THE WATERCOOLER

QUESTION: The St. Louis Blues’ recent success has put them in position to make a run at a playoff spot. It also has muddied the trade deadline waters. What do you think the Blues should do at the trade deadline: Be buyers, sellers or stand pat with the team that got them to this point? Is it worth trading off any of the youngsters for a veteran presence?

JEREMY RUTHERFORD
The Blues should stand pat. I was one who said that this team would not make the playoffs, but some way, somehow they’ve managed to put themselves in a good position. The bottom line is they can’t fool with the chemistry they’ve created. Regarding the question should the Blues trade a young player for veteran help, the answer is no. Even if the team should make the playoffs it is not a Stanley Cup contender. The Blues should continue following the same plan they’ve had all along.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
Stay the course. Do not trade good young players or top prospects for short-term gain. The only way it would make sense to mortgage some of the future is if the Blues honestly believed they had a chance to win the Stanley Cup this season. And they don’t. They are playing very good hockey with what they have. There is no reason to bail out and become a seller. And there is no reason to mess with a bright future by making an impulsive, short-sighted move. Stay the course.

JEFF GORDON
The Blues should stand pat unless another team spits up a No. 1 pick to rent Keith Tkachuk. That would be too good to pass up. Otherwise, the team should skate with what it has. It is really playing well. I wouldn’t overpay hoping to make it better, though, because everything is overpriced at the deadline. The Blues have made that mistake before — and that is one reason why this franchise has never built a Cup winner.

DAN O’NEILL
Realistically, I don’t think the Blues are in a position to make a significant trade. What they need most right now is scoring help, and it’s hard to imagine they have the chips to get a player who would have much impact. Trading a scoring threat (Keith Tkachuk) for a scoring threat doesn’t make much sense, unless it is a player you can build with for the future.

That said, if there are no plans to resign Tkachuk, it would be crazy not to explore moving him, and in that regard it may behoove the team to make a deal. You hate to mess with the chemistry right now, and everyone hopes the team can make the playoffs. But realistically, is it going anywhere in the playoffs? Unlikely. So if you have a chance to help yourself by moving Tkachuk, it would make sense to do so. There is also the possibility they will find a team (Buffalo?) willing to deal for a veteran goaltender (Manny Legace). The former Blues starter has a shutout and has allowed 17 goals in eight games at Peoria.

In the big picture, the Blues should stick to their guns and keep their young players. I would hate to see them deal one of their promising newcomers (David Perron) for the purposes of making the playoffs. The goal should be to win in the playoffs, not make them.

TOM TIMMERMANN
Even if the Blues make the playoffs, no one should expect them to go past the first round. For the Blues, the victory will be getting into the postseason. If you can get a good price for a veteran like Tkachuk, you make that deal. But other than that, I think the core group of Blues has to stay intact. I don’t think this team is one player away from being significantly better. (Well, maybe if that one player was Crosby or Ovechkin, but not Pronger.) It’s not as if John Davidson is fine-tuning his roster for the stretch drive. Teams historically overpay at the trade deadline. The Blues are not in a position to overpay. The ideal kind of trade for the Blues was the one earlier this season where they got Steen and Colaiacovo for Stempniak, getting two contributors for the price of one. It’s hard to make those at the deadline. So at this point, “Standing Pat Except for Tkachuk” is probably the best course of action.

KEVIN WHEELER (Host of “Sports Open Line” on KMOX)
I would be aggressively looking to buy but also be more than happy to stand pat if the price of doing business isn’t agreeable. There is no need for a desperation move. If I could pull something off that made a significant difference I would do it. It’s almost unfair to even mention Chris Pronger’s name but since it’s already out there in the rumor mill I’ll go ahead and say that if I could get a player of that caliber I’d pull the trigger. I just wouldn’t move Backes, Berglund, Oshie, Johnson, Polak or any of the established forwards on the NHL roster to get it done.

The Blues have more than enough prospects for the future and, let’s be honest, you can’t possibly count on having 15-20 young, homegrown players on your team in the next year or two. There are two reasons professional sports franchises need a strong developmental system: to create cheap talent that you can add to your roster periodically and to have the ability to acquire established impact players via trade.

You never say “never” when it comes to the possibility of selling off a player or two, it just depends on what is offered. I would have to really “win” the trade to move anyone of significance off this team right now. Short of reaching the playoffs, which is the primary objective, this team needs a strong finish to give them a jumping off point for 2009-2010.

