Post Presser Thoughts

[Harry S Deals]

We lost Pietrangelo, ROR, Tarasenko, Barbashev and what has Army's chosen rebuild path gotten us in return? Anybody have a clue?

Why yes, I do. With those 4 players, along with throw-ins Mikkola and Acciari, the Blues received:
25th pick (Otto Stenberg)
29th pick (Theo Lindstein)
Zach Dean
56th pick (Lucas Fischer)
76th pick (Juraj Pekarcik)
95th pick (Adam Jecho)
Sammy Blais
Hunter Skinner
Adam Gaudette
Mikhail Abramov

Obviously they got nothing for Petro. He walked as a UFA. But for the other three they got 2 top prospects, 3 solid prospects, 1 maybe prospect and scraps. You’re just not patient enough to see it through. Already declaring them failures because for some reason these teenagers aren’t NHL stars yet.

Petro - 35 yrs old 71 4 29 33 11 (PARAYKO)
ROR - 34 yrs old 79 21 32 53 -23 (THOMAS)
Tarasenko 33 yrs old 80 11 22 33 -13 (KYROU)
Barbie 29 yrs old 70 23 28 51 26 (HOLLOWAY)

Who cares, all great players in their prime all part of the teams first title great memories. All also replaced with better, younger players which is the nature of pro sports. So what.

[netboy65]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Here’s one more fruit-related thing. He’s bananas

[STL fan in MN]

We lost Pietrangelo, ROR, Tarasenko, Barbashev and what has Army's chosen rebuild path gotten us in return? Anybody have a clue?

Why yes, I do. With those 4 players, along with throw-ins Mikkola and Acciari, the Blues received:
25th pick (Otto Stenberg)
29th pick (Theo Lindstein)
Zach Dean
56th pick (Lucas Fischer)
76th pick (Juraj Pekarcik)
95th pick (Adam Jecho)
Sammy Blais
Hunter Skinner
Adam Gaudette
Mikhail Abramov

Obviously they got nothing for Petro. He walked as a UFA. But for the other three they got 2 top prospects, 3 solid prospects, 1 maybe prospect and scraps. You’re just not patient enough to see it through. Already declaring them failures because for some reason these teenagers aren’t NHL stars yet.

Fair enough. Point well made. Maybe more patience is required.

Snuggerud is a success story I think, so that is a good point in Army's favor.

I'm not declaring them a failure because they aren't NHL stars yet.

I fear that they are failures because:
-Armstrong says nothing about them
-The internet says nothing about them
-They are not dominating in their leagues
-Army's track record
-The odds of low draft picks actually making an impact in the NHL

You seem really hung up on Army not discussing prospects yesterday. It was a press conference on the end of the regular season. Neither he nor the media were focused on prospects. That doesn’t mean Army doesn’t have opinions on them. I bet he and Tim Taylor will have much more to say on them in June. Expect tons of sound bites on the prospects on July when most of them are in town for prospects camp. He was asked yesterday specifically about Stenberg, Kaskimaki, Peterson and Buchinger. He gave fair answers. Was way higher on Kaskimaki than I expected actually. Would it have been nice if someone had asked him about more guys? Sure. Is the fact they didn’t or he didn’t just randomly volunteer his opinions on the entire prospect pool somehow mean they’re failures? Of course not. That’s ridiculous.

What exactly are you expecting the internets to say?

Dvorsky absolutely dominated the AHL relative to his age. He dominated the OHL at age 18. He would’ve absolutely destroyed the OHL at age 19 but was so good he moved up to pro hockey a year early. Stenberg and Lindstein didn’t dominate but again, were in pro leagues. If they had been in Jrs I have every confidence they would’ve absolutely dominated.

Army’s track record is good. As has been shown, you’re just wrong. And it’s really not even his track record. It’s the track record of Tony Fentrin and Bill Armstrong and Jarmo Kekelainen before him.

Agree most draft picks don’t make it…which is why it’s all the more impressive that all of the draft analysis shows that the Blues are more successful than average in finding players in the draft.

[TheJackBurton]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

[a smell of green grass]

well there is a bright side to IT's last comment. the goblin said they would leave the board for good and IT didn't. Now IT's saying IT's going to stay. Maybe that means IT's leaving? Who knows.

IT is unpredictable. So I'd recommend monitoring around the clock. Do you need a flashlight and some rations?

[a smell of green grass]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

[TheJackBurton]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

Traps?

