Faulk made that play happen, but I doubt anyone will give him credit for it
edit: see a few folks did note that.. good on ya
I am curious how you approach improving the team. Obviously anyone calling for Faulk to be upgraded by a superior hockey player has problems in their life and merely needs a whipping boy as opposed to actually being honest in their belief. So we can dismiss them out of hand. I mean they never even give credit, that's how you know they are making it up.
Faulk made that play happen, but I doubt anyone will give him credit for it
edit: see a few folks did note that.. good on ya
I am curious how you approach improving the team. Obviously anyone calling for Faulk to be upgraded by a superior hockey player has problems in their life and merely needs a whipping boy as opposed to actually being honest in their belief. So we can dismiss them out of hand. I mean they never even give credit, that's how you know they are making it up.
But how does the team get better then?
I'm not in the Faulk bashing crew. I do think he has strengths and weaknesses, good games and bad. But one practical way to help the team and Faulk I think would be to replace him on the PP. I don't think that he's the best choice and I don't think that he has had enough success for the opportunity he's been given going back to last season and prior. I don't have all the stats but I know he had 1 PPG last year. He hasn't had more than 2 PPG in a season in the last 6 years.
Faulk made that play happen, but I doubt anyone will give him credit for it
edit: see a few folks did note that.. good on ya
I am curious how you approach improving the team. Obviously anyone calling for Faulk to be upgraded by a superior hockey player has problems in their life and merely needs a whipping boy as opposed to actually being honest in their belief. So we can dismiss them out of hand. I mean they never even give credit, that's how you know they are making it up.
But how does the team get better then?
I'm not in the Faulk bashing crew. I do think he has strengths and weaknesses, good games and bad. But one practical way to help the team and Faulk I think would be to replace him on the PP. I don't think that he's the best choice and I don't think that he has had enough success for the opportunity he's been given going back to last season and prior. I don't have all the stats but I know he had 1 PPG last year. He hasn't had more than 2 PPG in a season in the last 6 years.
"the Faulk bashing crew" is the entire point of my objection. that it is posited to exist. I guess since I say he needs to upgraded for the Blues to truly contend I'm one of the leaders of "the Faulk bashing crew?"
it's so facile to do this. It undermines discussion & litigates the people instead of the argument
Reading over this, quite a bit of a difference from page 7 on.
I get it though.
I think they are still getting to know each other in many cases. 2 new centers and 2 new wingers makes for chemistry issues.
I think the 3rd pairing needs a veteran dman. Might be a little unfair to Tucker but we are deep, deep, deep in lefties, so if we get a vet 3rd pairing dman it will be a lefty. Can't have essentially 2 rookies making rookie mistakes on the same d pair.
The offense will be fine, but we can't keep taking penalties at the beginning of every period and Bjugstad only getting 5 and a half minutes of ice time yesterday is not good, not good at all. Texier 6 and a half not a whole lot better. Then Joseph with less than 10.
That's 3 players with less than 10 minutes of ice time. It's early in the season, but I hope it isn't a trend Monty falls into.
Faulk made that play happen, but I doubt anyone will give him credit for it
edit: see a few folks did note that.. good on ya
I am curious how you approach improving the team. Obviously anyone calling for Faulk to be upgraded by a superior hockey player has problems in their life and merely needs a whipping boy as opposed to actually being honest in their belief. So we can dismiss them out of hand. I mean they never even give credit, that's how you know they are making it up.
But how does the team get better then?
I'm not in the Faulk bashing crew. I do think he has strengths and weaknesses, good games and bad. But one practical way to help the team and Faulk I think would be to replace him on the PP. I don't think that he's the best choice and I don't think that he has had enough success for the opportunity he's been given going back to last season and prior. I don't have all the stats but I know he had 1 PPG last year. He hasn't had more than 2 PPG in a season in the last 6 years.
"the Faulk bashing crew" is the entire point of my objection. that it is posited to exist. I guess since I say he needs to upgraded for the Blues to truly contend I'm one of the leaders of "the Faulk bashing crew?"
it's so facile to do this. It undermines discussion & litigates the people instead of the argument
He probably needs to be upgraded. From the rumors in the past, DA has tried. The Blues were serious about Dobson ... which would have pushed Faulk down to the 3rd pair ... if he were not included in that trade. Right now there is no upgrade in our system. But the practical answer to something that they could do sooner rather than later is look at moving someone else onto the PP. The PP seems to be one of his weaknesses.
Faulk has not been a problem for us, he's fine. Was one of the very few in the opener that wasn't a minus. If an upgrade is needed anywhere, it's Tucker's spot. Before that shot on Suter's goal, he'd been horrible
How he has looked in the first two games is irrelevant toward building the playoff roster for the next several postseasons. He's not unplayable, he's unplayable at the playoff minutes and situations he is being tasked with. They tried to get Dobson and had they gotten him they'd have dropped Faulk's minutes or moved him.
seattleblue wrote: ↑12 Oct 2025 11:50 am
"the Faulk bashing crew" is the entire point of my objection. that it is posited to exist. I guess since I say he needs to upgraded for the Blues to truly contend I'm one of the leaders of "the Faulk bashing crew?"
You've been around enough to know what a "Bashing Crew" looks like. You could say "I think Army should retire" and that wouldn't make you one of the "Army Bashing Crew". You know what that looks like too.
Faulk needs to be upgraded, He's got one year after this and a M-NTC. If there is a deal to be made, I don't think Army hesitates. Or wait a year and see what's available for what cost. If all else fails, he walks in 2027. He needs to be upgraded if we're trying to win a Cup, We're not there yet.
LewisL wrote: ↑12 Oct 2025 12:49 pm
Faulk has not been a problem for us, he's fine. Was one of the very few in the opener that wasn't a minus. If an upgrade is needed anywhere, it's Tucker's spot. Before that shot on Suter's goal, he'd been horrible
I'm with you here. Faulk has been fine. I think he was even wearing an "A", right?
I do think the third pairing is risky. They apparently like both of them enough not to bring in another vet. The downside is there will be games like yesterday where the top-4 are all on the ice for around 25 minutes. It's my belief Tucker has a ceiling and we've seen it, Mailloux is the one who's going to have to settle things down.
Mr.Snuggleupagus wrote: ↑12 Oct 2025 14:58 pm
Why aren't they giving Broberg power-play minutes, he's better than Faulk offensively.
He's gonna want out if they don't quit jerking him around.
It’s a contract year for him….jk but I hope they take Faulk off soon. His shot has become brutal and his passing is “like a box of chocolates, you never know what you’re going to get”.