****

MIDDAY NEWS AND THOUGHTS

PEAVY TALK STILL SWIRLS AROUND CUBS: For those who thought a Jake Peavy-to-the-Cubs deal was dead, it appears there still might be some life to it. The Chicago Tribune is reporting today that there are still plenty of reasons to believe a deal could be consumated before the start of the season. Peavy, 27, leads all National League pitchers with 1,256 strikeouts since his big-league debut in 2002. If the Cubs are able to somehow land Peavy, it would give the North Siders a starting rotation of five pitchers that would be considered No. 1-type pitchers for many clubs — not a Joel Pineiro to be found. Stay tuned.

NOTHING TO SNEEZE AT: Many Cardinal fans have questioned the club’s logic in not re-signing free agent pitcher Braden Looper. Perhaps the news that Looper suffered an oblique-strain after feeling a twinge while sneezing last week alters that perspective. As of now, the Brew Crew is unsure whether or not Looper will be available at season’s start. Can you imagine the gnashing of teeth in Cardinal Nation if fans here were not only holding their breath on Chris Carpenter’s return, but also had to worry about every time Looper sneezed? Ach-choo. Bless you.

****

SOMETHING TO PONDER

JUST HAVING SOME FUN: The folks at ESPN.com are having a little fun with NFL defensive tackle Albert Haynesworth’s new $100 million free agency contract. You just punch in your annual salary and they tell you how long it takes Haynewsorth to earn your wages. Check it out, it’s kind of fun and gives you some perspective on just what kind of money pro athletes make.

****

STAT OF THE DAY

7,075 — Most offensive yards gained in an NFL season. The feat was accomplished by the 2000 St. Louis Rams. The 1984 Miami Dolphins are second with 6,936 yards and the 1998 San Francisco 49ers are third with 6,800 yards. (Source: NFL Fact and Record Book)

THE WATERCOOLER

THE SHOWDOWN: Break down this Sunday’s Missouri-Kansas matchup in Lawrence and tell us who wins and why.

BERNIE MIKLASZ
This will be a difficult setting for the Mizzou Tigers. The team is obviously playing with a lot of confidence these days, and that will help the cause. This should be a terrific game: a renewal of a wonderful rivalry that will showcase two ascending teams. I have to give the edge to KU. The Jayhawks haven’t lost at home in a long time, and Allen Fieldhouse is one of the most imposing and impressive settings in college basketball. The young Tigers are almost ready to snatch a game at KU, but not quite yet. The Jayhawks should have won in Columbia but discovered that this was a different kind of Mizzou team: one that won’t back down. It’s almost as if KU, accustomed to so many recent surrenders by MU basketball, was caught off guard by Mizzou’s resilient comeback. I don’t think that will happen this time. Kansas won’t be surprised by MU’s aggression. And KU’s floor leader, Sherron Collins, will finish strong. He faded down the stretch in the first encounter.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 82, Missouri 76.

JEFF GORDON
Missouri is rolling. The Tigers have 11 guys playing with confidence. Their kids aren’t kids anymore. It’s easy to build a scenario where they upset the Jayhawks on the road. If they take care of the basketball and hit their shots, they can use their superior depth to beat anybody anywhere. But . . . Bill Self is a great coach, KU will be jacked up at home and the Jayhawks will hit their shots this time. The Jayhawks had a chance to blow the Tigers off the court in Columbia and they blew their opportunity. Sunday, the shots go down.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 91, Missouri 84

VAHE GREGORIAN
The game figures to have a totally different complexion than the first. The Jayhawks won’t commit 27 turnovers again, the Tigers won’t be held to 16 points in the first half and MU also won’t be able to overcome repeated double-digit deficits again. If KU gets up big early, the Tigers will keep playing but KU will stiffarm them away and win comfortably. If MU keeps it close in the first half, the ending should be similar to the sizzling one in Columbia. I think the Tigers are too good at this stage to let it get out of control and should be another great game.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 73, Missouri 70

DAN O’NEILL
It’s an interesting game to analyze based on the crazy last meeting, which Missouri won 62-60 at Mizzou Arena. On one hand, Missouri was fortunate to win at home, benefiting from a late Kansas meltdown. On the other hand, Missouri won despite playing poorly for two-thirds of the game. Soooo … if the Tigers play well from the get-go this time, what happens? Here are some factors:

• Good start: Hard to believe the Tigers won last time after scoring just 16 points in the first half — they trailed 30-16. Hard to believe they could have a similar start this time and still be in the building for the second half.