[a smell of green grass]

We lost Pietrangelo, ROR, Tarasenko, Barbashev and what has Army's chosen rebuild path gotten us in return? Anybody have a clue?

Why yes, I do. With those 4 players, along with throw-ins Mikkola and Acciari, the Blues received:
25th pick (Otto Stenberg)
29th pick (Theo Lindstein)
Zach Dean
56th pick (Lucas Fischer)
76th pick (Juraj Pekarcik)
95th pick (Adam Jecho)
Sammy Blais
Hunter Skinner
Adam Gaudette
Mikhail Abramov

Obviously they got nothing for Petro. He walked as a UFA. But for the other three they got 2 top prospects, 3 solid prospects, 1 maybe prospect and scraps. You’re just not patient enough to see it through. Already declaring them failures because for some reason these teenagers aren’t NHL stars yet.

Fair enough. Point well made. Maybe more patience is required.

Snuggerud is a success story I think, so that is a good point in Army's favor.

I'm not declaring them a failure because they aren't NHL stars yet.

I fear that they are failures because:
-Armstrong says nothing about them
-The internet says nothing about them
-They are not dominating in their leagues
-Army's track record
-The odds of low draft picks actually making an impact in the NHL

You seem really hung up on Army not discussing prospects yesterday. It was a press conference on the end of the regular season. Neither he nor the media were focused on prospects. That doesn’t mean Army doesn’t have opinions on them. I bet he and Tim Taylor will have much more to say on them in June. Expect tons of sound bites on the prospects on July when most of them are in town for prospects camp. He was asked yesterday specifically about Stenberg, Kaskimaki, Peterson and Buchinger. He gave fair answers. Was way higher on Kaskimaki than I expected actually. Would it have been nice if someone had asked him about more guys? Sure. Is the fact they didn’t or he didn’t just randomly volunteer his opinions on the entire prospect pool somehow mean they’re failures? Of course not. That’s ridiculous.

What exactly are you expecting the internets to say?

Dvorsky absolutely dominated the AHL relative to his age. He dominated the OHL at age 18. He would’ve absolutely destroyed the OHL at age 19 but was so good he moved up to pro hockey a year early. Stenberg and Lindstein didn’t dominate but again, were in pro leagues. If they had been in Jrs I have every confidence they would’ve absolutely dominated.

Army’s track record is good. As has been shown, you’re just wrong. And it’s really not even his track record. It’s the track record of Tony Fentrin and Bill Armstrong and Jarmo Kekelainen before him.

Agree most draft picks don’t make it…which is why it’s all the more impressive that all of the draft analysis shows that the Blues are more successful than average in finding players in the draft.

Ok. Fair enough. I hope that you are correct.

When I read other town's newspapers, I see success stories brewing regarding their prospects, and it bothers me to not see the same for our guys.

IMHO
Army would not be saying "the rebuild or whatever is OVER NOW", and "we can stop talking about it now" if he was confident in his prospects. The windbag would be blowing his horn daily. He wants all eyes on the goal of "5% better next year". That's all. That's it. If our prospects were great, he would be telling us that he can't wait for them to get here--like he did with Snuggerud.

Like you say though.... We shall see. Till then, I'm going to be looking under the hood.

[sdaltons]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

So the part you aren't getting is their star players were drafted 8 years ago and over 10 years ago. The terrible years weren't recent, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

And since then, with all those guys on their roster, they've managed a couple more wins than Army's Blues and the same number of Cups.

[STL fan in MN]

We lost Pietrangelo, ROR, Tarasenko, Barbashev and what has Army's chosen rebuild path gotten us in return? Anybody have a clue?

Why yes, I do. With those 4 players, along with throw-ins Mikkola and Acciari, the Blues received:
25th pick (Otto Stenberg)
29th pick (Theo Lindstein)
Zach Dean
56th pick (Lucas Fischer)
76th pick (Juraj Pekarcik)
95th pick (Adam Jecho)
Sammy Blais
Hunter Skinner
Adam Gaudette
Mikhail Abramov

Obviously they got nothing for Petro. He walked as a UFA. But for the other three they got 2 top prospects, 3 solid prospects, 1 maybe prospect and scraps. You’re just not patient enough to see it through. Already declaring them failures because for some reason these teenagers aren’t NHL stars yet.

Fair enough. Point well made. Maybe more patience is required.

