Comments on: Blues clearly stand alone as NHL’s top team (for now)

By: leeo00

leeo00 — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 18:22:05 +0000

If you go back and look at some of the blues loses half of them come from back to back games usually the third game in four night, i think it adds up to 9 loses on a back to back nights coming from teams like, Nashville 2, Detroit 2, Chicago 2 and the Canucks 1 .To me those are game that the best of the best are going to lose, so that in mind i think they mean business . for being in the the top five or even three for the good part of the second half of the season they have been treated very unfair by the news sites. they talk more about teams that don’t even have a chance in the playoffs than talk about them. I think its time to give them some well earned credit.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 17:54:52 +0000

No, the Blues have been better because they got Perron and McDonald back from concussions, which has made the offense much more dangerous, and because they are a young team with guys that are improving at both ends of the ice under Hitch’s tutelage.

By: cmutimmah

cmutimmah — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 15:34:36 +0000

Blues have been better because they got Elliot out of goal. He’s a decent goalie that’s numbers are skewed by Hitchcock’s system… but who would you rather have under pressure… Halak or Elliot?

Halak has came up and made timely saves all year. (And this is coming from a Wings fan)

By: 8man

8man — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 11:44:33 +0000

This team has really been ignored for much of the year. Well, they are going to the playoffs and if they win, there won’t be many other teams to talk about.

Western Conference Playoffs could be brutal!

By: danphipps01

danphipps01 — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 09:21:01 +0000

Wow. Take that in combination with musgima’s point about Payne’s road numbers versus Hitch’s and you have to wonder if they’re the real deal already. I wasn’t expecting them to be a top-tier contender ’till next year, but I’m beginning to think I need to revise that statement based on what we know today… they’re scary good this year.

By: James O'Brien

James O'Brien — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 06:07:15 +0000

Interesting points. The Blues make an already quality-saturated West that much more brutal. Almost makes me wonder if that conference will batter itself to the point that the East will have a freshness advantage?

By: eggserino

eggserino — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 06:00:36 +0000

Let’s keep in mind that four of the top six home records lie in the central division. The fact that the Blues have to play these teams more often absolutely skews their road record. Take, for example, their dominance over eastern conference teams. If I remember correctly, they have only lost about three games total to eastern conference teams. Pretty solid record…

By: musigma45

musigma45 — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 05:19:41 +0000

Ok, I wasn’t sure if you were talking about a statistical split I wasn’t aware of or their overall.

A 15-14-3 mark is not elite, I agree. However, if you take away Payne’s 3-6-0 away record they’re 12-8-3 or 27 out of 46 points, basically 59% of the points possible instead of 51.5%. Sign enough, especially of late, that they’re getting better.

Still, the ability to win on the road is a big concern. Just not as big as it once was.

By: paledevil

paledevil — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 05:18:09 +0000

The Blues are playing like an all pro offensive line with a franchise running back….

By: James O'Brien

James O'Brien — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 05:13:37 +0000

15-14-3, actually. (Fixed.)

By: musigma45

musigma45 — Fri, 09 Mar 2012 05:12:15 +0000

A 15-4-3 record on the road is 33 out of 44 possible points or 75%. How is that “not elite”?