Stillman also has the Taylor family/Enterprise on his side as well. as long as Enterprise is apart of the ownership of the Blues i think this team now has a legit shot at winning at least 2-3 stanley cups in the future. I also agree with you in the 47 year history this team never had complete backing and financial stability like it finally does now. Also a owner thats very passionate who's at the games and such that alone shows fans he means what he says and cares about the team. Cardinals are the same now only if the Rams will give St.Louis that very same commitmentdweebe wrote:The reason for the negative $30 million is the Checketts group sold the concessions contract for up front cash. As I understand it they only get a tiny sliver of concessionsjstriebel wrote:I can't speak to his intentions, but the "flipping" thing wasn't a reality. His group purchased the Blues for $150 million, but sold them for $120 million.
For their solid fan backing and somewhat above average record: the Blues have never been on solid financial ground in their 47 year history. Sounds like the Stillman led group is finally has the passion and the backing to get things right. (Yes the Lauries had the money. I also don't think they cared one bit about hockey.)
- 284
I know Laurie gets a lot of crap because of the way he left things, and to some extent that's valid. But I've also always thought it was a little unfair.
He took the Blues as far as they'd been in a very long time (and they haven't reached it since—that being the third round). He ranked with the biggest spenders in the league despite that not being the smartest business decision. He wanted a Stanley Cup and he went for it.
Everyone may have been better off had he not gone for the big money players. We'd have had young emerging players, and he wouldn't have been saddled with the huge contracts he eventually decided needed to go and helped he decide he needed to get out. But regardless, he tried HARD to bring a Cup to St. Louis, and I respect that.
It's true that his primary goal was always to bring the NBA to St. Louis, but he didn't treat the Blues as second fiddle to that desire. He just blew it at the end.
He was ALMOST successful in bringing the NBA to St. Louis too. As I recall it, he had a deal in place to buy the Grizzlies, but the NBA insisted he not move them for 5 years. He balked. They sold to Memphis interests the next year and were allowed to move immediately.
As it stands now, I don't think St. Louis is in particularly prime position to land an NBA team unless a motivated buyer emerged to make it happen. Seattle probably tops the list depending on whether they can get their arena plan in a row again the next time a potential move or expansion would happen. KC may be just behind them.
Being a small- to mid-market that already has an NHL team means St. Louis isn't a priority for the NBA. It could happen, but as I said, it would have to be because a potential owner with St. Louis interests made it his priority.
He took the Blues as far as they'd been in a very long time (and they haven't reached it since—that being the third round). He ranked with the biggest spenders in the league despite that not being the smartest business decision. He wanted a Stanley Cup and he went for it.
Everyone may have been better off had he not gone for the big money players. We'd have had young emerging players, and he wouldn't have been saddled with the huge contracts he eventually decided needed to go and helped he decide he needed to get out. But regardless, he tried HARD to bring a Cup to St. Louis, and I respect that.
It's true that his primary goal was always to bring the NBA to St. Louis, but he didn't treat the Blues as second fiddle to that desire. He just blew it at the end.
He was ALMOST successful in bringing the NBA to St. Louis too. As I recall it, he had a deal in place to buy the Grizzlies, but the NBA insisted he not move them for 5 years. He balked. They sold to Memphis interests the next year and were allowed to move immediately.
As it stands now, I don't think St. Louis is in particularly prime position to land an NBA team unless a motivated buyer emerged to make it happen. Seattle probably tops the list depending on whether they can get their arena plan in a row again the next time a potential move or expansion would happen. KC may be just behind them.
Being a small- to mid-market that already has an NHL team means St. Louis isn't a priority for the NBA. It could happen, but as I said, it would have to be because a potential owner with St. Louis interests made it his priority.
Back more specifically on-topic, the Blues are mired in a rough stretch.
They managed just 1 point during a 4-game stretch. They returned home and appeared to be on track dominating Colorado from start to finish with a 3-0 win. But then they went to Nashville and had all the same problems they had during the losing streak, letting one slip away 4-3.
So that's 3 points out of a possible 12, and now they're back out in Cali where they always struggle. Time to put up or shut up as they say.