Snuggerud is a success story I think, so that is a good point in Army's favor.

I'm not declaring them a failure because they aren't NHL stars yet.

I fear that they are failures because:
-Armstrong says nothing about them
-The internet says nothing about them
-They are not dominating in their leagues
-Army's track record
-The odds of low draft picks actually making an impact in the NHL

You seem really hung up on Army not discussing prospects yesterday. It was a press conference on the end of the regular season. Neither he nor the media were focused on prospects. That doesn’t mean Army doesn’t have opinions on them. I bet he and Tim Taylor will have much more to say on them in June. Expect tons of sound bites on the prospects on July when most of them are in town for prospects camp. He was asked yesterday specifically about Stenberg, Kaskimaki, Peterson and Buchinger. He gave fair answers. Was way higher on Kaskimaki than I expected actually. Would it have been nice if someone had asked him about more guys? Sure. Is the fact they didn’t or he didn’t just randomly volunteer his opinions on the entire prospect pool somehow mean they’re failures? Of course not. That’s ridiculous.

What exactly are you expecting the internets to say?

Dvorsky absolutely dominated the AHL relative to his age. He dominated the OHL at age 18. He would’ve absolutely destroyed the OHL at age 19 but was so good he moved up to pro hockey a year early. Stenberg and Lindstein didn’t dominate but again, were in pro leagues. If they had been in Jrs I have every confidence they would’ve absolutely dominated.

Army’s track record is good. As has been shown, you’re just wrong. And it’s really not even his track record. It’s the track record of Tony Fentrin and Bill Armstrong and Jarmo Kekelainen before him.

Agree most draft picks don’t make it…which is why it’s all the more impressive that all of the draft analysis shows that the Blues are more successful than average in finding players in the draft.

Ok. Fair enough. I hope that you are correct.

When I read other town's newspapers, I see success stories brewing regarding their prospects, and it bothers me to not see the same for our guys.

IMHO
Army would not be saying "the rebuild or whatever is OVER NOW", and "we can stop talking about it now" if he was confident in his prospects. The windbag would be blowing his horn daily. He wants all eyes on the goal of "5% better next year". That's all. That's it. If our prospects were great, he would be telling us that he can't wait for them to get here--like he did with Snuggerud.

Like you say though.... We shall see. Till then, I'm going to be looking under the hood.

Fair enough. You keep checking the hood, man.

As to the part I bolded, I come to the exact opposite conclusion. He’s declaring the re-whatever over because of what he currently has on the roster, the cap space he has AND the prospect pool he has. He knows he has good reinforcements coming AND some of those prospects can be used to acquire more immediate help as well. Like he did trading Thompson and a 1st for ROR. He expect the team to be good now. No more top 10 picks in the foreseeable future…in part because a lot of the prospects are starting to make an impact or are likely to soon.

[a smell of green grass]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

So the part you aren't getting is their star players were drafted 8 years ago and over 10 years ago. The terrible years weren't recent, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

And since then, with all those guys on their roster, they've managed a couple more wins than Army's Blues and the same number of Cups.

Oh so you need a little bit more data, eh? Let's go back 18 years since Landeskog was drafted 14 years ago, and he has been with them the longest.

The Colorado Avalanche have averaged a win percentage of .517 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

The St. Louis Blues have averaged a win percentage of .547 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

So Colorado has "tanked" 3% worse than St Louis across 18 years. That means that St Louis has won 30 more regular season games across 18 years.
So for the great amount of "tanking", they now have 4 superstars and we have Thomas and Kyrou, and the rest of the TOP 6 that can't score on Hellebuyck in the playoffs.

Face it. Colorado fans don't "feel" like their team tanked any more than St Louis fans do. The only difference is that St Louis fights hard to win every meaningless regular season game at the end of the season--just like they did this year.

[sdaltons]

Convenient that the data includes two of their tank years but cuts off right after we drafted the #1 pick!

[a smell of green grass]

Convenient that the data includes two of their tank years but cuts off right after we drafted the #1 pick!

What year was your Mom born? 20 years ago? What is the magic perfect year number that you want me to go back to? I just picked a number a long time ago.

[sdaltons]

Like I said, very convenient!

Definitely proves you actually do have integrity!!

[LGB73]

BluesTalk is lousy at providing analysis. I get timed out 9 out of 10 times, and then my content is lost. BluesTalk is the Kyrou of Talk forums. It can only do so much.

