St. Louis Game Time - All Posts

A Cultural Difference Separates Blues And Cardinals

2013-05-18T17:04:54Z

I've been batting this article around in my head since literally the night playoffs ended for the Blues. Do I write it here, do I write it at my site? Do I write it at all? Am I the only one who has noticed a huge cultural difference between the Blues and Cardinals and how they handle disappointment?

Of course, while thinking on this, Bernie Miklasz kind beat me to the punch a little bit. That'll learn me to worry about if bringing the Cards up on Game Time is a good idea or not. In today's post, he wonders why the Blues are so satisfied - they didn't play as well this year as last, they didn't win a single playoff series, and yet Ken Hitchcock and Doug Armstrong put a positive spin on things. In his post, Miklasz writes:

Hitchcock seemed offended by the post-series criticism of the Blues. I don’t know why. They blew a 2-0 series lead and lost four consecutive games. The Blues were up by two goals in Game 4 but squandered the lead, the game and the opportunity to go ahead 3-1 in the series.

But Hitchcock emphasized that the Blues – after being swept by LA last season – were more competitive this time around.

Do you get a trophy for that?

"To write off the playoffs and just say it was not good is really not fair to this team," Hitchcock said.

I’ll write it: It was not good. Your team had a 2-0 series lead and didn’t win again.

And I’m not sure why Armstrong thinks it’s so terrible for fans and media to link the present-day Blues to the franchise’s history of postseason futility.

"That’s somebody else’s issue," Armstrong said. "To live in the past and try to exorcise ghosts is irrelevant."

Irrelevant?

Simply preposterous.

Simply correct. The Blues seem to be caught up in this culture of participation. "We did well!" Yes, you did. Making the playoffs should never be a team's goal - winning the Stanley Cup should be. Sometimes you need to be realistic about expectations, sure, but doing so means not building up expectations during the year and then justifying when they fail. Your fans expect you to compete for the Stanley Cup every season.

Of course, being Blues fans, we're a realistic bunch. We know what the front office is doing, and for the most part we just accept it. The team's just kind of "happy to be here," and so are we. Believe me, that attitude isn't the best to have, but it's next to impossible to shake.

During game five of the NLCS last year, when Lance Lynn beaned the hell out of second base on a botched throw to God-knows-where, I turned to my friend that I was watching the game with and I said this: "Well, that's it. They're done, but they never should have made it this far, so I'm happy."

During game six of the 2011 World Series, I kept thinking "well, the Cards tried. This was a really great series, win or lose."

In one of those situations, I was spot on. In the other I wound up being pleasantly surprised. In neither was I thinking like the Cardinals organization - I was thinking like the Blues.

Later on in his article Bernie, who must be a mind-reader, because I was thinking this same thing writes:

The Cardinals have won 11 World Series championships, including two since 2006. And after the Cardinals blew a 3-1 lead to San Francisco in the 2012 NL championship series, manager Mike Matheny and his players were furious and inconsolable.

That hasn’t changed. Mention the NLCS to Matheny, and a cold, hard look of disgust appears on his face. Adam Wainwright frequently discusses the anger that remains from losing the NLCS, and how the players use it for motivation. They want to make amends.

There’s a profound difference in the standards that the Cardinals and Blues set for themselves.

The Blues always promise to do better next year. The Cardinals, even after a situation that in any other season before last year would have been impossible for the team (the second wild card helped), want to make things better. So far this season they've come out swinging with the best record in the National League and best winning percentage in baseball at the time of this writing. They don't make excuses. They fix things, because they have a dedication to excellence.

The Blues have a dedication to existence.

One of those two things wins championships, the other wins the occasional division. If the Blues want to stop being the little brother of St. Louis sports teams, they need to take a look at their neighbors around the corner. Having a Stanley Cup isn't a prerequisite to winning one - they can start a culture of winning any time that they want to. Stop trying to make fans feel better, and start making fans expect good things.

Cardinals fans enter nearly every season with a reasonable expectation: that the team will contend. More often than not, they're rewarded. Blues fans dare to enter a season with that expectation, and they get the roller-coaster ride that was this shortened season. This needs to change.

David Backes Saves Puppies. Again. Off-Season Puff Piece Alert!

2013-05-17T21:38:49Z

Apologies for the couple of days of no new content. Something's been up with SB Nation's servers, and I've been a bit slammed at work. Obviously we've all been kind of down with the playoff elimination, so I've dug up not one but two instances of David Backes and his wife, Kelly, being awesome.

