Yes, for those of you who are waiting for it, yes, I still hate the shootout. I'll glad take the two points tonight because those are the rules of the game, but that is a really dumb way to end a hockey game.
Before we bullet the blue sky here, I just want to make one more point: The Blues have gotten little attention from the media and I think we've come to a consensus that we're okay with that. Let everyone keep talking about the other Central teams and the Sharks and Canucks and virtually every team in the Northeast first. Fine. I'm also really enjoying the fact that fans everywhere still take the Blues lightly and think this is a fluke. That's all good too.
But fans and media alike keep saying that the Blues under Hitchcock are playing boring hockey. Boring, I guess, if you want to see both teams get tons of chances and play a wide-open game. Bully for you. As Blues fans, I'd say we're getting to see pretty exciting hockey. The other team might not be getting a ton of chances, but the Blues had 49 shots on goal tonight against a team that tries to play a defensive style of game. Forty-nine shots on is somehow boring hockey? Tighten up, yo. Tighten up and pay some attention before you just spurt out there that under Hitchcock the Blues are playing a boring trap game.
Boring for you: your team is getting whooped.
Alrighty then. Onto the pulletboints:
- If they're going to have to keep participating in this shootout, and they are, I have a couple chunks of advice for the coaches. First, your three shooters are T.J. Oshie, David Perron and Kevin Shattenkirk. If they can't get it done, fine, feel free to throw Jamie Langenbrunner, David Backes, Chris Stewart or whoever you want, though I'd recommend you let Patrik Berglund or Matt D'Agostini go before the big men go.
- As for Oshie and his shootout move: kid, you have an awesome move. It's the one you used for a couple years with great success. I know you must think that goalies are on to it, but it's got to be better than the new move, which is turrible. This year, using the new move, you are 1-for-6. Time to go back to old faithful.
- Did Alex Pietrangelo get tired of hearing about how Shattenkirk is the big offensive dynamo on the blueline these days? Because with his goal tonight he now has a five-game point streak going during which he has two goals and five assists. I had a discussion with someone on Thursday who was looking purely at offensive numbers and said that Shattdeuces was a better defenseman than Pietrangelo. Pietrangelo is so much more than that and if people would watch him exclusively for a few of his shifts, I think they'd tend to agree with me. No wonder Mike Babcock thinks God touched him with his wand.
- Both Oshie and Perron showed some serious hands tonight and just failed to bury their chances. There's something about watching young guys mature and get better and better and watching these two is a lot of fun right now. Throw on top of that the further emergence of David Backes, who has been hitting the hell out of everyone, skating his ass off and is involved in a good scoring chance nearly every shift and I'm feeling pretty confident in the talent the Blues have at forward.
- What else, what else, what else? Seems like I forgot to mention something else. Oh yeah, we all know that the Blues are overrated and the trap will eventually fail them and they don't have the talent to compete with the top teams in the division, let alone the conference and that they are only good on paper, but this works for me for right now:
| WESTERN | DIV | GP | W | L | OT | P | ROW | GF | GA | DIFF | HOME | AWAY | S/O | L10 | STREAK | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | * - VANCOUVER | NW | 45 | 28 | 14 | 3 | 59 | 26 | 147 | 110 | +37 | 2-3 | 7-2-1 | WON 2 | ||
| 2 | * - ST LOUIS | CEN | 44 | 26 | 12 | 6 | 58 | 25 | 115 | 94 | +21 | 1-5 | 6-2-2 | WON 1 | ||
| 3 | * - SAN JOSE | PAC | 41 | 25 | 11 | 5 | 55 | 20 | 120 | 95 | +25 | 5-2 | 7-1-2 | WON 2 | ||
| 4 | CHICAGO | CEN | 45 | 26 | 13 | 6 | 58 | 22 | 146 | 130 | +16 | 4-3 | 4-4-2 | OT 1 | ||
| 5 | DETROIT | CEN | 44 | 28 | 15 | 1 | 57 | 26 | 141 | 103 | +38 | 2-0 | 7-3-0 | WON 2 | ||
| 6 | NASHVILLE | CEN | 44 | 25 | 15 | 4 | 54 | 22 | 122 | 119 | +3 | 3-1 | 7-3-0 | WON 4 | ||
| 7 | MINNESOTA | NW | 45 | 22 | 16 | 7 | 51 | 17 | 105 | 113 | -8 | 5-5 | 2-6-2 | OT 1 | ||
| 8 | LOS ANGELES | PAC | 44 | 21 | 15 | 8 | 50 | 18 | 97 | 100 | -3 | 3-5 | 5-1-4 | OT 1 | ||
| 9 | COLORADO | NW | 46 | 24 | 20 | 2 | 50 | 17 | 119 | 128 | -9 | 7-0 | 6-3-1 | WON 1 | ||
| 10 | DALLAS | PAC | 43 | 24 | 18 | 1 | 49 | 21 | 120 | 125 | -5 | 3-1 | 5-5-0 | LOST 1 | ||
| 11 | CALGARY | NW | 45 | 21 | 19 | 5 | 47 | 20 | 110 | 127 | -17 | 1-2 | 5-4-1 | WON 3 | ||
| 12 | PHOENIX | PAC | 45 | 20 | 18 | 7 | 47 | 18 | 114 | 118 | -4 | 2-4 | 2-4-4 | LOST 1 | ||
| 13 | EDMONTON | NW | 43 | 16 | 23 | 4 | 36 | 15 | 112 | 126 | -14 | 1-3 | 2-7-1 | LOST 1 | ||
| 14 | ANAHEIM | PAC | 43 | 14 | 22 | 7 | 35 | 13 | 109 | 136 | -27 | 1-4 | 5-3-2 | WON 1 | ||
| 15 | COLUMBUS | CEN | 44 | 12 | 27 | 5 | 29 | 9 | 106 | 147 | -41 | 3-4 | 3-6-1 | LOST 1 |
Okay, I've made my comments, you go make yours.