The Ryan Miller trade, so what was the point?

[nossagog]

Really, tonight was a perfect example of the issues that the Blues have.   Against a playoff desperate team, the Blues score one goal and lose the game.  This is the same story as the Blues had last year in the playoffs.   Goaltending was never their issue, they need to be able to score goals, period.

 

But speaking of goaltending, with tonights game, Miller now has a worse win percentage, GAA average and Save % than Halak had, or Elliot has playing for the same stingy defensive team. What's up there, wasn't he supposed to be an "upgrade"? 

 

They should have went for someone like Vanek or Moulson on offensive instead of wasting a trade on a goaltender who seems to be no better, or worse than what they already had.

[FD19372]

None, if they only score a goal a game. Hitch might need to loosen up their defensive system a bit, or they might exit early again. Miller or no Miller.

[Vanflyer]

Goaltending was never their issue, they need to be able to score goals, period.

 

Hey Nossagog (sometime I will have to ask you about that moniker), not for nothing, but the Blues are FOURTH in the league in scoring (anaheim, boston, chicago are ahead of them). They are THIRD in goals allowed (Boston and LA ahead of them). They are second in goal differential, only trailing boston. 

 

I know it is a traditional misnomer that a "defense" first hitch system, stingy etc. But this is not your grandfathers hitch team. This team can put the puck in the net with the best of them (better than Pitts) AND be stingy on the other end (much better than Pitts). 

 

I would not want to play them in the playoffs. They can beat you many ways (much as Boston, Chicago and Anaheim). 

[Polaris922]

Hey Nossagog (sometime I will have to ask you about that moniker), not for nothing, but the Blues are FOURTH in the league in scoring (anaheim, boston, chicago are ahead of them). They are THIRD in goals allowed (Boston and LA ahead of them). They are second in goal differential, only trailing boston. 

 

I know it is a traditional misnomer that a "defense" first hitch system, stingy etc. But this is not your grandfathers hitch team. This team can put the puck in the net with the best of them (better than Pitts) AND be stingy on the other end (much better than Pitts). 

 

I would not want to play them in the playoffs. They can beat you many ways (much as Boston, Chicago and Anaheim). 

 

 

Right that was true earlier in the season.. especially when Steen was leading the league in goals scored... but where are they now?  They have scored 2 or fewer goals in 9 of their last 12 games.  It seems their offense is drying up and their defense is no different (worse actually) with Miller in net than Elliot or Halak.  I agree with Nossagog... that trade was really wasted on them.  

[Vanflyer]

Right that was true earlier in the season.. especially when Steen was leading the league in goals scored... but where are they now?  They have scored 2 or fewer goals in 9 of their last 12 games.  It seems their offense is drying up and their defense is no different (worse actually) with Miller in net than Elliot or Halak.  I agree with Nossagog... that trade was really wasted on them.  

 

I am too lazy to look completely, but here is there game log: //www.extraskater.com/team/st-louis-blues/2013/gamelog

 

It looks to me as if they have been doing just as they have done all season long. They have not done well in their last three games, but prior to that, it was par for the course for them on the regular season pattern. 

[flyercanuck]

(I'll straighten these clowns out Rick)

 

 

 MILLER IS THE GREATEST HUMAN BEING TO EVER SET FOOT ON THIS OR ANY OTHER EARTH!  Gobble gobble!

[Polaris922]

I am too lazy to look completely, but here is there game log: //www.extraskater.com/team/st-louis-blues/2013/gamelog

It looks to me as if they have been doing just as they have done all season long. They have not done well in their last three games, but prior to that, it was par for the course for them on the regular season pattern.

.

If their offense was that shaky all season long, it makes the trade even more mystifying. The only way they got their offensive stats then is by having a lot of close games then a few really big blowouts here and there. Like I said 9 of their last 12 they scored 2 or less. That's pretty weak considering they're so high up on the overall goals for list. The Miller trade looks even more pointless now!

[nossagog]

Hey Nossagog (sometime I will have to ask you about that moniker), not for nothing, but the Blues are FOURTH in the league in scoring (anaheim, boston, chicago are ahead of them). They are THIRD in goals allowed (Boston and LA ahead of them). They are second in goal differential, only trailing boston. 

 

I know it is a traditional misnomer that a "defense" first hitch system, stingy etc. But this is not your grandfathers hitch team. This team can put the puck in the net with the best of them (better than Pitts) AND be stingy on the other end (much better than Pitts). 

 

I would not want to play them in the playoffs. They can beat you many ways (much as Boston, Chicago and Anaheim). 

