After last night’s loss to extend the current losing streak to 5 games, Blues Nation predictably went semi-apocalyptic. Not really surprising, because this happens with fans of most teams (unless your team has stunk for years – in which case, you’re just kind of numb to losing). Heck, some fanbases go off the deep end after losing 2 in a row. (Leafs fans, Canadiens fans, Flyers fans, … don’t worry, I won’t mention you by name.) However, some of the ideas and comments being lobbed out by Blues fans (or in some cases, faux Blues fans) are somewhere on or beyond the lunatic fringe.
I promised when I took over writing to always have a level-headed approach, but to be honest at all times. This is probably a good time to take that kind of a look at the team.
Current status
‘Yes, the Blues are sitting 6-5-1 after 12 games. Not where we thought we’d be after 7 games when we were 6-1-0 – but let’s put this in perspective. Just like the Blackhawks aren’t going to go 40-0-8 this season (even if they’ve looked freakishly good so far), we weren’t going to go 42-7-0 (ish) this season, and we’re not going to go 0-28-7 (ish) the rest of the way.
Every team is going to have stretches like this. The Kings struggled through the first half of last year, and with 4 games to go and a golden chance to win the Pacific Division they blew 3 of the last 4 to fall to the 8-seed. Boston went 8-6-4 over the last 18 games of the 2010-11 season and then lost the first two games at home to Montreal before coming back to win the series and the Cup. The Sharks started off 7-0-0 but have gone 0-3-3 in the last 6. In 2009, the Red Wings lost 7 of their last 10 and took an 8-2 beating at home from Columbus a few weeks prior to that; they still had Game 7 of the Finals at home. Losing streaks happen; overreacting to them is a great way to make bad decisions.
Yes, the goaltending needs to improve – but again, let’s put this in perspective. As I noted in the preseason preview, expecting Elliott to repeat last year’s 1.56 GAA, .940 SV% was unrealistic … but expecting him to continue at his current 3.57 GAA, .849 SV% pace (or, if you prefer to use the last 4 games, 5.04 / .791) is similarly unrealistic. If he can get back into being consistently in the 2.50 / .910 range, he at least gives the team a chance to win – and if they can get things unlocked 5-on-5, they’ll have a chance to win most nights. The last thing we need to do is throw Jake Allen (who’s struggled in Peoria, and was far from impressive in his lone appearance this season vs. Nashville) in net out of desperation and hang “please save us” around his neck … unless you’re trying to firmly implode the season.
Tarasenko has been muffled after a hot start – but teams are also making sure they pay close attention to him. Other guys need to step up and take the pressure off and create space for him to work in. Backes is chipping in points (yes, he’s really 2-6-8) but he needs to get confidence while shooting; right now, he doesn’t have any. Perron can be great if he wants, but when he's selfish he hurts his linemates. Stewart has been good when parked around the net, but way too often is asked to stickhandle with the puck around the zone - and it's something he's not good at. Berglund has been a force at times, and invisible at others. Stupid penalties have to stop; nothing kills momentum like those, and the Blues have been good for 2-3 a night so far. The defense has to start playing more defense, which means less "go offensive" moments.
There’s things to fix – but the important thing to remember is that we still have 36 games to fix them before things become do-or-die. I’m comfortable believing that this squad will get it together well before then; the alternative is to believe that it’s time to gut the roster and go back into rebuild mode – and everyone should remember just how much that sucked.
Coaching
A handful – maybe a big handful – of Blues fans either think Hitchcock isn’t the guy who should be running the team, or wonder if he’s lost the team. Let’s look at both of those.
Hitchcock has essentially the same roster as last year, with 3 exceptions: (1) he has Redden instead of Colaiacovo, (2) he has Tarasenko instead of Arnott, and (3) he has Schwartz instead of Crombeen. If those three changes are the difference between a 109-point team and a team that, according to some, is going to struggle to make the playoffs this year, I have no idea what coach in the history of the NHL could get more out of this team than Hitchcock has. You don’t take a team with no talent and go 43-15-11 by pure luck; this team has skill, it just hasn’t competed very well over the last 2+ weeks. Hitchcock more than has the ability to get this team pointed in the right direction, he just needs to figure out how to get guys to relax and just play instead of trying to play perfectly.
Let’s pretend though that Hitchcock has lost the locker room, as a few have speculated. That would make him the 3rd head coach that has been tuned out by the core of this team – but this time around, it wouldn’t be the head coach taking the blame. You’d see key guys getting moved out. That said, it’s pretty clear he’s still got control of the team right now. Teams who’ve tuned out the coach play indifferently. Guys look like dead men walking, waiting for someone to come put them out of their misery. The Blues may have looked like crap during this skid, but they look nothing like a team waiting for the GM to come save them from themselves.
The PP has been dynamite. The PK has been hot and cold – when it’s hot, it looks great; when it’s cold, guys are standing around flat-footed and waiting for the opposition to get in position to fire off a good shot on net, or reacting to what the opposition does instead of applying pressure. That’s not a coaching thing, that’s on the players.
