Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Join the discussion about the Blues.

[Complete Blues coverage on STLtoday.com]

Moderators: STLtoday Forum Moderators, Blues Talk Moderators

the miracle
Forum User
Posts: 281
Joined: 24 May 2024 12:14 pm

Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by the miracle »

One random observation deserves another.
skilles
Forum User
Posts: 1639
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:28 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by skilles »

I actually didn't think the Blues played very well at all. Worse than they played in some of the losses for sure IMO.
moose-and-squirrel
Forum User
Posts: 5980
Joined: 20 Dec 2020 10:49 am

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by moose-and-squirrel »

dusting off this sock, eh?
Kilokaai
Forum User
Posts: 120
Joined: 09 Jun 2024 22:01 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by Kilokaai »

I appreciate the snarky thread because of the other one just keep things equal, truth is though we do miss Sunny and Kyrou whether we like it or not.

I've been pretty impressed with Sunny's offensive vision in this (bleep) shoot start of the season. It isn't something I really gave him a ton of credit for but he's looked better in that aspect then previous years. Hopefully, we can string a few decent games together here and keep rotating people through the press box so everyone knows the team can win without them if that is what Monty is trying to do.

I don't think what we did last night was sustainable but I'm all for an experiment to break off the rust we seem to have.
11WSChamps
Forum User
Posts: 3950
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by 11WSChamps »

Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
the miracle
Forum User
Posts: 281
Joined: 24 May 2024 12:14 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by the miracle »

Kilokaai wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:29 am I appreciate the snarky thread because of the other one just keep things equal, truth is though we do miss Sunny and Kyrou whether we like it or not.

I've been pretty impressed with Sunny's offensive vision in this (bleep) shoot start of the season. It isn't something I really gave him a ton of credit for but he's looked better in that aspect then previous years. Hopefully, we can string a few decent games together here and keep rotating people through the press box so everyone knows the team can win without them if that is what Monty is trying to do.

I don't think what we did last night was sustainable but I'm all for an experiment to break off the rust we seem to have.
Glad someone appreciates a little humor 🙂

Admittedly - I haven’t visited the board in several months, I got tired of reading about draft picks/tanking and how much Army blows, etc, etc. After last nights Kyrou benching, I figured there’d be nonstop “I hate Kyrou more than you do posts”, so had to add a little snark.

But, I appreciate your thoughtful post, and I agree. While the end result was good - the Blues really didn’t generate much offense. Holloway and Buch still looked like ghosts out there. Makes me glad Army didn’t take the advice of the group think and offer Holloway 8 million over 8 years after one good season (not a diss on Holloway, but more of a thought that a long term contract for him after one good season seemed a bit premature). Tucker and Kessel (while not the only problems this season), haven’t looked like NHL caliber defensemen at all. Tucker only played 7 minutes last night, and Kessel only 10. I can’t see a future where that’s sustainable.

On the bright side though - Hofer made the saves I would have expected him to make, and I thought Faulk looked good. I can’t see the Blues winning 30 games playing like this, but they won one, and that’s at least a start.
the miracle
Forum User
Posts: 281
Joined: 24 May 2024 12:14 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by the miracle »

skilles wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:23 am I actually didn't think the Blues played very well at all. Worse than they played in some of the losses for sure IMO.
Totally fair point, and no disagreements here. I know a lot of folks like Tucker, and I will too as long as he wears the Blue note, but he's been terrible this year. It wasn't surprising to me that he only played 7 minutes last night and the Blues were better defensively.

By no means is he the only issue on this team, but its going to be a tough slog through the season if the bottom half of this roster can't be competitive.
TruBlueFan_1970
Forum User
Posts: 1587
Joined: 23 May 2024 16:32 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by TruBlueFan_1970 »

11WSChamps wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:39 am Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
100% true. They looked disjointed against a mediocre Sabre team. They were outshot something like 27-17 but Hofer had a solid game. Against a stronger opponent, they lose playing like that. A win is a win though, so I’m happy about that though.
Last edited by TruBlueFan_1970 on 07 Nov 2025 09:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
the miracle
Forum User
Posts: 281
Joined: 24 May 2024 12:14 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by the miracle »

11WSChamps wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:39 am Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
Hofer looked good - which was a big relief.

I'm on the fence about Joseph. He has flashes where he uses his speed, drives the net, and spurs offense for his line mates that give me hope he could do it consistently and make the Blues third line actually look like a threat. But then he'll vanish for a few games. He was absolutely noticeable last night though - just wish he was that noticeable all the time.
Kilokaai
Forum User
Posts: 120
Joined: 09 Jun 2024 22:01 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by Kilokaai »

the miracle wrote: 07 Nov 2025 09:00 am
skilles wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:23 am I actually didn't think the Blues played very well at all. Worse than they played in some of the losses for sure IMO.
Totally fair point, and no disagreements here. I know a lot of folks like Tucker, and I will too as long as he wears the Blue note, but he's been terrible this year. It wasn't surprising to me that he only played 7 minutes last night and the Blues were better defensively.