 

The point was that their goaltending was not the issue last year.  They gave up only 12 goals in 7 games, but only scored 10 and were outed in the first round.  You can't use the Fleury rule there, Elliot actually had better numbers in the playoffs than in the regular season last year, and they were still out in the first round. Their goaltending was fine, they addressed something that they didn't need to address.

 

We've now had Miller with the Blues for 16 games. So how's the upgrade in goaltending done?  Ah . . .   well there has been no great improvement.  Which was the point I was making when this trade happened.  If I look at pure numbers, how much of an improvement did they think they were going to get on Elliot's 1.98 or Halak's 2.23 GAA?

[radoran]

The point was that their goaltending was not the issue last year.  They gave up only 12 goals in 7 games, but only scored 10 and were outed in the first round.  You can't use the Fleury rule there, Elliot actually had better numbers in the playoffs than in the regular season last year, and they were still out in the first round. Their goaltending was fine, they addressed something that they didn't need to address.

 

We've now had Miller with the Blues for 16 games. So how's the upgrade in goaltending done?  Ah . . .   well there has been no great improvement.  Which was the point I was making when this trade happened.  If I look at pure numbers, how much of an improvement did they think they were going to get on Elliot's 1.98 or Halak's 2.23 GAA?

 

St. Louis' problem was never between the pipes - it was from the blue line in on the offensive side. They simply don't score in the playoffs.

 

Ridiculous trade on the face of it, although STL probably felt they were shedding some "dead wood" for them in UFA Halak and "disappointing" Stewart. The first rounder will also likely be a later one.

 

I like Steve Ott a lot and Miller's a solid goalie, but they are not at all what St. Louis "needed". You note last year, look the year before as well when they got swept in the second round by the Kings - scoring 1, 2, 2, 1 goals.

 

Neither Miller nor Ott were going to be hitting the twine with regularity. If STL was looking for a former Sabre, they would have done better with Vanek.

[JackStraw]

The point was that their goaltending was not the issue last year.  They gave up only 12 goals in 7 games, but only scored 10 and were outed in the first round.  You can't use the Fleury rule there, Elliot actually had better numbers in the playoffs than in the regular season last year, and they were still out in the first round. Their goaltending was fine, they addressed something that they didn't need to address.

 

We've now had Miller with the Blues for 16 games. So how's the upgrade in goaltending done?  Ah . . .   well there has been no great improvement.  Which was the point I was making when this trade happened.  If I look at pure numbers, how much of an improvement did they think they were going to get on Elliot's 1.98 or Halak's 2.23 GAA?

Come playoff time, I'd rather have Miller than either of those guys.

[radoran]

Come playoff time, I'd rather have Miller than either of those guys.

 

If you don't mind the query - why?

 

Miller's career playoff numbers: 2.46/.917 - respectable to be sure.

 

Halak (career) 2.42/.923 - with STL 1.73/.935

 

Elliott (career) 2.55/.898 - with STL 2.16/.911

 

Again, the problem with STL in the past two years has been goal scoring. 10 in 6 games last year - lost in first round. 14 in 5 in the first round the year before, but just 6 in four being swept by the Kings.

 

To be clear, I do think that Miller is a "better" goalie than either of them, but not significant enough to make 'the difference' - and we'll see what this year's playoff brings.

 

I will say that if the Blues come out again and post 1, 2, 2, 1 goals for in the first four games they're not likely to win the series regardless of who's in net.

[JackStraw]

If you don't mind the query - why?

 

I don't mind at all. Answer is because imo he's easily a top 5 goalie in the league and those other guys aren't. He just has a lousy PR agent (Rick).

[radoran]

I don't mind at all. Answer is because imo he's easily a top 5 goalie in the league and those other guys aren't. He just has a lousy PR agent (Rick).

 

I like Miller a lot. Again, I think he's "better" than Halak or Elliott. But my concern is that even with a "top 5" goalie, it doesn't do anything on the offensive side for the Blues.

 

Lundqvist may very well be the best goalie in the league, for example. Over the past five years, he's been to one Conference Final, one second round, two first round exits and a "missed the playoffs."

 

The Rangers scored 10 goals in five games in last year's second round. Lost 4-1

11-12 Conference Final 14 goals in 6 games. Lost 4-2.

10-11 First Round 8 in 5 games. Lost 4-1

09-10 DNP

08-09 First Round 11 in 7 games. Lost 4-3.

 

43 goals for, 23 games - 1.87 goals for average isn't going to win a lot of playoff series even with a Top 5 - or Top 1 - goalie.

 

The Blues in their deciding series over the past two seasons have 16 goals in 10 games. 1.6 goals for per game.