• Missouri’s defense: It caused 27 Kansas turnovers in the last meeting, and it will have to be at its chaos-creating best to disrupt the Jayhawks and quiet the Allen Fieldhouse crowd. Missouri had 13 steals in the last game, they will need at least that many this time.

• 3-point shooting: MU leads the Big 12 in 3-point shooting defense, and that will be important. Like many teams, KU tends to struggle offensively without 3-point injections. The Jayhawks were just 2 of 15 from the arch last time. Meanwhile, Missouri was 2 of 14, and it must do better, must get Matt Lawrence (0 for 2) more involved.

• Rebounding: Missouri was outrebounded 48-28 last time — yikes! A lot of that had to do with shooting the ball poorly. The Tigers were 7 of 29 from the field during the first half in the last game.
• Free Throws: The first meeting, Mizzou was 1 for 4 from the line in the first half, 17 of 23 in the second. The Tigers have to hope DeMarre Carroll can wear out a path to the line this time.

• Sherron Collins: KU’s excellent guard is coming off a 26-point performance against Oklahoma and is fourth in the Big 12 in scoring average (18.3). Hear that J.T. Tiller? That’s your man.

Both teams have momentum, with KU coming off a big win at Oklahoma and Missouri riding a seven-game streak. But winning at Kansas will be a tall order for the Tigers.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 87, Missouri 79

TOM TIMMERMANN
First off, show of hands: How many people expected the Mizzou basketball team to be ranked higher than the football team? Mizzou won the last meeting because Kansas came apart down the stretch, and still, if one or two iffy calls had gone the other way, the Jayhawks would have won in Columbia. KU, no doubt rattled by what the Tigers threw at them, committed gobs of turnovers. They’ll be better composed in Lawrence. If KU hangs on to the ball, that will be a major difference.

Normally, I say pick against the team coming off a big win, like KU’s at No. 3 Oklahoma. But, 1) almost a week has passed since that game; 2) Oklahoma didn’t have Blake Griffin, so that takes some of the luster off the win; and 3) what the Jayhawks have been hearing around campus all week hasn’t been, “good job against Oklahoma,” it’s been, “Beat Missouri.” I think Sherron Collins will do better than the 9 points he had last time and Tyshawn Taylor will do better than his 11.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 64, Missouri 56

KATHLEEN NELSON
Two factors work against Missouri. The Tigers will need a more consistent performance than the spotty effort they mustered in beating the Jayhawks in Columbia. In addition, KU’s tough at home.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 82, Missouri 78

MIKE SMITH
Coach Self will sell this one to his players as being the equivalent of a national championship game. Feeding off the fan frenzy, the Jayhawks will respond accordingly. And if I’m Self, or any other coach with a physical post man like Aldrich, I pound it inside against Mizzou for 40 minutes. Lyons will back off soon as he sees that’s the strategy, saddling Carroll with the impossible task of singlehandedly stopping the inside game. Translation: He’ll foul out.
FINAL SCORE: Kansas 69, Missouri 57.

****

MIDDAY NEWS AND THOUGHTS

MANNY REJECTS TWO-YEAR, $45 MILLION OFFER: You saw my thoughts yesterday that Manny Ramirez would be crazy to turn down the Dodgers offer. Still, it appears his agent Scott Boras has done just that. And I’m not the only one who thinks he’s nuts. Bill Plaschke of the Los Angeles Times writes today: “This week, by every stretch of the wildest imagination, the Dodgers made Manny Ramirez a no-lose proposition. By rejecting it Thursday, Ramirez has officially lost it. He’s lost his dignity. He’s lost his perspective. He’s lost his marbles.”

Plaschke also has some pointed words for Boras. You should check out his column today.

REDSKINS AT IT AGAIN: Redskins owner Dan Snyder desperately wants to win. He just hasn’t figured out yet that throwing money around isn’t always the way to get it done (See: New York Yankees.) Still, Snyder pulled out the wallet Thursday night and kept it out until the wee hours Friday in an attempt to build a winner in Washington.

First, Snyder ponied up a six-year, $54 million deal ($22.5 million guaranteed) to retain DeAngelo Hall. The deal made Hall one of the league’s highest paid cornerbacks. But at that point Snyder was just getting started, because as soon as free agency opened around midnight, he signed DT Albert Haynesworth to a seven-year, $100 million deal ($41 million guaranteed.)

It’s not Snyder spending money that I find surprising … it’s just how he spent it. Hall was actually cut by the Raiders last season after eight games. Cut. By the Raiders. He ended up with Washington and finished the season on a high note. But a $54 million high note? I don’t know. As to Haynesworth hitting the free-agent jackpot … I know he was one of the most coveted free agents on the market this year, but do you really spend $100 million on an interior defensive lineman?