I'm in favor of a shakeup, but I'm not particularly opinionated on what that shakeup would be. I'd be okay firing Hitch, not because I think he's a bad coach and necessarily deserves it, but just because I wonder if a new voice could take what he's helped establish and make it even better. Sometimes coaches' voices and methods get stale. This seems to happen in hockey more than any other sport. Sometimes it's just time to pass the torch, and I think that could be the case here.
That said, I don't think Hitch is going anywhere until after the season unless things get really bad. So more likely might be a trade of a familiar player. Backes, Oshie, Berglund... I don't know. But they might need to shake up the old guard so to speak.
Or they could do nothing, get back on a winning track, and this will all be an overreaction. Wouldn't be the first time.
They managed just 1 point during a 4-game stretch. They returned home and appeared to be on track dominating Colorado from start to finish with a 3-0 win. But then they went to Nashville and had all the same problems they had during the losing streak, letting one slip away 4-3.
So that's 3 points out of a possible 12, and now they're back out in Cali where they always struggle. Time to put up or shut up as they say.
I'm in favor of a shakeup, but I'm not particularly opinionated on what that shakeup would be. I'd be okay firing Hitch, not because I think he's a bad coach and necessarily deserves it, but just because I wonder if a new voice could take what he's helped establish and make it even better. Sometimes coaches' voices and methods get stale. This seems to happen in hockey more than any other sport. Sometimes it's just time to pass the torch, and I think that could be the case here.
That said, I don't think Hitch is going anywhere until after the season unless things get really bad. So more likely might be a trade of a familiar player. Backes, Oshie, Berglund... I don't know. But they might need to shake up the old guard so to speak.
Or they could do nothing, get back on a winning track, and this will all be an overreaction. Wouldn't be the first time.
The only untouchable is Tarasenko. I wouldn't mind a huge shake up that involves Oshie, Jackman and/or Backes getting shipped out.jstriebel wrote:Back more specifically on-topic, the Blues are mired in a rough stretch.
They managed just 1 point during a 4-game stretch. They returned home and appeared to be on track dominating Colorado from start to finish with a 3-0 win. But then they went to Nashville and had all the same problems they had during the losing streak, letting one slip away 4-3.
So that's 3 points out of a possible 12, and now they're back out in Cali where they always struggle. Time to put up or shut up as they say.
I'm in favor of a shakeup, but I'm not particularly opinionated on what that shakeup would be. I'd be okay firing Hitch, not because I think he's a bad coach and necessarily deserves it, but just because I wonder if a new voice could take what he's helped establish and make it even better. Sometimes coaches' voices and methods get stale. This seems to happen in hockey more than any other sport. Sometimes it's just time to pass the torch, and I think that could be the case here.
That said, I don't think Hitch is going anywhere until after the season unless things get really bad. So more likely might be a trade of a familiar player. Backes, Oshie, Berglund... I don't know. But they might need to shake up the old guard so to speak.
Or they could do nothing, get back on a winning track, and this will all be an overreaction. Wouldn't be the first time.
Just a few thoughts from an avid, not maniacal fan:
I don't Hitch goes anywhere for awhile since he has a Cup to his name. I think we are just coming out of 8 year stretch where the organization severely overhyped its young talent. The "lunch box" line was never really what is was marketed to be as Johnson and Peron were dealt and Bergland and Oshie, while productive at times, are not the caliber of the faces of the true perennial contenders. Finally we have some a guy that is a real game changer in VT and perhaps a more productive supporting cast with the STL line (JS injury not withstanding).
It is concerning that the much celebrated Statsny doesn't seem to be finding a niche or chemistry as quickly as I think we all would like. This is where I don't know enough about the nuts and bolts of hockey to know if this is coaching, a rough patch of personal performance, a bad blend of styles, or just something time will cure.
I don't believe we are in a good situation from a goaltending perspective. Do other teams share the load the way the Blues do? How often are Quick, Crawford, or Rinne taking nights off? Neither Elliot or Allen impress me as dominant goalies. I understand Allen is young and developing, but there just seem to be too many goals given up, even if the team as put the net minders behind the 8 ball from a power play perspective. Marty is Marty and it's cool he's around, but there's no long term comfort there.