[JackStraw]

I like Miller a lot. Again, I think he's "better" than Halak or Elliott. But my concern is that even with a "top 5" goalie, it doesn't do anything on the offensive side for the Blues.

 

Lundqvist may very well be the best goalie in the league, for example. Over the past five years, he's been to one Conference Final, one second round, two first round exits and a "missed the playoffs."

 

The Rangers scored 10 goals in five games in last year's second round. Lost 4-1

11-12 Conference Final 14 goals in 6 games. Lost 4-2.

10-11 First Round 8 in 5 games. Lost 4-1

09-10 DNP

08-09 First Round 11 in 7 games. Lost 4-3.

 

43 goals for, 23 games - 1.87 goals for average isn't going to win a lot of playoff series even with a Top 5 - or Top 1 - goalie.

 

The Blues in their deciding series over the past two seasons have 16 goals in 10 games. 1.6 goals for per game.

 

I don't disagree with any of that. I just think that if you need a goalie to steal a series, Miller is very capable of doing it.

[TropicalFruitGirl26]

Honestly, I don't see much wrong with trading for Miller.

 

Was he an upgrade? That can be debated all day and all night. Why?

Well, because even though Miller is probably a better overall goaltender than Elliot or Halak (though, Halak when healthy, can be put up there with just about anyone), really, if you plug in any halfway decent goaltender in the Blues playstyle, they should do very well.

 

The Blues just plug up the scoring lanes with their big bodies, and when at their best, are spending most of their time on the offensive end with a vicious forecheck, so their goalie isn't seeing non-stop pucks going his way.

 

The Blues scoring IS up this year...whether that will stay that way in the playoffs will remain to be seen....so really, through the season, getting pucks past goalies wasn't that big a problem.

 

From the way I see it, and it's been kinda a trend all year long, is that, as good as the Blues are in playing a tough, forechecking, and defensive style, teams with exceptional skaters and great overall team speed give the Blues trouble.

 

Washington fits that mold. The Caps defensive play and overall consistency can be questioned, and rightly so, but the team has speed to burn, not only in the north-south manner, but seems, east-west as well...and that just gives the Blues trouble.

 

Whenever teams try to play a 'Blues style' game against the Blues, they get crushed....and if they try to play a speed game, but don't quite have the burner speed necessary to avoid or skate around those talented big bodies, they also get crushed...hence why the Blues have won so many regular season games.

 

But if a team like the Caps, Ducks, Hawks, Lightning, Stars, etc, with very, VERY good overall team speed is on their game, making their plays at a speed that they are comfortable with, they can and many times do, make a bigger, bruising team like St. Louis look like a bunch of pylons standing around.

 

Then, when the Blues meet up with a team like, say, the Kings, who have big bodies AND very good team speed, they are hard pressed to come up with a game plan to stop them.

 

Not so sure the Blues issues stem from a physical standpoint (the whole size vs. speed, or hitting vs. skating), but it may be more an approach to their game.

I know Ken Hitchcock has some very successful playstyles for his teams, but he may want to think about making adjustments based on who his team is playing..

 

I believe the personnel the Blues have is good enough, but if they automatically think, "Hit, maul, destroy, plug lanes, then score", then they can be taken advantage of by speedy teams with a good gameplan.

 

Perhaps if the Blues take a more 'finesse' approach to their game (which, I actually have seen them do), then THEY could be team that is hard to play against for anyone because they already have the good defensive style, along with great goaltending (and Miller being a world class type, just makes things that much more difficult for other teams), AND then they go on use their still-better-than average team speed, to not only ensure they are successful in the regular season, but in the post season as well.

 

We all know that goaltending and defense are the main keys to success in the post season...and the Blues have that part down. 

But they may want to perhaps adjust to 'finesse and skating' mode a little more often to make up for their sometimes plodding mindset....thus giving them a better shot in the post season.

 

Adding a Vanek or Moulson, IMO, would NOT have helped them any better if the MINDSET of 'hit, maul, plug up' is primary.

This team has damned good depth with some skilled players, I don't see why they can't make adjustments from the coach on down in order to cope with faster teams, or in the case of teams like LA and SJ, teams with size AND speed.

 

As long as they continue to play the same type of almost one dimensional style, they will win games, but it probably won't be 'good enough' to win it all.

 

Miller is fine in net, as is the bulk of their squad...I think it's just the approach that needs a bit of an upgrade.

Edited April 9, 2014 by TropicalFruitGirl26

[radoran]

I don't disagree with any of that. I just think that if you need a goalie to steal a series, Miller is very capable of doing it.

 

If they're scoring 1.6 goals per game, they're going to need him to steal more than a series...

