Why Jonathan Quick Owns the St. Louis Blues

Oct 16, 2014; Los Angeles, CA, USA; Los Angeles Kings goalie

Jonathan Quick

(32) blocks a shot by St. Louis Blues right wing

T.J. Oshie

(74) in the shoot out during the game at Staples Center. Kings won 1-0. Mandatory Credit: Jayne Kamin-Oncea-USA TODAY Sports

On Thursday, October 17^th, we St. Louis fans were devastated by another premature postseason loss by the Cardinals. However, the end of the Cardinals season means that Blues fans can look forward to another hockey season, except with new sweaters, and likely another attempt towards a deep playoff run. But, another eerie and untenable tune was strung after a ‘throwback Thursday’ match-up; just one of three this season, between our beloved St. Louis Blues and their arch-nemesis: the LA Kings. It’s as though St. Louis cannot get enough of California teams. This battle was much different from battles in the past, which left an awful taste in our mouths—especially since the Kings demoralized the Notes in back-to-back post-season appearances. Though in this case, the Blues had the King’s number, but couldn’t find the back of the net. In essence, the Blues lost another game to the Kings, in which Jonathan Quick prevailed. But, that’s not to say Brian Elliott wasn’t up for the challenge.

Elliot faced 18 shots, 5 of which took place during the man-advantage. On the other hand, Jonathan Quick, the star-studded King faced 43 shots; 9 on the penalty kill, when including the 5 minute overtime, and denied all of them including more than a dozen scoring chances. In better words, the Blues and Jonathan Quick dominated the game even though Elliott played surprisingly well. The Kings still managed to squeak by 1-0 following the only shootout goal by Jeff Carter. Regardless of the loss, the Blues proved they can handle the Western Conference’s de facto rulers. If the Blues aim to de-throne the Kings, they must solve the Kings goaltending…Quick-ly. We can try to identify the problems with the game, but the truth of the matter is that there lacked any problem except one: Jonathan Quick. While the fan-sided tensions continue to shift towards loathing the championship goaltender, it’s more constructive to identify the reasons for the Blues’ lack of success against Jonathan Quick.

More from Editorials

First, lack of a net-front presence. During the game, David Backes and Steve Ott were notably the most effective players in front of the net. However, when Backes was in front of the net-minder, pucks failed to make it through; LA blocked 18 of 61 attempts. Steve Ott’s presence in front of Quick was not as effective during the first power play in the first period as the goalie was able to see all four of the power play shots through to the crease. So far this year, 2 of 8 Jonathan Quick’s goals allowed resulted from deflections in front of the net. Last year, Chicago managed to put two important goals past Quick, during the playoffs, due to their presence in front of the net.

Second, during last year’s playoffs, the Chicago Blackhawks found a way to chase Quick out of the net after taking the series lead 2-0. They took advantage of net-front presence and exploited Quick’s weakness; the stick-side. So far this year, Jonathan Quick has given up 4 of his 8 goals allowed due to shots on the blocker side.

Tommy Wingels

‘ goal against Quick:

Tommy Wingels

with the San Jose Sharks beat Quick through the 7-hole to take a 1-0 lead, then followed up in the 3

period with a breakaway goal on knee-high on the same side. Additionally,

Mikkel Boedker scores on Quick’s weak side:

And

Oliver Ekman-Larsson

each scored for the Coyotes on a similar breakaway and rifle from the top of the circle to the same side, respectively.

Unlike the Sharks, Coyotes, and Blackhawks, the Blues continue to apply pressure to the short-side from the slot and the point. While some of the plays were cleverly executed, they clearly haven’t proven successful and satisfies the question as to how the Blues can sling 41 pucks at Quick without success. Nevertheless, only during the last 8 minutes of the 3^rd period did the Blues make quality attempts towards the blocker side, and still wound up empty handed. Out of all 43 shots against, only 4 were to the blocker side. Even worse, all three failed shootout attempts aimed for the five hole, of which Quick flawlessly taunted the Blues the entire game.

Regardless, the Blues overtime loss was a stunning display of their new offensive prowess and makes the case for a deep playoff run. The only question is, who will they face, and if it’s the Kings, will they have solved Jonathan Quick? The Blues have two more opportunities against the Kings when they visit the Scottrade Center on December 16^th, then back at the Staples Center on the 18^th. I’ll look forward to the match-up, but until then, LET’S GO BLUES!

Home/Editorials