In the first one, Backes flew his plane to the Tri-States area (apparently this article doesn't believe in specifying a city - is Keokuk a city? Where? What state?) to take three dogs back to the Five Acres Animal Rescue in St. Charles. One of the dogs, Meaty, looks like he could suit up for the Blues next year. Dog is big.

You will cringe at the part were they talk about how Backes has "extra time." I'll just go ahead and warn you.

I'll also warn you that the photos in this Riverfront Times story may make you cry. Phineas, a three year old labrador, is basically on doggie death row and has been for a year for his third biting incident. His owners dispute the first two, and the third one was apparently so minor that the parents of the child he bit didn't press charges and are even advocating for Salem to not put Phineas down.

The city's come under fire for how they've been holding Phineas until the decision to euthanize him is made final, and Backes wants to fly the dog out to Five Acres to make sure that whatever time he has left is comfortable - or maybe just get him a nice vacation while the city decides to not put him down.

Are The Blues Ripe For A Goalie Controversy?

2013-05-13T19:50:47Z

Well, that ended well. I'm not talking about the season - I'm talking about the Blues' goaltending situation. Is it any more clear now than it was in February? Nope. Do the Blues have a starter? Sure. They apparently have three of them. While that sounds like a situation any team should be lucky to have, it presents quite the quandary for the Blues. One of the starters has quite a huge contract and is developing a wonky groin. One of them occasionally has problems with consistency, sets his crease aflame with terribleness, and has to be sent to the AHL for a conditioning stint before he comes back better than ever. The third one is a rookie with 15 games of NHL experience.

Fan-freaking-tastic. Personally, by the end of the year, I felt the most comfortable with Brian Elliott in net since he was obviously in some otherworldly zone. That zone basically continued through the playoffs - game four featured three goals against that were just next to impossible to stop, and the overtime goal in game five changed direction, as did the shit goal that ended the season in game six. The games that were lost in the playoffs were a team effort (especially that last one - God, people, clear the damned puck) that are really hard to place 100% on Elliott. The games he won in the regular season and playoffs, well, if the Blues could have scored a few more goals he could have had a margin for error. They didn't, he didn't, and he realized that.

Elliott is a piece of the potential controversy because he pushed Jaroslav Halak out of the role of starter, and Halak never got a chance to get back into the swing of things. Ken Hitchcock's main job is to make sure that the Blues win, and Elliott was giving the Blues the best chance to do so night after night. How do you risk losing valuable points by tossing in a cold goaltender? Halak could have gotten back into form, but it was impossible for him to get the playing time to do so. His groin is also becoming a question mark. If he stays healthy, he's a starter. If his groin acts up, he's Kari Lehtonen with more reliable backups, but that kind of situation throws off a team's routine and rhythm.

Allen's situation is probably the easiest one to figure out: if he needs to, he'll start in the AHL next year no problem. Does that cut into Jordan Binnington's playing time? Yes, but there is a league called the ECHL where goalies can also get playing time and experience. if Allen gets called up to the Blues, Binnington gets called up to the Wolves.

So, to answer the headline's question: no. The only controversy is over "who the starter is," because NHL fans have a strange compulsion to have to have a starter and they need to have a backup. Tandems where it's 1A and 1B freak people out - look at Vancouver and the Cory Schneider/Roberto Luongo situation. Instead of being thankful that there are two more than capable goaltenders on the team - with more in the pipeline! - people have to get irritated that there's not a clear-cut difference between the two NHL goalies.

That's why reports of a Hitchcock/Halak kerfuffle have such potential to get blown out of proportion. Hitchcock called it an "everyday occurrence," and it is. It's someone who hadn't played in a month, who assumed he was the starter, asking for playing time and not being happy with not getting it. The earth kept spinning after the discussion, presumably because stuff like the disagreement happens all of the time and is no big deal. Hitchcock couldn't throw a cold Halak in net in the middle of the playoffs, because Elliott was playing well and giving the team a chance to win. A coach's responsibility is to give the team every opportunity to win a game, and regardless of what you think about Hitchcock's decisions, you can't really argue with him using Elliott.

There will be all sorts of issues to sort out this off-season, and I fully expect the Blues to do what they usually do: stand pat and maybe add a cog or two. There shouldn't be any drama coming from the team, so some of the fans will invent their own to pass the time with. Is it something people should worry about? No. I think that there are bigger net-missing fish to fry.

Kings Vs. Blues Round One Recap: What Happened?