The organization has hinted the last month or so that a trade with Boston is looming. I wouldn't be surprised to see Bergland, maybe Oshie go.
The offensive lulls are frustrating. Hopefully they can right the ship tonight and sustain.
Let's Go Blues.
I don't Hitch goes anywhere for awhile since he has a Cup to his name. I think we are just coming out of 8 year stretch where the organization severely overhyped its young talent. The "lunch box" line was never really what is was marketed to be as Johnson and Peron were dealt and Bergland and Oshie, while productive at times, are not the caliber of the faces of the true perennial contenders. Finally we have some a guy that is a real game changer in VT and perhaps a more productive supporting cast with the STL line (JS injury not withstanding).
It is concerning that the much celebrated Statsny doesn't seem to be finding a niche or chemistry as quickly as I think we all would like. This is where I don't know enough about the nuts and bolts of hockey to know if this is coaching, a rough patch of personal performance, a bad blend of styles, or just something time will cure.
I don't believe we are in a good situation from a goaltending perspective. Do other teams share the load the way the Blues do? How often are Quick, Crawford, or Rinne taking nights off? Neither Elliot or Allen impress me as dominant goalies. I understand Allen is young and developing, but there just seem to be too many goals given up, even if the team as put the net minders behind the 8 ball from a power play perspective. Marty is Marty and it's cool he's around, but there's no long term comfort there.
The organization has hinted the last month or so that a trade with Boston is looming. I wouldn't be surprised to see Bergland, maybe Oshie go.
The offensive lulls are frustrating. Hopefully they can right the ship tonight and sustain.
Let's Go Blues.
The probably with a trade with Boston is that the most speculated return is Lucic, and that's more of the same, just a different face.
Anyways, I agree with most of what you're saying. I think Stastny's troubles are a combination of things. Hitch is putting him on some weird lines, but I wouldn't put it all on the coach either. I'm still optimistic that he'll settle in nicely, though.
The one area I disagree with you on is goaltending. If Elliott's healthy, we're in great shape. And I'm a guy who maintained for a long-tim that he was little more than a very good back up. But I'm convinced. He's a legit starter. Really good.
Jake Allen will be that some day, but he's still developing. So he didn't look great when all the pressure fell on him. And Marty is a legend, but a 42-year old legend that hasn't been a very good goalie in a while. We should enjoy watching him and be happy any time he has a good performance.
But even when Elliott was out, the goalies weren't as bad as the numbers looked. Our defense and PK has been brutal. Just hanging the goalies out to dry. When that improves, so will the goaltending. But Elliott's the real deal.
The mix of goalies is 1. Something Hitch likes doing. 2. Something necessitated so that Allen can continue his development. And 3. further necessitated by the legend of Brodeur requiring some playing time (for better or worse). It's also becoming more common throughout the league, though maybe the best of the best still take most of the playing time.
But when the playoffs roll around, Elliott will get the starts. Goaltending is the area I'm the least concerned about.
The Blues finally have the ability to score, but they have to start doing it consistently. And they have to find the dominant defense they used to have. We used to have one of the best PKs and lowest shots allowed averages in the league. But we'd lose low scoring games because we couldn't bury goals. Now we've got the league's best PP and some talented scorers, and we're losing games 4-3 because our defense is bad and our PK is a disaster.
If they can play what's become traditional Blues hockey with that extra scoring punch, they're a great team. But they've gotta get that defense back.
Anyways, I agree with most of what you're saying. I think Stastny's troubles are a combination of things. Hitch is putting him on some weird lines, but I wouldn't put it all on the coach either. I'm still optimistic that he'll settle in nicely, though.
The one area I disagree with you on is goaltending. If Elliott's healthy, we're in great shape. And I'm a guy who maintained for a long-tim that he was little more than a very good back up. But I'm convinced. He's a legit starter. Really good.
Jake Allen will be that some day, but he's still developing. So he didn't look great when all the pressure fell on him. And Marty is a legend, but a 42-year old legend that hasn't been a very good goalie in a while. We should enjoy watching him and be happy any time he has a good performance.
