had that one. That kind of goal is uncharacteristic of him as he's been great this year. Had the game gotten to the shootout (which it almost did)...I liked our chances with how well the Blues have done in shootouts and how poorly Detroit has done.
But I had a bad feeling when the clock ticked down under 10 seconds in OT. I just had a feeling Detroit was going to score.
I can't complain too much though, as we did score with less than a minute to go to force OT, so we came real close to coming away with nothing. With how tough the Central is, I'll take it and move on.
Congrats on the win. Maybe we'll even the score in Detroit later in the season. Maybe a nice 10-3 Blues win like the one a few years ago in Detroit? I'll take one of those.
TheXym and derblaueClaus reacted to this -
Signing a player to a contract like this based on expectations he hasn't achieved yet is risky.
He had a down year last year and I was hoping he'd sign for no more than $5.5 million...but we'll see how he plays this year.
in a couple years this contract could be a steal...or it could be one that they are trying to get out of if he turns into the next Erik Johnson.
I'm optimistic he'll turn into a superb d-man...I just wanted him to prove it on a consistent basis before he got a big contract.
-
This is truly awesome. Light and horn going off in the house would be epic... though I suspect there would be a significant delay from the time you see the goal scored on your TV and when the light goes off.
On a similar note, been wanting one of these for awhile... hitting a button to set off your own light wouldn't be so bad:
http://us.thegoallight.com/store/#!/~/product/category=1620116&id=15439010
My brother has a red light that looks just like a goal light, it spins and whatnot.
He has it hooked up to The Clapper, so when there is a goal and someone claps or even a loud, sharp "YEAH!!", it goes off.
Pretty cool...and not much $$.
55fan reacted to this -
Did you not read what I wrote, are you intentionally misrepresenting what I said?
I called it a questionable hit, not a dirty one. Though it certainly wasn't clean. It could've been boarding, roughing, elbowing. But regardless of whether it was dirty or not, he broke Sprunger's neck on the play. He never bothers to contact Sprunger after the incident. Then the next time they played one another he taunts him saying it could happen again. That's a prick move.
And Backes made no attempt to play the puck when he hit Sprunger, so I'm not sure what you're talking about there.
If I were Backes, I don't think I'd want to contact the guy either because he was constantly whining about the play to the press, calling me a dirty player, etc. I think I'd just leave it alone because he doesn't want to talk with me. But I honestly do not care. It's a hockey play that had an unfortunate outcome where someone got hurt. It happens. Hockey is a rough game.
Here is what Backes said concerning the aleged commment during the next game:
"I was pretty distraught that it happened the first time. You don't ever want to hurt anybody," Backes said. "It was a hard, finished check. He's a good player, and I'm glad he's back on the ice. We had a good battle today, we had a few run-ins, but I don't think I would stoop that low to dig my fingers and pour salt in the wound."So it's just a question of who you believe on that. And you have made it clear who you believe.
And you are correct about Backes not playing the puck. The puck may hit off of Backes' stick, but he wasn't playing it. For some reason I thought I saw Backes take a swing at the puck, but that wasn't the case. With that said, the puck was in Sprunger's skates...so he was fair game to hit.
-
If you're so sound in your opinion I don't know why you keep going on about mine.Because I like to debate. Isn't that obvious?
Yeah, I dunno...the Sprunger hit isn't a great example to try and prove Backes is a dirty player. It was a fast, bang, bang play where the players went into the boards goofy, with the puck right there. That was just an unfortunate play for Sprunger. Hockey is a violent game. Players get hurt sometimes, especially if you have your head down. It doesn't automatically mean the guy who dished the hit out is dirty. A penalty for a hit to the head, sure...but I don't even think Backes had time to think about it as he was playing the puck a millisecond before he collided with Sprunger.
-
The Blues should be LIVID! If Detroit got screwed like that, this forum would be lit up with conspiracy and cheating and Bettman... They Blues lost two valuable points with that non-penalty. I like to win, but don't like to be handed the win ala Pitt in 2009.
You and I have had our differences in the past, but this is dead on. If the Wings go screwed that way, we all would be calling for somone's head! I do agree with the NO goon hockey too. I wish upon wishes that we had more players like Backes on this team....too bad for your loss, but I am sure you will make it up this season while Detroit continues to play like the local squirt team in town....
Well, I never said it cost the Blues the game, that would imply the Blues would have won if no penalty was called...which we'll never know. Detroit may have still won the game, but the penalty ended up leading to the game winning goal...so yeah, Detroit was handed one there. But as far as blame goes...yeah, Walsh was to blame 100%. It was just a bad call. I'm not sure how anyone can say they don't blame him when he is the one who messed up.