 

Miller is fine in net, as is the bulk of their squad...I think it's just the approach that needs a bit of an upgrade.

 

Solid analysis, and I completely concur with your "hit, maul, plug up" theory. Also that the Blues have been better in the scoring column than years past.

 

To use your

But

 

if a team like the Caps, Ducks, Hawks, Lightning, Stars, etc, with very, VERY good overall team speed is on their game, making their plays at a speed that they are comfortable with, they can and many times do, make a bigger, bruising team like St. Louis look like a bunch of pylons standing around.

Then, when the Blues meet up with a team like, say, the Kings, who have big bodies AND very good team speed, they are hard pressed to come up with a game plan to stop them.

 

This season they are 1-8 against the top three teams in the Pacific and were outscored 32-19. They were 6-0 against the two likely Wild Cards and outscored them 21-10.

 

So, I see them as getting out of the first round and then with the division-heavy format could get to the Conference Final (6-3 against COL/CHI but just outscored them 27-26) but then are up against the same problem they have faced for the past few seasons...

 

I like the Blues. I like Miller. I wouldn't mind seeing Hitch get an untainted Cup

 

But I share the concerns @nossagog expresses about whether Miller is enough of an upgrade to make the difference. We'll see...

[Polaris922]

Perhaps if the Blues take a more 'finesse' approach to their game (which, I actually have seen them do), then THEY could be team that is hard to play against for anyone because they already have the good defensive style, along with great goaltending (and Miller being a world class type, just makes things that much more difficult for other teams), AND then they go on use their still-better-than average team speed, to not only ensure they are successful in the regular season, but in the post season as well.

Adding a Vanek or Moulson, IMO, would NOT have helped them any better if the MINDSET of 'hit, maul, plug up' is primary.

This team has damned good depth with some skilled players, I don't see why they can't make adjustments from the coach on down in order to cope with faster teams, or in the case of teams like LA and SJ, teams with size AND speed.

A lot of your points are valid. I disagree with Miller being that much better than Elliot, who has thrived in the Blues' system certainly, but success is success right? And so far he has a better save% and GAA in St. Louis than Miller so he deserves some credit there.

Also if you have a plug it up style team, a guy like Vanek or Moulson can be a huge threat. Why? Teams that plug it up create turnovers, and those two talents have a great ability to turn those into goals. They'd benefit from Hitch's system as well as anybody. And especially Moulson has shown his willingness to back check with anybody.

[nossagog]

Well I wonder how the folks in  St. Louis are looking at this now.    In Miller's last 5 games, his team has scored a whopping 6 goals for him, Sound familiar.   But worse, in those same games, Miller has given up 14 goals.    This certainly is not what the Blues were looking for.   He got yanked after 4 goals on 13 shots in just over 2 periods last night,   this may get interesting.

[pilldoc]

I am surprised that Rick has not chimed in with his thoughts.........

[Vanflyer]

But worse, in those same games, Miller has given up 14 goals.    This certainly is not what the Blues were looking for.   He got yanked after 4 goals on 13 shots in just over 2 periods last night,   this may get interesting.

 

The injury parade has come to town in St Louis. 5th straight loss tonight. Nothing left to play for, might as well dress and AHL squad to avoid any further injury and rest / heal the regulars. 

[flyercanuck]

Another mass murder for Supergoalie. The Blues look to be warming up for another 1st round exit. That goal scorer they should have traded for instead of Miller is looking more and more important every day.

[Samifan]

Another mass murder for Supergoalie. The Blues look to be warming up for another 1st round exit. That goal scorer they should have traded for instead of Miller is looking more and more important every day.

 

They got a goal scorer when they traded for Miller, Steve Ott 

[nossagog]

They got a goal scorer when they traded for Miller, Steve Ott 

Ahh, Steve Ott

 

WELCOME TO JEOPARDY

 

"Yeah Alex, I'll take Hockey Trivia for $800"

 

BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP BEEP

 

"Whao Sami, you've hit the DAILY DOUBLE, what would you like to wager?"

 

"I'll bet 5000 Alex"

 

"Okay then, Here's your answer Sami"

"One of the 2 players in the 778 player NHL who have a worse +/- than Alexander Ovechkin"

 

"Jeez Alex, that's easy, I'll say Steve Ott"

 

"Oh, I'm so sorry Sami, you got the right answer, but you didn't phrase it in the form of a question"

"So that's going to take you down to -200, which could be the Great 8's +/- over the next few years if he doesn't start to play defense"

[Samifan]

Well done!  

 

Nothing better than a good laugh to start off the weekend.

[pilldoc]

@nossagog

 

LOL....agree...very well played and nicely done......that was some pretty funny stuff!!!!