By no means is he the only issue on this team, but its going to be a tough slog through the season if the bottom half of this roster can't be competitive.
Mentioned in another thread but the Blues are playing with 3 6th defensemen at the moment. They could really use a 5th real NHLer to help those guys. Mixing up the other pairings to provide that across the pairings hurts their effectiveness and consistency. I said in another thread that someone on 101 mentioned that Tucker having such a good stint and then getting injured really hurt the ability for Army to project his continued success.

We probably should have entertained keeping Leddy/Suter around in hindsight, but that is totally 20/20 hindsight.
Kilokaai
Forum User
Posts: 120
Joined: 09 Jun 2024 22:01 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by Kilokaai »

the miracle wrote: 07 Nov 2025 09:04 am
11WSChamps wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:39 am Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
Hofer looked good - which was a big relief.

I'm on the fence about Joseph. He has flashes where he uses his speed, drives the net, and spurs offense for his line mates that give me hope he could do it consistently and make the Blues third line actually look like a threat. But then he'll vanish for a few games. He was absolutely noticeable last night though - just wish he was that noticeable all the time.
Joseph plays great when speed and determination are the sauce needed that night. If it is cycling and puck handling he just isn't as good at those, he and Toropchenko are similar players to me but Joseph has a little more shooting touch so he is a good "3rd" liner vs. 4th liner.
bixblues
Forum User
Posts: 80
Joined: 16 Aug 2024 09:32 am

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by bixblues »

Someone said the Blues are playing with 3 #6 Dmen..........I'd argue they are rotating 3 #7 Dmen. I like Joseph and what he brings but if he's one of your best forwards on a nightly basis, that does not bode well. Also agree that a win is a win. Felt like we might turn a corner after Edm but maybe it's after this game??? Fingers crossed.
hotrivets
Forum User
Posts: 2036
Joined: 24 May 2024 07:38 am

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by hotrivets »

Sabres are 4-2-4 last 10 so they may be mediocre but are on a decent streak versus our 2-6-2. They are -5 ytd and we are -18.

Blues played well enough to win and that is the key. No team is great every night and no team plays 100% every night. If they can ramp it up enough to win more than 50% of the time we should have a team worth watching- until some major changes are made.
BluesDom
Forum User
Posts: 560
Joined: 19 Jun 2024 18:16 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by BluesDom »

Sunny should play half the time and in playoffs. He's a force when rested. He cant handle every day duty imo.
Keep these guys motivated.
the miracle
Forum User
Posts: 281
Joined: 24 May 2024 12:14 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by the miracle »

Kilokaai wrote: 07 Nov 2025 09:12 am
the miracle wrote: 07 Nov 2025 09:04 am
11WSChamps wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:39 am Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
Hofer looked good - which was a big relief.

I'm on the fence about Joseph. He has flashes where he uses his speed, drives the net, and spurs offense for his line mates that give me hope he could do it consistently and make the Blues third line actually look like a threat. But then he'll vanish for a few games. He was absolutely noticeable last night though - just wish he was that noticeable all the time.
Joseph plays great when speed and determination are the sauce needed that night. If it is cycling and puck handling he just isn't as good at those, he and Toropchenko are similar players to me but Joseph has a little more shooting touch so he is a good "3rd" liner vs. 4th liner.
I have to admit, I hadn't considered the game plan (cycle vs speed) as having an effect on neutering Joseph's overall game. I'll pay attention a little more over the coming games. Thanks for the insight!
11WSChamps
Forum User
Posts: 3950
Joined: 23 May 2024 13:35 pm

Re: Blues did quite well without Sundqvist

Post by 11WSChamps »

the miracle wrote: 07 Nov 2025 09:04 am
11WSChamps wrote: 07 Nov 2025 08:39 am Hofer is the sole reason the team got that win.

Joseph was noticeable and a few others.

The big money players were silent, again.
Hofer looked good - which was a big relief.

I'm on the fence about Joseph. He has flashes where he uses his speed, drives the net, and spurs offense for his line mates that give me hope he could do it consistently and make the Blues third line actually look like a threat. But then he'll vanish for a few games. He was absolutely noticeable last night though - just wish he was that noticeable all the time.
Agree. Joseph is a bit of an enigma and maybe that's why he's still in the league. Just as you said some nights he's a real shot of energy and other nights poof..

I wonder if Montgomery starts Hofer in the next game based on his play last night.
Post Reply