The Blues will have their chance for redemption quickly... we play each other again on Thursday. I'm kinda liking this short season. Lots of division games close together.
-
I've already mentioned it and you ignored it. Your Blues got away with at least 3 interference calls, a couple tripping calls and probably more that I did not see. This bad call evened it out a bit
Interference? Tripping?
And how again is that "goon hockey"?
-
I know who Wyshynski is. I wouldn't rank him quite as high and respected as you apparently do. He's basically a blogger who consolidates things he's read elsewhere and chimes in his two cents, but my apologies for referring to him as "a guy" and not "The Great and Respected Blogger..." He's also been a pretty clear fan of Backes for a while now. My point is you digging up some random article on yahoo where he mentions Backes isn't dirty as if that's some irrefutable evidence.
I've made no claims about Backes hit the other night. That was a terrible call. That doesn't change my opinion that Backes is a prick and often plays at and sometimes over the line. So like I said originally, when he gets a 5 minute major he didn't deserve for that hit, I certainly don't feel too bad for him. It's not the first time Backes has thrown that type of hit. This one was clean but he's had a few that are borderline late on a defenseman who's made a pass up ice. He comes east west and drills them after the puck is gone and they're looking up ice at the play.
That's not a misinformed opinion by the way, it's just one you don't agree with.
Well, I'm not the one ranking Wyshynski high. He's a respected hockey writer/blogger for Yahoo...I guess just not respected by you, which is convenient for you in this discussion.
I don't read the guy every day, but when I do, I usually enjoy his takes on things. It just came up right away when I did a quick search, and I thought it was funny how much it applied to this discussion, and how much he completely contradicted your (and some others here) opinion of Backes...so, like the thorough guy I am, I shared it.
You see Backes play a few games a year and form your opinion based on that. Understandable.
I see him play every game, every year and also spend time analyzing the Blues for my site and our podcast. So I'm going to defer to my own opinion of him over yours...or even Wyshynski for that matter, since I see Backes play a lot more than he does.
Maybe you just don't like Backes for various, understandable, divison rival-type reasons...but we're going to have to disagree on your idea that he is a dirty player. He has had some questionable hits in the past, like any player has who plays the game hard and plays a very physical game...that can't be avoided. But by saying he is dirty, you are saying he goes out looking to hurt other players, which just isn't the case at all. He doesn't have that type of reputation anywhere (except in here). With that said, I'm not going to pretend he is an angel out there either. He plays with an edge and it's not beyond him to give someone a shot, but to me, that falls under the "that's hockey" category, and is something you see everyone do from time to time...and it's never (at least not that I recall) an intent to injure.
Maybe we just disagree on the definition of "dirty player".
-
It's the right call by the NHL. I don't blame the refs, they thought he got the head and called it that way.
How can you not blame the refs? It was a horrible call, made by a referee.
He is most certainly to blame because he was dead wrong.
it was a bad call but you know how consistently we're dicked on bad calls? And how often STL plays goon hockey and gets away with it?
If you believe in karma, last night was a textbook example.
Enlighten me. How often does St. Louis play "goon hockey"? I'd like to know.
-
Wait, a guy wrote an article on yahoo mentioning Backes isn't a dirty player?? Well that changes my mind completely.
Backes is a prick. That doesn't mean he's not a good player. And if you spent time here other than to respond to some perceived injustice perpetrated against the Blues, you would've seen the Tootoo signing got mixed reactions to say the least. Tootoo is absolutely a dirty player who I'm hoping gets it together and learns to be a little more defensively responsible while with the Wings.
If it carries so much less weight than yours, than why are you spending so much time trying to refute it?
You don't think Backes is dirty or a prick. Since you're a Blues fan that's not surprising. Since I'm a Wings fan my opinion shouldn't be all that shocking either. I'm not exactly losing sleep over our difference of opinion.
A guy? That's Wyshynski (Puck Daddy). He's a well known and respected hockey writer. I would have thought you'd have known that. And that "guy" happens to also not think Backes is dirty, and actually stated he was the polar opposite of the type of player you think he is. Which is why I posted it. My opinion was apparently tossed aside because I am a Blues fan...but you guys will have to find another reason to toss out Wyshynski's opinion, since he is a Devil's fan. I'm sure you'll come up with something.