But even when Elliott was out, the goalies weren't as bad as the numbers looked. Our defense and PK has been brutal. Just hanging the goalies out to dry. When that improves, so will the goaltending. But Elliott's the real deal.
The mix of goalies is 1. Something Hitch likes doing. 2. Something necessitated so that Allen can continue his development. And 3. further necessitated by the legend of Brodeur requiring some playing time (for better or worse). It's also becoming more common throughout the league, though maybe the best of the best still take most of the playing time.
But when the playoffs roll around, Elliott will get the starts. Goaltending is the area I'm the least concerned about.
The Blues finally have the ability to score, but they have to start doing it consistently. And they have to find the dominant defense they used to have. We used to have one of the best PKs and lowest shots allowed averages in the league. But we'd lose low scoring games because we couldn't bury goals. Now we've got the league's best PP and some talented scorers, and we're losing games 4-3 because our defense is bad and our PK is a disaster.
If they can play what's become traditional Blues hockey with that extra scoring punch, they're a great team. But they've gotta get that defense back.
First off, as a disclaimer I must admit that selfishly, as an owner of both an Albert Pujols and David Freese jersey, I would love to be able to keep my recently-purchased Oshie jersey current and that influences my opinion of any possible trade. However, on a more relevant note, I think Lucic for Oshie would be a bad trade. Another disclaimer, along with most fans outside of Boston, I think Lucic is a whining d-bag. However his contract is currently worth $6 million, as opposed to Oshie's $4.5 million, and he has 18 points in 36 games played compared to Oshie's 20 in 31 games. For career averages, their points-per-season numbers are also comparable. Neither are putting up awe-inspiring numbers, but why pay extra for what is a statistical wash? The Bruins are interested in clearing cap space, but the Blues aren't exactly in the best situation financially either. So while we had the conversation before about ownership spending to put a winner on the ice despite a poor financial situation, it's hard to justify swapping contracts. Especially since the concern is that Lucic is wearing down due to his bruising style.
I think a lot of this is overreaction, particularly out of frustration from not being able to beat the Hawks. I wouldn't mind a strengthening of the defense, but I think the Blues are real contenders as they are constructed now.
I think a lot of this is overreaction, particularly out of frustration from not being able to beat the Hawks. I wouldn't mind a strengthening of the defense, but I think the Blues are real contenders as they are constructed now.
If Oshie plays like he has the last week, he ought to be off the table unless someone over pays. I wish we knew we'd get consistency from him, though.
He's one of many tantalizing Blues that has never quite reached the potential we thought they had (whether they really did or not).
He's one of many tantalizing Blues that has never quite reached the potential we thought they had (whether they really did or not).
20 goals in the past three games with everyone contributing. Oshie and Backes especially stepping up. Stastny starting to look healthy.
I was watching the Blues game last night on the Hurricanes network and it was awesome to hear their announcers raving about what a great "hockey town" St. Louis is. They were thrilled that a capacity crowd was on their feet for the last 10 minutes of regulation/overtime and was creating such an awesome environment. I realize they were coming from Raleigh and not Montreal or Boston, but it was still good to hear.
- 1,299
St. Louisans are just plain great people and know how to have fun. They are not burdened by the tragedy of uber hipness.
It shows in our parades, our sports fans, our neighborhood bars, our mom and pop stores. We're cool by any measure.
It shows in our parades, our sports fans, our neighborhood bars, our mom and pop stores. We're cool by any measure.
On "Pardon the Interuption" Michael Wilbon has stated numerous times that St. Louis is an unheralded "darn good hockey town". He reiterated that last Monday when the Ingelwood Rams stadium proposal hit and said St. Louis' hockey popularity isn't far off the well-know love of the Cardinals.shimmy wrote:I was watching the Blues game last night on the Hurricanes network and it was awesome to hear their announcers raving about what a great "hockey town" St. Louis is. They were thrilled that a capacity crowd was on their feet for the last 10 minutes of regulation/overtime and was creating such an awesome environment. I realize they were coming from Raleigh and not Montreal or Boston, but it was still good to hear.
^That's very cool, thanks for sharing. The Cards and Blues show what commitment to the region can bring around here.
