Isn’t It A Little Late For This?

by Brad Lee on Mar 10, 2008 11:04 AM CDT

Yet more photographic proof of the Blues not scoring.

By Brad Lee

While looking around the Internets for news about the St. Louis Blues, sometimes what we read makes us pause. And then scratch our heads. And then squint at the monitor making sure we understand what we're reading.

Such a head-scratching experience happened this morning while reading a Jeremy Rutherford story about the Blues trying to figure out why they haven't scored more goals this year. Kudos to J.R. for doing a bangup job on his beat. He's been the Post's Blues guy since the lockout, meaning he's covered possibly the worst stretch of time in franchise history. We can relate since most of the folks who work on Game Time started doing underground hockey "journalism" when GT started after the lockout. But this story below amazes us (J.R. in bold).

Blues to analyze why they haven't put more pucks in net

When Blues management sits down to analyze the 2007-08 season, President John Davidson said, the answer everyone will be seeking is why the Blues failed to score more regularly.

The word "to" in the headline is interesting. That implies the Blues haven't done this yet. You think the coaches just picked up the paper one day and said, "Hey, in this GF column, we have a really low number compared to most teams. Whadya think that means?" And then the lead of the story says J.D. will be looking for that answer when analyzing the season. You think he has April 6 circled on his calendar for that task?

While their 2.5 goals-per-game average suggests they can pull it off, the Blues still need 11 goals in their final 14 games to avoid a franchise record for fewest goals in a season (177 in 1967-68).

That's an interesting paragraph. First of all Rutherford did something really, really lazy. He looked at the NHL standings to figure out that the Blues have scored 167 goals on the season. But if he had looked on the NHL stats page and looked under Goals For to see that the Blues have actually scored 165. The difference is that the standings page counts total score including shootouts. Why the NHL does this and has contrary Goals For totals on two different pages on their own Web site is beyond me. If no player gets credit in his statistics for a shootout goal, then the team shouldn't either in its team total. So they need 13 to not be the lowest scoring team in Blues history.

What's also amazing is that the 2005-06 team that finished dead last in the NHL standings that season wasn't the lowest scoring Blues team ever. Nooooo. That team scored 193 goals. That was Mike Kitchen's only full season as the Blues head coach. To think that the Blues need to score 28 more goals in 14 games just to tie that team is reason enough to start drinking before noon.

"For whatever reason, we haven't scored and we have to figure out why," Davidson said Sunday, one day after the Blues' 4-2 loss to Vancouver, in which they got both goals from team leader Brad Boyes (Nos. 33 and 34).When asked whether he had any leads on the Blues' scoring problems, Davidson responded: "No … there's a lot of variables that we'll have to sift through."

Here are some variables: Paul Kariya has apparently forgotten how to score or make a pass that leads to a score. The leading Blues goal scorer last year, Lee Stempniak, has 11 goals. David Perron has only played 48 games. Erik Johnson leads defensemen in goals with four. Bradley Boyes has seen stretches where he struggled. Before netting thos two, he hadn't scored in eight straight games. The varying variables have varied between shitty and crappy.Through the first 41 games of the season, the Blues scored 107 goals, or 2.6 per game. They had a record of 22-14-5 in that stretch, placing them second in the Central Division and eighth in the Western Conference with several games in hand. Ahhhh, those were the days. To score 2.6 per game, good for 2oth in the NHL, was truly living a charmed life. How I miss those days.

But in their last 27 games, the Blues have totaled 60 goals, or 2.2 per game. That figure includes back-to-back five-goal games against Columbus and Chicago; take those two games out and the average is about two goals per game since the halfway point.

Where is that bartender when you need him?

It was after those wins over Columbus and Chicago — Feb. 17 and 19 — that the Blues headed out West and appeared poised to make a playoff push. Since then, however, the Blues have scored only 10 goals in nine games and, as a result, they are 1-7-1 in those games.

It was also during this time that we kept seeing on-screen promos for Playoff Push Packs. Apparently the Blues marketing department has a weird sense of humor.

"That was a key part of the season to me, because we were still in it," Davidson said. "We played hard, but the puck wouldn't go in."Davidson feels the team has continued to play hard despite the limited results."The one promise we made to the fans was we wouldn't be outworked," Davidson said. "I'd like to see us stay with that, win some games, get confident again. I'm not going to have this season be completely wasted. We want to think about the good things … the emergence of Erik Johnson, the play of Manny Legace, the penalty kill. There's been some good things happen."

It's much easier for Davidson to make that statement about the Blues not getting outworked after a good game in Vancouver Saturday. With games tonight in Calgary and Tuesday night in Edmonton, we'll see if the team sticks to that one promise.

Are you buying Davidson's spin in the last paragraph? Tell us in the comments.

Tweet Comment 12 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

NO SALE

I defy the team to make me feel confident about them this year [note that I mean “at all” and not “again” after all the times I have gone into my “I’ll never see them score again” funks.

My low expectations [to have hovered near the 8th playoff slot] have been met for the most part. I admire the team’s refusal to quit, but we started 07-08 lacking goal scoring and a legit #1 center and we will end with the needs intact.