2013-05-11T23:39:07Z

There are more causes of death for the Blues this postseason than there are bodies at the Body Farm. This was the closest series I can remember watching in the playoffs for a long time, and I remember thinking after the first game that there wasn't going to be much room for error. There wasn't. Each game was decided by a goal, each game had big hits and hard hockey, and each game was immensely winnable for either team.

That's what makes this series loss so frustrating. The Blues could have won. Why didn't they? At the risk of wallowing in misery, because that's what we as Blues fans are so consistently good at, there are two particular chronic problems that the Blues can't seem to address. They need a finisher, and they need a playmaker. The bulk of our team are big guys who clear space. Sure, they can score - and they should score (which we'll get to here in a second) - but that's not really their job. On any other team, the Blues' scorers would be ancillary guys, or the guys you turn to for punch and support scoring. While I love that the Blues are grinding and hard hitting - which is what made this series so much fun to watch, and is a big characteristic of the Kings as well - the fact that they can't manage more than one or two goals a game is disconcerting. It's a symptom of the bigger problem at large.

The Blues' hometown guys got called out by Hitchcock in his postgame comments, and that's great. The playmaker that should succeed, David Perron, spent most of his season dangling his way into the penalty box. It's not all Perron's fault, of course. Who was he going to set up? Who consistently threatened to score? The defense? Alex Steen? Those were the only guys who were a threat in this series.

But they couldn't hit the broad side of the barn. No one could. You want a depressing read? Check out Bernie's column today at STLToday.com:

In the series the Blues missed the net on shots 101 times.

But for some reason, management stays with the same cast of players that can't put pucks in the same zip code as the opponents' goal when the Blues desperately need a big score. These guys couldn't shoot the puck less accurately if you spiked the Gatorade with LSD and sent them on the ice blindfolded.

David Backes and Patrik Berglund missed the net 11 times. Alexander Steen and Alex Pietrangelo missed the net 10 times. David Perron (7) and T.J. Oshie (4) were repeatedly off the mark - and at critical moments.

Good lord God almighty. That's what happens when you have a team made up entirely of helpers.

I'm not going to blame people, because I firmly believe that the effort was there, the desire was there. The ability is what was lacking, and that's what needs to be addressed.

Brian Elliott gave the team a chance to win in every game, and while he could have been better in game four, or maybe could have stopped the shot that chipped off of Roman Polak's stick at the end of the second period, that's not why the Blues lost. They lost because they don't have that one or two guys to wrap it up.

What the Blues need to do in the off-season is a totally different post. After this season, and after this series, it's become apparent that the number one need is one that's been the Blues' number one need for years now: get someone who can score.

Blues At Kings Game Four Recap: Blues Lose Game 2-1, Series 4-2

2013-05-11T04:38:53Z

Never before have I seen a hockey team work so much for so little. Such quality play from the Blues, and nothing to show for it. The smart defense has been there for the most part, the Blues had good goaltending that gave them a chance to win, and they had an energy line that should have rubbed off on the rest of the team.

The downside is, they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn all series long, and when you're playing a goaltender like Jonathan Quick, you gotta make him work for it. The Blues did, a little - but not nearly enough.

This series had everything from the Blues but scoring. It even came complete with a deflating last-second goal, albiet in the second period - still wound up being the game winner, though:

Ugh.

That's an appropriate way for the season to end. Not with a bang, but with a groan. The effort was there this year, but not on a consistent basis. There were some games where you felt like they were going to really bust their asses, and then there were others where you knew what would happen: the defense and bottom lines would work hard, and the top lines'd grip their sticks too tight, everyone trying to be a hero, and miss the net.

All in all, though, this was the most evenly matched playoff series that I've seen in years, and one bounce one way or the other, and every game easily could have had a different outcome. At least we can take comfort in knowing that the Blues will need some Icy Hot before they hit the links. They went down swinging, but they went down nonetheless.

Congrats to the Kings on a hard-fought series.

Playoff Road Music: 05/10 at LA Kings

2013-05-10T19:00:06Z

During regular-season games, players and coaches are loathe to use the phrase "must-win" game. Tonight, however, I think that is the ONLY thing that can describe the game. Must. Win.