In an over-caffeinated state yesterday and too much reading about the stadium proposal, it crossed my mind that perhaps the Cardinals and Blues venues could be used for a consistent display of Rams support between now and this fall. At this point in the season, Scottrade is going to be packed, and Busch always gets good national TV time. Is it inappropriate to bring "Keep the Rams" or "STL Rams" signs and such? Various groups often buy bulk tickets in sections and it seems with enough effort some messages could be communicated.
Or step it up as a community even more: Jan 19 the Blues host Stan's Avalanche. How awesome would it be if the Blues organization helped orchestra a "Keep the Rams" or "Let's Go Rams" chant at a key time in the game? I remember in college, sometimes their would be instructions on our seats in the student section with instructions on what to chant when, or what to yell when a certain guy had the ball, etc. 19,000 strong showing support for the new stadium/team/NFL/retention, etc while also supporting the Blues? Sounds good to me. I realize it's a tough thing to do but makes for some fun hypotheticals. Those types of demonstrations would be befitting of our closer knit sports town image vs. a place like LA.
As FS Midwest says...We are Team STL.
In an over-caffeinated state yesterday and too much reading about the stadium proposal, it crossed my mind that perhaps the Cardinals and Blues venues could be used for a consistent display of Rams support between now and this fall. At this point in the season, Scottrade is going to be packed, and Busch always gets good national TV time. Is it inappropriate to bring "Keep the Rams" or "STL Rams" signs and such? Various groups often buy bulk tickets in sections and it seems with enough effort some messages could be communicated.
Or step it up as a community even more: Jan 19 the Blues host Stan's Avalanche. How awesome would it be if the Blues organization helped orchestra a "Keep the Rams" or "Let's Go Rams" chant at a key time in the game? I remember in college, sometimes their would be instructions on our seats in the student section with instructions on what to chant when, or what to yell when a certain guy had the ball, etc. 19,000 strong showing support for the new stadium/team/NFL/retention, etc while also supporting the Blues? Sounds good to me. I realize it's a tough thing to do but makes for some fun hypotheticals. Those types of demonstrations would be befitting of our closer knit sports town image vs. a place like LA.
As FS Midwest says...We are Team STL.
I bet the Blues would want to update Scottrade Center soon, and will probably ask for public money. Could/would providing a subsidy for a new NFL stadium stymie a Blues/Scottrade proposal?
If I had to choose, I would choose the Blues.
If I had to choose, I would choose the Blues.
Isn't that why they backed off trying to get a political convention? Like St. Louis was told to not even bother sending an application in until Scottrade gets fixed up? They've done nothing in the last decade outside of the scoreboard/LED ring, some lights and new (but too small) TVs.stlien wrote:I bet the Blues would want to update Scottrade Center soon, and will probably ask for public money. Could/would providing a subsidy for a new NFL stadium stymie a Blues/Scottrade proposal?
If I had to choose, I would choose the Blues.
I'm not saying Scottrade needs a huge remodel, but it at least needs some updates. I've been to some other arenas the same general age (Chicago, Nashville and Tampa) and it's clear that over a decade of cash shortages has put them behind.
How many NHL owners are going to start wanting this in their building?
Not entirely. STL would've lost the bid (EJ dome not up to par either). No point to waste time going after the DNC 2016 convention. Better to wait until after Arch Grounds renovation etc.dweebe wrote:Isn't that why they backed off trying to get a political convention? Like St. Louis was told to not even bother sending an application in until Scottrade gets fixed up?
Scottrade is in a good spot. It doesn't need an absurd amount of renovation, and it doesn't need replaced. Sometime in the next decade a $50-100 million renovation (if that?) could make it sparkle again.
That's what I'm saying: nothing crazy. Just stuff like paint, tile, new lighting and other "freshening". Maybe hide all those ugly pipes and wires on the 100 concourse.jstriebel wrote:Scottrade is in a good spot. It doesn't need an absurd amount of renovation, and it doesn't need replaced. Sometime in the next decade a $50-100 million renovation (if that?) could make it sparkle again.
I thought they redid the HVAC not long ago but that the ice plant really needs fixing.
