Yes, I know that the correct phrase is "fickle finger of fate," but what the heck. Regardless of what it's called, fingers are pointing, trying to figure out exactly what the issue has been so far with the Blues and our slump. Is it the players? Is it the management? Maybe we need to look at the offensive system. Maybe, as Jeff Gordon mentions today in the Post-Dispatch, there's something to be said for that ol' saying: "Fish and visitors stink in 2 days." Can that apply to coaches? Do NHL coaches have a shelf-life?These past few games have been frustrating. Improvement has been there, but has been coming slowly. Three straight OT/shootout losses have gotten us some points in the standings, but we're still three points short of what we could have - what we should have had. We've allowed four goals in regulation time over the past three games. Defensively, we're tight. Goaltending wise - set.
How do you lose a game 2-1? No one scores. So far this season we have seen playing rough and tumble around the boards, crashing the net, dump and chase, and the new one - whapping the puck across the ice, hoping to find the tape of another player. Sunday night they found the tape of the other players - unfortunately it was the other teams' players.
You can't keep throwing playing "styles" at a team. You can't keep fudging and mixing up the lines. What kind of "identity" does that give your team? Do they even know what to expect from night to night? And, most importantly, is it a sign of coaching desperation, which is just a bigger sign of future troubles?
You really have a few ways to point the finger, and you have a few different kind of fingers to point (and we all know which one your favorite is), but is it fair to single out a coach who has been successful with the team to this point?
Si or no? Discussificate.