A bottom three league finish remains possible — play Hannu, audition Rivermen to fill scoring roles and hope for a favorable draft lotto draw.

The Blues have always been victimized by their modest success — good enough to get into and hang around the playoffs a round or two, but never bad enough to get the sort of scoring help they need via the entry draft. We have had teams capable of hoisting, but all ended up flaming out somehow — most recently from center ice off the stick of Owen Nolan.

by brian on Mar 10, 2008 11:51 AM CDT reply actions

Brad, I believe that review of this season is called a “Post Mortem” since our playoff hopes are dead.
I think that JD’s comments at the end are very telling.
"I’m not going to have this season be completely wasted. We want to think about the good things … the emergence of Erik Johnson, the play of Manny Legace, the penalty kill. There’s been some good things happen."

What that means to me is this season has taken a very disappointing turn for this organIzation. The only things he lists as positives are EJ, Emmanuel and the penalty kill. That is one heck of a short list of positives for almost an entire season. If they can end the season with a good strong run, it will be easier to stomach. If they don’t, there is always a chance at a very high draft pick like Stamkos to look forward to.

by Chris on Mar 10, 2008 12:48 PM CDT reply actions

I wonder if JD will spend more time on his analysis than “We don’t have enough guys that can score consistently.” If so, it will be wasted.

He undersells the bright spots, too. Boyes is a bright spot. Getting Andy MacDonald for Weight was a bright spot. Don’t forget the Cam Cam.

by LeNoceur on Mar 10, 2008 1:13 PM CDT reply actions

Personally, seeing Game Time held up on the jumbotron like it has a centerfold was a bright spot.

by Brad Lee on Mar 10, 2008 1:31 PM CDT reply actions

More bright spots:

- Matt Walker scored a goal

- Blues named a captain

- Taco promotion didn’t cost as much as expected

- We got a furry blue mascot

- Attendance is way up so a lot more people get to see Kariya miss the net and pass into defenders’ legs

- The referee mics usually work once or twice a month

(help me out here)

by Mr. Particle on Mar 10, 2008 3:47 PM CDT reply actions

- Some dumb game contestant doesn’t know who Brian Sutter is (did I “Stuttler”?)

- The lucky skate shuffle changed winning patterns, but people still always get $100 worth of lottery tickets

- Angellllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllla was shocked when some dude yelled, “Trade Brewer” into her microphone

- Some guy cheated his way to victory in musical chairs by chasing a self-thrown chair all over the ice each round

- One pee-wee player brutally cross-checked another pee-wee player to the ice

- T-shirt slingshot guy hit the back wall of section 3XX not once, but twice!!

- Buddy of mine in town for first weekend in February games (not knowing anything about the mascot) asks, “Hey, what’s with the big blue rat?”

- Idiot loudmouth one section over appears to only be on a partial ticket plan

- Ushers refuse to stop people during play and remind them only to go to their seats during a stoppage in play

- Fraser’s hair still a helmet

- Guys on skates hitting each other (sometimes)

- Razor-thin blueline for linesmen

- We get to see all goalies in the farm system

(passing the torch — next!)

by Milo on Mar 10, 2008 6:15 PM CDT reply actions

semantics semantics semantics. this team made its roster moves for next season starting months ago with weight for mcdonald. the resignings, the trading of the ufa d-men. they need now what i said they needed PRESEASON (although they had me fooled a bit with a great start) transition, finishing, and a power play.

i suspect the discusions will be because of limited to no money for the free agent market (in fact on local radio semi-recently jd has primed the pump cautioning fans that there wasnt much out there this off season market) so if you get ONE piece which one do you get?

probably the discussion, probably a serious discussion, and probably if we had it here we would have 100 different answers.

personally i want a defense man who is a proven power play qb
1) our power play sucks

2) with the o we stick back there we are abused

3) our best power play point is a rookie (will be a sophomore) and can use the help and training of a successful pp qb

4) MOST pp qbs can pass and shoot :)

but it will still be brutal on the inishing on the forwards.

yikes!

by Childhood Trauma on Mar 10, 2008 7:23 PM CDT reply actions

How much will the likes of Oshie, Berglund, and a bit more experience for Perron help? Could Eller be with the big club next year? Not knowing much on Wagner, could he be a potential PP QB? Why is the sky blue? Why is “Fuck Detroit” so popular?(rhetorical) What are the odds that Rick Wamsley is eating right now?

by Poor College Student on Mar 10, 2008 7:45 PM CDT reply actions

And how did Lee Stempniak end up with the moniker “Dutchie”? Always wondered that.

by Poor College Student on Mar 10, 2008 7:48 PM CDT reply actions

Power Play Quarterback is the #1 need to address before next season. as it stands this year, we like to play Boyes at the point, so E. Johnson and Woywitka need to be switched off on the other point. Also, Perron is used to playing the PP role that Boyes has, so when we change lines while still on the PP, Perron needs to be at that spot. so for the rest of this season, the power play defense pairs need to look like this: Boyes/E. Johnson & Perron/Woywitka

by Dooks on Mar 10, 2008 7:57 PM CDT reply actions