- 8,155
What I recall the major reason cited by city leaders for not pursuing the 2016 convention was the commitment to the Arch Grounds.... that overwhelming focus took the attention of government and corporate funding away from what was needed to pull off a successful convention. Public $$-wise, I believe Cleveland is making a few upgrades to its facilities ahead of the convention and is also using the event as a sort of mini-Olympics catalyst for additional public amenities such as treatments to Public Square and a bike/ped bridge over the shoreway from the CBD to the lakefront. Developers are also working to get some projects opened as well.stlien wrote:Not entirely. STL would've lost the bid (EJ dome not up to par either). No point to waste time going after the DNC 2016 convention. Better to wait until after Arch Grounds renovation etc.dweebe wrote:Isn't that why they backed off trying to get a political convention? Like St. Louis was told to not even bother sending an application in until Scottrade gets fixed up?
It'll be interesting to see if Saint Louis makes a bid in 2020... we'll have the hotel rooms, the public spaces and hopefully we could get the facilities up to speed without too much of a $$ commitment.
I doubt $100 million..probably not even $50 million. But the conversation will probably start to happen soon. Definitely before 2020.jstriebel wrote:Scottrade is in a good spot. It doesn't need an absurd amount of renovation, and it doesn't need replaced. Sometime in the next decade a $50-100 million renovation (if that?) could make it sparkle again.
Well, you could do a lot with probably even just $30 million. But if you spent $50-100 you could make it almost like new other than maybe concourse width.stlien wrote:I doubt $100 million..probably not even $50 million. But the conversation will probably start to happen soon. Definitely before 2020.jstriebel wrote:Scottrade is in a good spot. It doesn't need an absurd amount of renovation, and it doesn't need replaced. Sometime in the next decade a $50-100 million renovation (if that?) could make it sparkle again.
But yeah. My real point was that just a small fraction of the cost of a football stadium will take the Scottrade from pretty good back to great.
I agree.jstriebel wrote:Well, you could do a lot with probably even just $30 million. But if you spent $50-100 you could make it almost like new other than maybe concourse width.
But yeah. My real point was that just a small fraction of the cost of a football stadium will take the Scottrade from pretty good back to great.
Yes, in the end it will be a penance compared to a new NFL stadium. But nobody should be surprised in the next few years when the Blues say they need some public help updating the building. Hopefully that will be minimal if Stillman really is cleaning things up and repairing the damage from the Lauries bumbling and Checketts stop-gap measures.jstriebel wrote:Well, you could do a lot with probably even just $30 million. But if you spent $50-100 you could make it almost like new other than maybe concourse width.stlien wrote:I doubt $100 million..probably not even $50 million. But the conversation will probably start to happen soon. Definitely before 2020.jstriebel wrote:Scottrade is in a good spot. It doesn't need an absurd amount of renovation, and it doesn't need replaced. Sometime in the next decade a $50-100 million renovation (if that?) could make it sparkle again.
But yeah. My real point was that just a small fraction of the cost of a football stadium will take the Scottrade from pretty good back to great.
A new center scoreboard would be nice. They had the AFC playoff game on before Saturday's hockey game and it was hard to read the score or time. If it's high-def, it's barely that.
I won't be surprised. And I also won't be upset. It's unlikely the Blues would threaten a move, so they'd mostly just be pleading.
And the pleas would be coming from a local ownership group, who've spent to the cap, and given us dynamic teams in their few years at the helm. They haven't solved the problem of being the Blues (meaning not going far in the playoffs), but it's hard not to be pleased with the ownership.
Not saying we should fork over anything they ask for, but it won't make me mad if they ask for some help.
And the pleas would be coming from a local ownership group, who've spent to the cap, and given us dynamic teams in their few years at the helm. They haven't solved the problem of being the Blues (meaning not going far in the playoffs), but it's hard not to be pleased with the ownership.
Not saying we should fork over anything they ask for, but it won't make me mad if they ask for some help.
- 1,864
Speaking of facility renovations and/or upgrades, I heard some clatter through the Blues a while back about a possible pedestrian bridge on the south side of Scottrade towards the Civic Center Metrolink station. I saw a decent rendering too, but haven't heard anything in quite some time. Anyone know if that project ever gained legs or was just one of those exploratory ideas?