St. Louis Blues fans want blood.
Tuesday night: The St. Louis Blues come into their matchup with Florida riding high off a nice team effort against Columbus, where a speed-oriented attack yielded results against a stout Tortorella defense. St. Louis Blues fans, me included, expected the squad to jump all over the Panthers, who, while a team on the rise, had fallen to the Blues six times in a row.
Instead, what fans saw was a nearly unwatchable effort. No shots on goal until nearly fifteen minutes in the game. Passes that looked fired by weak drunkards. Solid hits by Ryan Reaves and atrocious giveaways from just about everyone else. Dump and chase, clear, repeat.
Even our superstars looked like they couldn’t wait to get on a plane for New York. Vladimir Tarasenko, who has apparently been sick, got the first Blues shot on goal, but his offensive M.O. seemed to consist of attempting to skate through all five Panthers toward Luongo. Jake Allen looked frustrated as Florida’s fourth line scored twice.
And then the baffling part: In the third, out comes Allen. The Blues were only down two, and yet Allen got the hook. Suddenly, Steen-Backes-Tarasenko becomes Upshall-Stastny-Tarasenko. Or Steen-Backes-Brouwer. I’ll be honest, the lines changed so much that I lost track. Finally, with about three minutes left, Steve Ott dumps the puck into the offensive zone and the fourth line skates around, down two goals with time waning. Predictably, the best lines the Panthers had easily slapped the puck out of danger.
Where did the recklessness go? Where did all the confidence in Allen go? Did we leave Scott Gomez in Buffalo or something? Should I send out an amber alert for Dimitrij Jaskin?
I’m fired up about this one.
Personally, how Ken Hitchcock still has his job is a mystery to me on the level of Jimmy Hoffa’s body or the Bermuda Triangle. I have sat for five years and slowly watched this man lead the St. Louis Blues on an aimless and painful death march toward another full restart for the organization. We have seen the Backes era come to fruition and we may soon see it go, and through it all, Ken Hitchcock’s been watching from the bench, arms folded and scowling, continually failing to ice a team that can stand up to today’s hockey elite for more than a one or two games at a time.
Hitchcock is one of the winningest coaches of all time. Sure, he’s a better hockey coach than me. I couldn’t coach a jelly donut. I’m sure there’s some reason I’m wrong here, and I’m frankly venting frustration.
But on a night where our forwards and defensemen look asleep on their skates, why pull the goaltender if he isn’t hurt? If one is trying to motivate the troops, wouldn’t it be more prescient to bench or limit the minutes of the men who have been consistently fumbling pucks onto the sticks of Panthers (Ott and Gunnarsson, I’m looking at you…) rather than taking your frustration out on the goaltender?
(Just side thought, but does anyone else feel that Brian Elliot has all the right in the world to despise each and every person in the hierarchy of the St. Louis Blues? How many years has he played great and then been benched or otherwise slighted, if not injured at the worst possible moment? If I were him, I’d want out, and any number of teams would be aching for his sub-.220 GAA.)
Line juggling isn’t an exotic coaching strategy in hockey. However, when done night in and night out, how are Blues players ever supposed to develop on-ice chemistry? Once behind in a game, Hitchcock tends to scramble his on-ice combinations to tailor to the competition, but throughout the last few years, our best success come from battle-hardened trios like the STL line, Steen-Backes-Oshie and last years’ brief but awesome Schwartz-Stastny-Oshie. These mad alchemical in-game maneuvers demonstrate a disturbing lack of faith in the Blues’ roster.
Speaking of Ott, who has tallied up a grand total of two points in 19 games, why is he on the ice whatsoever, let alone in the offensive zone with three minutes left? The same thing happened last year in Minnesota, when the Blues’ season was dwindling to an inglorious end and Ott was slowly cycling the puck behind the Wild net as seconds frittered away. That isn’t even mentioning the horrendous giveaway which led directly to the game-winning goal Ott served up in the second. Human sandpaper Ott may be, but when does trolling take precedence over winning? In the playoffs or not, Hitch’s fascination with an old pal looks like little more than nepotism. Less skill means less scoring, and less scoring loses you games.
More from Editorials
- St. Louis Blues Need Kasperi Kapanen To Be On Best Behavior
- Hayes’ Debut And Other Bold Predictions for the St. Louis Blues
- St. Louis Blues Captaincy Is Suddenly A Huge Problem For 2023-24
- St. Louis Blues National Games Cause More Problems Than They’re Worth
- St. Louis Blues Brayden Schenn Has To Be An Impact Player In 2023-24
Especially in the playoffs. Did you know that Ken Hitchcock, since leaving Dallas nearly fourteen years ago, has won 29 playoff games and lost 39? And that his 2003-2004 Flyers run count for 11 of those wins? Even though Hitchcock walked in and won the Presidents’ Trophy and turned us into perennial preseason favorites, the Blues have won fewer games in the second season since the lockout than the Edmonton Oilers. And the Oilers haven’t made the playoffs since 2006.
T.J. Oshie, before we jettisoned him to Washington, complained of ‘information overload’ from the coaching staff after coming back from an illness. I’m not sure what that exactly means, but according to Denis Potvin on the Panthers broadcast Tuesday night, Hitchcock’s strategy is “to coach 5 guys, and then teach the rest of the team. “
The team on the ice Tuesday night was a team divided and sluggish. They didn’t seem to care, and didn’t seem to have much of a cohesive strategy other than to clean up their own turnover-related messes. I can’t help but think that the team isn’t buying in to what Hitch is selling. I fear that the next player to refuse to listen to the ‘information overload’ could be sent packing too.
Didn’t we see this movie before in the 1990s with the St. Louis Blues? An abrasive coach pushes players’ buttons and molds the team as he sees fit? Some things translate into success, but most don’t? The unused pieces move on to great success elsewhere?
Look, it’s not as if I don’t want Hitchcock to win, or that I’ll be dancing in the streets if he’s fired. I absolutely appreciate the success Hitch has brought this franchise. I’m just seeing that year after year, the same Hitchcockean peculiarities are leading to the same old results. I could get behind ‘recklessness’, but this is something I cannot abide.
Next: St. Louis Loses Tourney Bid
Then again, Tuesday could have been an off night. It could have been a soft matchup before a demanding weekend of hockey. Rust from the Thanksgiving break, perhaps. Whether or not the actual game was worthy of alarm, the continual issues of the Hitchcock era poison even the most insignificant of losses for our St. Louis Blues.