I can understand not liking Backes from a competitive standpoint. He plays hard, he hits hard, he's physical, he puts up decent offensive numbers and he is the captain of a division rival. I respect that completely. What I find ridiculous is the constant flow of comments saying that Backes is a prick, is dirty, or whatever...and using that misinformed opinion to try and justify the horrible call against him the other night.
-
Again, I don't see your purpose (cprice12) in coming on this site. Are you a closet Wings fan or just like to put in your 2 cents in as you feel like it when the Blues play the Wings and mysteriously disappear again.
I've been here for a long, long time.
I post when I find things I want to comment on...and usually it is when the Blues and Wings play. Does that confuse you? Seems pretty understandable to me.
I always find it odd when someone questions why I (a Blues fan) am here, posting in a Blues-Wings gameday thread. Dumb question.
-
There's no year shown as to when that article was written? Interesting.
It had to be October of 2011, because they talked about Perron being out with a concussion and he returned later that season.
-
Found this take on David Backes. I'm sure you guys will enjoy it.
From Puck Daddy:
Backes is known as one of the NHL's top power forwards and hardest hitters. What he isn't known for: Being a dirty player, or a player that runs afoul of the League's supplemental discipline system. It's something Backes takes pride in, while having little respect for players that play recklessly. -
Nope, sure doesn't.
And we Tootoo is awesome, because he's a wing.
It's called being a fan.
All I'm saying is, using that video as "proof" that Backes is some kind of dirty douchebag of a player, is ridiculous.
I'm not above admitting a Blues player is dirty if he really is. But, sorry, Backes isn't a dirty player.
Backes had 1 major penalty last year, 0 game misconducts. Hell, Zetterburg had more game misconducts last year than Backes.
What's interesting is that your a fan of a team who has never win a championship.
What's interesting is your use of "your".
-
Because I've seen him play.
That's not actually a fact. That's your opinion as a Blues fan.
Do you honestly think your opinion of what kind of a player Backes is carries more weight than mine?
That's interesting.
-
one of many
Really? Wow. Doesn't take much, does it?
You guys must hate Tootoo with a passion then.
-
First of all I'm not a dude! Second of all it was the wrong call but at the time it appeared to the refs that he hit him in the head. They were wrong and nothing has come out of it so GET OVER IT! Anyway, Backes is a douchebag and I stand by my opinion of him. If it were the other way around you'd be singing a different tune
Get over it? It was a horrible call that directly led to the game winning goal late in the 3rd period. No. I will not get over it for a while. Especially since the Blues have a couple more days off. It's my right as a fan to be pissed when my team gets jobbed.
Why all of the hate towards Backes? I can see disliking a guy if he has burned your team in the past, but all of the "prick" and "douchebag" comments? I don't get it. Where does that come from? Because he plays physical? I'm curious...simply because of the fact he is NOT, a douchebag. Hmmm...
-
What's sad is in the Philly game Erskine threw an elbow that almost KO'd Simmonds. No call on the play.
People will always complain about officiating, but having watched hockey a lot of years, the quality of reffing really seems to have deteriorated in the last few.
Terrible call by the refs against St. Louis, but Backes is a prick so it's hard to feel that bad.
I'm curious as to why you feel Backes is a prick.
ROY according to LGW
in General
Posted · Report reply
I don't like considering anyone "untouchable"...but on the Blues roster, Parayko is about as untouchable as it gets. Even though Larkin is having a very nice season, plus the fact we need a boost on offense, I still wouldn't trade Parayko for him...and it's not a tough decision. That's not a knock on Larkin by any means though. It's just that I think that highly of Parayko.
Parayko reminds me of Pronger in a way, without the mean streak of course.
When he is on the ice, he controls the play. He's so big and technically sound. But he's also really mobile and fast...and he is as offensively gifted a defenseman as you will see at his age and he is a fantastic stickhandler.
Parayko has been our best all around defenseman. He does it at both ends of the ice. He has been better than Shattenkirk and Pietrangelo...and it's not even close. Assuming he progresses as hopes, he could easily be a Norris caliber guy in a couple years.
I really don't have anything bad to say about the guy. He has been fantastic...but like the OP said, he is a defenseman...plus Larkin, Panarin and some others are having good offensive years (having Kane on your line helps Panarin, but that guy is good anyway), so Pararako likely won't get much consideration for the Calder, even though as of right now, him not being a finalist should be a crime.
Now, if you want a defenseman and want to offer Larkin, maybe we could work out a package deal that includes Pietrangelo? Let's make this happen.