Snyder has swung and missed on many big-name free agents in the past, but who knows, maybe this is the year he gets it right. Time will tell if it was money well spent.

****

SOMETHING TO PONDER

WEDNESDAY ROUND 2 REDUX:
WILL TKACHUK BE A HALL OF FAMER?

My friend Kevin Wheeler, who hosts “Sports Open Line” on KMOX, stated his case earlier this week in this space for why he thought St. Louis Blues forward Keith Tkachuk is unquestionably a Hall of Famer. Not everyone agreed. In the spirit of debate, Kevin went back to work and offers up the following to support his case:

FROM KEVIN: After giving this subject a little more thought, because I’m a sports guy and that’s what I do, I decided to do a little more research on the subject of Keith Tkachuk and the Hall of Fame. The raw numbers I presented in Wednesday’s Round Two were pretty compelling, but what I found when I dug a little deeper was even better.

With a little extra time on my hands I sat down and compared Tkachuk to Hall of Famers Glenn Anderson, Bernie Federko, Dale Hawerchuk, Joe Mullen and Peter Stastny. What I looked at was the number of goals each scored per game compared to the number of goals scored per game overall in the NHL during their respective careers.

Even the least-experienced hockey fans recognize the fact that offense in the NHL is not what it used to be. Goals are harder than ever to come by, even after a bunch of rules changes, but I don’t think people truly understand how much scoring has decreased over the last 15 years.

Here’s how Tkachuk’s goals per game rate stacks up against the aforementioned Hall of Famers:

Goals per game
Tkachuk - 0.47
Anderson - 0.44
Hawerchuk - 0.44
Federko - 0.37
Mullen - 0.47
Stastny - 0.46

Tkachuk scores more per game than anyone on that list except Mullen, which kind of surprised me. Even in an era where fewer goals are being scored on a nightly basis, Walt’s scoring rate compares favorably with five guys who were no-brainers for the Hall.

I also looked the points per game rate:

Points per game
Tkachuk - 0.93
Anderson - 0.97
Hawerchuk - 1.19
Federko - 1.13
Mullen - 1.00
Stastny - 1.27

He’s at the bottom of the barrel here but within a whisker of Anderson and Mullen.

The numbers below signify the average goals scored per game in the NHL from the first year each player stepped into the league until the day they retired.

Total goals scored per game
Tkachuk era - 5.51
Anderson era - 7.28
Hawerchuk era - 7.25
Federko era - 7.48
Mullen era - 7.17
Stastny era - 7.35

In other words, there were roughly 25% more goals scored during the careers of the five Hall of Famers than there were during Tkachuk’s career.

Tkachuk has played in the NHL equivalent of baseball’s “Dead Ball Era” yet he still scores goals at the same rate as Hall of Famers who played in the high-flying offensive years.

Voters may or may not consider these kinds of facts when the time comes, preferring to fall back on lazy critiques that are more about the teams Tkachuk has played for than on what he’s accomplished as an individual, but they should at least do the amount of digging I was able to do between the 2nd and 3rd period of the Blues-Stars game Thursday night.

Nothing can “prove” that Tkachuk will he in the Hall someday because voters are human and humans can be a little goofy, but I think his case is outstanding even if has yet to play for a team good enough to win the Stanley Cup.

****

STAT OF THE DAY

548 — Most career homers hit by a player who played his entire career for only one franchise. Philadelphia’s Mike Schmidt leads the list. Here’s the top 20, along with their HR totals and the team they played for:

1. Mike Schmidt, 548, PHI
2. Mickey Mantle, 536, NYY
3. Ted Williams, 521, BOS
4, Ernie Banks, 512, CHC
5. Mel Ott, 511, NYG
6. Lou Gehrig, 493, NYY
7. Willie Stargell, 475, PIT
8. STAN MUSIAL, 475, STL
9. Carl Yastrzemski, 452, BOS
10. Jeff Bagwell, 449, HOU
11. Cal Ripken, 431, BAL
12. Chipper Jones, 408, ATL
13. Al Kaline, 399, DET
14. Johnny Bench, 389, CIN
15. Jim Rice, 382, BOS
16. Joe DiMaggio, 361, NYY
17. ALBERT PUJOLS, 319, STL
18. George Brett, 317, KC
19. Todd Helton, 310, COL
20. Edgar Martinez, 309, SEA

(SOURCE: Baseballreference.com)