With few exceptions, almost everyone in the larger hockey world has been talking about how wonderful this series has been, especially the hitting and tight defensive play. It has certainly been an entertaining one. So much so, it'd be a shame to end it at 6 - let's go for 7 eh? Or, as radio voice Chris Kerber put it:

Well, we're here in LA. Might as well win a hockey game while we're at it.
— Chris Kerber (@chriskerber) May 10, 2013

Sounds like a swell idea. One hindrance is Jeff Carter - held off the score sheet for the first 3 games, he now has 3 goals in the last two. The last thing we need is him heating up again. For the entire series, the Kings have only scored one more goal than the Blues have, so St Louis is certainly capable of shutting the Kings down. St Louis hasn't hosted a Game 7 in quite a while - no time like the present to change that. Having been present for the other games, I can tell you that place is rocking. DrinkScotch exploded when Alex Pietrangelo scored to tie it up Wednesday night. I can only imagine what it could be like for Game 7. Rocking, and Rolling, On the River.

From the Gimme Shelter soundtrack, East St Louis's Ike & Tina Turner Revue:

Proud Mary / Ike & Tina Turner

"We Never, Ever, Do Nothin' Nice and Easy ... We Always Do It Nice, and Rough ..."

Sounds like Tina could have been talking about the St Louis Blues.

Further Reading:

Jewels From The Crown

Battle Of California

The Royal Half

Blues vs Kings coverage

Final Verse: With the Blues in LA, it's another late one. Thank the Hockey Gods that it's at least a weekend night. The puck is scheduled to drop at 9:00 PM St Louis time. The GDT should drop shortly ahead of that. The TV broadcast will be on Fox Sports MidWest locally ... although it'll be on other channels in other areas. See this notice for all of the details. The radio call will be on KYKY (Y98) 98.1 FM.

Until Then, get ready for another liver-killing, pulse-raising, heart-stopping Blues/Kings matchup. If you need some help, here's Part 2 of the previous video. Hollywood does love their sequels, after all ...

100 More Best "Fucks" in Film (Sorted by Use) - (Part 2) (via mewlists)

LGB!!!

-CrossCheckRaise

2013 NHL Playoffs: Blues At Kings Game Six Preview

2013-05-10T17:52:22Z

Tonight won't be easy, but no one ever said that the playoffs were easy. The Blues have proven that, letting a 2-0 series lead slip away to a 3-2 series deficit. Tonight is win or go home.

Of course, a win tonight and the Blues do go home, back to St. Louis for a game seven. Game five heroics weren't enough, as Alex Pietrangelo forced an overtime period that ended eight minutes in when Slava Voynov got a whiffed shot past Brian Elliott. You can't blame Elliott for the goal:

"I was hustling back as hard as I could and got a stick on him," Schwartz said. "He definitely wasn’t going five-hole there. If anything, he fanned on the shot. I got a stick on him, but it wasn’t enough."

Elliott was anticipating the puck to rise, but instead it stayed at ice level.

"One of those plays that you’re not going to tell your guys not to get in front of the puck, but stick on stick can kind of change the trajectory a little bit," Elliott said. "That’s why anything can happen in overtime."

And that's why you don't let the games get to overtime to begin with. However, that happening necessitates the Blues combining scoring with responsible defense tonight, and that's been a problem. The one game where the Blues scored more than two goals, they lost 4-3 thanks to defensive lapses, the highlight of which was Kevin Shattenkirk trapped on a 3-on-1. Hockey is not made up of either-or moments. You really are allowed to play defense and offense in the same game.

It would be nice if someone would get that memo to the forwards; the defense has done their job on both this series. Alexander Steen and Jaden Schwartz have been outstanding, but the rest of the team has failed to impress. T.J. Oshie scored two in game four, but was on the ice for LA's goals. David Backes tapped in an easy open-net goal, but that was just one out of about 20 chances that Jonathan Quick has given up. David Perron has been in the LA net more than the puck has, and Andy McDonald isn't the right player to be a key cog in such a physical series.

I have faith that the Blues can win tonight, but that faith hasn't been rewarded regularly all season. The Blues have gone through on-again/off-again slumps from which they have recovered with a pop. A recovery tonight, and I'll believe in round two.

2013 NHL Playoffs: Blues At Kings Game Six Gameday StoryStream

2013-05-10T13:48:22Z

You all probably already know what this is going to say.

What more can I type after a Blues loss? Score more? Stop missing good chances? The top nine needs to wake up? Is Andy McDonald even a part of this team anymore? Will David Perron run Jonathan Quick again tonight, operating under the mistaken belief that it "gets into his head?"

Who knows. All that we all know is that the Blues blew two chances in LA to put the series out of reach, lost in overtime on Wednesday night, and now face elimination in a city where they haven't win a game in two years.

This is your morning open thread. Predict, rant, try to be optimistic. I very much would like to be, but I'm stuck in Starbucks surrounded by college kids while I get my radiator replaced. Happy Friday, everyone.