What is on the coaching staff is the 5-on-5 play so far. When your team has scored about as many special teams goals as even strength goals, that’s a problem unless you’re getting 2+ goals a game on special teams. Part of that may be line combinations – we have top-9 guys, but aside from McDonald-Steen-Tarasenko they’ve struggled to find consistency. It’s up to the coaches to figure out lines where guys mesh on-ice and can play in a way that they can utilize their strengths; if they can do that, the problems on offense instantly get better.
The Roster
No, the roster as currently composed cannot win a Cup – but a lot of the pieces are there. A wholesale dump isn’t needed by any stretch.
As noted above, the Blues have top-9 guys. Yes, I even think they have the pieces for a #1 line – but whether those guys can really fit on the same line and be productive is an open question. Given that we arguably have 4 guys (Tarasenko, Perron, Oshie, Steen) capable of scoring from the wing and a couple guys (Backes, Stewart) who have the size and ability to stand in front of the net and shovel in garbage, it would be kind of nice if we had 2-3 guys who could play center and be set-up guys. Well, we sort of do – except that instead we have guys who have size but not a lot of true playmaking ability in the pivot. That’s kind of a problem.
I still maintain that Berglund is a #1 center waiting to happen. In fact, I’d just put him there between two guys (probably Oshie and Stewart) and tell him, “you’re the #1 guy, for better or for worse – you have the potential to be a dominant center in this league, play like you want to be that kind of guy.” I still like McDonald as a center for his faceoff ability (between Backes and Tarasenko) and the fact that he can be a playmaker. That leaves a 3rd line of Steen, Perron, and either D’Agostini or Schwartz – and if Perron can play a team game instead of being selfish like he has been at times, that gives the Blues three lines that can be a threat to score and forces the opposition to choose who to focus on at the risk of getting burned by the uncovered line. Whether the combinations above make sense in terms of right/left handed, I’ll leave to everyone else – but I think some setup like that (size, shooter, playmaker) is needed on all 3 lines.
On defense, we’ve got a #1 (Pietrangelo), a probable #3 (Shattenkirk), a guy playing #4 who might be better suited playing 5/6 (Jackman), a guy with the potential to be a #4 down the road but is going to need time to develop (Cole), a guy who maybe can fill the #4 spot short-term but is going to be more a 5/6 guy for the rest of his career (Redden), a guy who is a 5/6 (Polak) and a guy who maybe can be 5/6 but is going to struggle come the postseason when guys start using their size (Russell).
Yes, Cole needs more time to develop. A lot of the defense does. People see Cole’s age (he turns 24 in 9 days) and think he’s been around for years and he should be a lot farther in his development than he currently is. The fact is, counting this season he’s logged exactly 169 professional games (AHL and NHL, regular season and playoffs) across 3 seasons and a very partial 4th – and only 60 of those are at the NHL level. For perspective, Shattenkirk has 187 pro games under his belt; Alex Pietrangelo has 205, Russell has 368, and Polak has 413. Redden has 1237 by himself. While the Blues need a true top-2 defenseman, they really need some more experience on the blueline to help out Redden and Jackman – because the lot of that defense is still pretty green.
Possible Trades
I’ve long said that I would love to see an online hockey simulator that lets fans be GM over multiple years just to see how quickly they can screw up a team. After reading some of the comments from some Blues fans across the Internet, I’m convinced a non-trivial number of them could take the current team, and in less than 10 days transform it into a cellar-dwelling franchise without a 1st-round pick in both the ’13 draft and the ’14 draft. That’s how silly some of the ideas have been.
Yes, the Blues could use a top-pairing defenseman to go with Pietrangelo. They’re not going to get that with Rattie, Stewart and a 1st – especially if “Stewart sucks, he’s a worthless slug” is an accurate description of his abilities. However, it’s also not going to take Perron, Shattenkirk and a 1st as some on the other side of the fence have implied.
The bigger issue is this: if you make a trade to try and upgrade in one area, do you just rip a hole somewhere else that now needs to be filled? If so, do you really accomplish anything other than churning the roster for the sake of change (and based on some of the proposals, fork away a few pieces that might have been trade chips down the road)? Add in the fact that the Blues are a budget-constrained team (which means salary either has to swap evenly, and/or other teams will have to eat some salary), and it further limits the trade options available. I’m fine with a trade that improves us both short-term and long-term; I’m not fine with trades for the sake of doing something.
Who should the Blues target in a trade? No idea right now - I try not to do the, "let's trade" game very often. Check back in another 12 games, when it becomes more clear who's in contention and who's not, who's going to be available, and what our needs really are.
Bottom line
Like it or not, plan on this being the Blues team going forward for a while. If a trade becomes available, that changes things – but don’t expect an overhaul of the roster or other drastic changes. If this group was capable of putting up 109 points in a season, it’s capable of getting back on track and getting hot again. This team has to figure out how to deal with adversity at some point; better to do it now than have to do it come playoff time when the stakes are much higher and there’s no time to go through a slump trying to put the pieces back together.
Be patient, have a little faith – and most importantly, don’t panic.
St Louis Blues Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»