Summary:

Just consider what the team would look like right now if we only had our drafted players. Throw out Broberg, Holloway, and Fowler.

Colorado would have Landeskog, MacKinnon, Rantanen, and Makar.

No. Our scouting department is lousy, and any list that says otherwise is a worthless read.

Talk about an apples and oranges comparison, or cherry picking your data…..or any other fruit-related thing you can come up with!

So tell me, when did the Blues scouts have the luxury of the 2nd overall pick (Landeskog), 1st overall pick (MacKinnon), 10th overall pick (Rantanen), and 4th overall pick (Makar…who should have gone even higher if Philadelphia didn’t screw the pooch)

The 10th overall pick we used on Dvorsky is the highest pick we have had in years. Otherwise, the Blues have consistently picked in the 20’s. Given where the Blues have picked, they have done really well, and the 2023 draft looks like it could really be a home run.

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

So the part you aren't getting is their star players were drafted 8 years ago and over 10 years ago. The terrible years weren't recent, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

And since then, with all those guys on their roster, they've managed a couple more wins than Army's Blues and the same number of Cups.

Oh so you need a little bit more data, eh? Let's go back 18 years since Landeskog was drafted 14 years ago, and he has been with them the longest.

The Colorado Avalanche have averaged a win percentage of .517 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

The St. Louis Blues have averaged a win percentage of .547 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

So Colorado has "tanked" 3% worse than St Louis across 18 years. That means that St Louis has won 30 more regular season games across 18 years.
So for the great amount of "tanking", they now have 4 superstars and we have Thomas and Kyrou, and the rest of the TOP 6 that can't score on Hellebuyck in the playoffs.

Face it. Colorado fans don't "feel" like their team tanked any more than St Louis fans do. The only difference is that St Louis fights hard to win every meaningless regular season game at the end of the season--just like they did this year.

So for all these high draft picks, Avs haven't accomplished much more than the Blues have drafting in the 20's most of the time.

[TheJackBurton]

Bingo, We have a winner here, folks. A man that GETS IT!!!!!! Finally, sanity enters the rooms like a spring breeze on the porch.

The idiots will only say that the Blues draft great, and look no further. There lips are too firmly attached to Army that they can't see DRAFT RESULTS.

Imagine that folks.... Colorado drafts better than us when they have picks 2, 1, 10, 4, and the Blues have a single 10.

So now that we've established the draft works when you have high picks, let take this one step further.

Next Question for those that can grasp reality and have a brain:
Does anyone remember Colorado TANKING? Does anyone remember Colorado not being a great team? Does anyone remember Colorado being a LOT WORSE than the Blues in regular season results?

Earlier in the thread Sophisticated Shoes illustrated that Buffalo had far more picks in the top 10 than Colorado and hasn't made the playoffs in 13 years. They have had multiple #1s #2s and #4s and haven't gotten players the equivalent of Colorado's. Getting those players is as much of a crapshoot as anything, that's why they are referred to as "generational". Rasmus Dahlin is your typical #1 overall, good quality player with a huge upside, but if he never reaches it then he is likely still an all star a few seasons. Nate MacKinnon is not your typical #1 overall.

Now to answer your other questions: Yes, yes, yes

It's hell to fall into 1 of my traps.

The winning percentage of the Avs for the last 10 years is .549
The winning percentage of the Blues for the last 10 years is .544

So the part you aren't getting is their star players were drafted 8 years ago and over 10 years ago. The terrible years weren't recent, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen.

And since then, with all those guys on their roster, they've managed a couple more wins than Army's Blues and the same number of Cups.

Oh so you need a little bit more data, eh? Let's go back 18 years since Landeskog was drafted 14 years ago, and he has been with them the longest.

The Colorado Avalanche have averaged a win percentage of .517 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

The St. Louis Blues have averaged a win percentage of .547 between May 7, 2007 and May 7, 2025.

So Colorado has "tanked" 3% worse than St Louis across 18 years. That means that St Louis has won 30 more regular season games across 18 years.
So for the great amount of "tanking", they now have 4 superstars and we have Thomas and Kyrou, and the rest of the TOP 6 that can't score on Hellebuyck in the playoffs.

Face it. Colorado fans don't "feel" like their team tanked any more than St Louis fans do. The only difference is that St Louis fights hard to win every meaningless regular season game at the end of the season--just like they did this year.

Now...how many years of god awful hockey did Colorado fans have to deal with to get those players?