St. Louis Blues Pros And Cons From Game 13 Vs. Minnesota

ST. LOUIS, MO - OCTOBER 30: Jason Zucker #16 and Mats Zuccarello #36 of the Minnesota Wild battle Vince Dunn #29 and Tyler Bozak #21 of the St. Louis Blues for the puck at Enterprise Center on October 30, 2019 in St. Louis, Missouri. (Photo by Joe Puetz/NHLI via Getty Images)
ST. LOUIS, MO - OCTOBER 30: Jason Zucker #16 and Mats Zuccarello #36 of the Minnesota Wild battle Vince Dunn #29 and Tyler Bozak #21 of the St. Louis Blues for the puck at Enterprise Center on October 30, 2019 in St. Louis, Missouri. (Photo by Joe Puetz/NHLI via Getty Images)

The St. Louis Blues had their first game after officially knowing Vladimir Tarasenko would no longer be part of their roster. However, the Blues have a way of playing down to their competition, so facing the Minnesota Wild was worrying.

While they do not get the national recognition, due to the city we live in or just the mainstream idea that nobody should be good outside of the coastal teams, the St. Louis Blues are actually one of the better teams in the league on a regular basis. That was true even before they won the Stanley Cup.

However, over the course of the years, the Blues have always been a team that plays up to competition and down to to the lesser opponents. All due respect to the Minnesota Wild, but they are not currently on the Blues level. However, you would not have really known that the way the game played out.

Minnesota had played against the Dallas Stars the night prior. Still, the Blues did not grind them into the dust and let them stick around much longer than they probably should have.

One might argue that the Wild had a burr in their saddle after giving up a three goal lead against the Stars. Even so, the Blues just did not find a way to go for the throat, so to speak.

St. Louis did manage to score the first goal of the game. The lead lasted less than two minutes as the defense got caught off guard for a split second and that was enough for Minnesota to strike.

The third period was just awkward at best. St. Louis created a few chances here or there and obviously scored the goal to put them up 2-1, but they were flat footed too much of the period.

St. Louis relied on their goaltending and defensive positioning. Their best break out of the zone came when the Wild had their net empty and the Blues managed to pass too much to avoid scoring.

Overall, it is a win and that is always good. You could tell the players were not all that enthused about it though, which at least shows they know it was not their best effort.

Pros: Getting pucks to the net

The Blues had a goal and one called back that were the result of just putting the puck on net. Too often, in the past, we have seen them fail to do that, passing up opportunity after opportunity.

This year seems to be a little different. This game showcased that as the shots that went in were not fantastic ones, but just putting it on target and letting good things happen.

More from Analysis

Sammy Blais goal was a nice shot and, as NBC pointed out, reminiscent of one Vladimir Tarasenko might score. It came from the off wing and beat the goaltender over the shoulder.

However, it was not in a prime scoring position. The shot came north of the faceoff dot and was likely something that should have been saved. Regardless, the goal went in because Blais took the chance.

Later in the game Ryan O’Reilly looked like he was going to pick up his second point of the night. He just flung one toward the net from the circle, surprising the goaltender, and it hit the back of the net.

It was not counted because Zach Sanford was found to be offside. Nevertheless, it was just a chance on goal and good things happened even if the goal did not count.

Cons: Foot off the gas/poor defensive combos

The goal that the Wild scored was not the direct fault of any one person. Justin Faulk was in decent position on the initial play from behind the net and Vince Dunn was in OK position regarding the pass that went back across.

However, it just looked like they were both a little flat. Mats Zuccarello just slipped right by Faulk, into the slot and popped home the pass back to him. Dunn seemed like he could have done a little more to defend the pass too.

These things happen. Nobody is going to be on 100% of the time. It just stinks that the Blues seem to always have to pay when they take their foot off the gase.

A larger issue might be the fact those two were paired together at all. The defensive combinations had shown no signs of weakness the last two games, so why in the world would you change them up again?

I get that you want to get Faulk rolling offensively, but that just has to happen on its own. Faulk and Dunn together don’t have the focus on the defensive end. Maybe that does involve keeping Jay Bouwmeester and Colton Parayko apart, but if it benefits the team that much more, you keep it that way.

Cons: Relying on Binnington too much

Speaking of the defense taking their foot off the gas, the entire team allowed Minnesota way too much time in the offensive zone in the third period. Overall, the Blues were allowing the Wild too many opportunities, but the third period took that even further.

The stats might not bear that out. Minnesota had 12 shots in each period.

Still, the defense was allowing the Wild to spend far too much time in their zone in the third period, and the first as well. The Blues failed to get double-digit shots in the first and third period, which allowed Minnesota even more time on the attack.

It is good to know that Jordan Binnington has your back, or any goaltender for that matter. That is what they are there for.

That said, there is a difference between a goaltender coming up big and being relied on too heavily. The Blues were doing the latter on this night.

Making matters worse, while the defense was sound overall, St. Louis made things tougher on Binnington too. With just 12 seconds left and the Minnesota net empty, Alex Steen actually knocked the puck toward his own goal. Fortunately Binnington was in good position and made a good glove save off the the deflection.

As said, it is good to have a goalie you can rely on. Wen you do it too often, you will likely lose if they are not on their game 100% though.

Pros: The Captain

I will be the first to admit that I had soured on Alex Pietrangelo in recent times. I never fully bought in to the idea he was not worthy to be captain, but there was just an odd fall off from when he was a legitimate Norris Trophy contender just a season and a half ago.

Now, Pietrangelo is looking like that player again. He might not have been the main reason the Blues won this game, but he was definitely a big reason.

Pietrangelo did pick up an assist on Blais’ goal, but it was his actions during the breakout that really led to the score. After dishing the puck off, Petro drove down the ice along with Blais and pushed his way into the zone. His presence took the defender with him and allowed Blais the time to size up the shot and rip it home.

Then, there is the goal itself. The Pietrangelo we have seen in the recent past would have taken the pass, stickhandled and tried to toss it right back across for the assist.

Instead, Petro did exactly what he should have. He faked both the defender and the goaltender out of their jocks with one little feint and then buried it into an open net.

That is what he can provide. Pietrangelo is not as offensively talented as a forward, but he has plenty of skills both with his puck handling and his shot. It is great to be unselfish, but sometimes you can lead by example when you have that kind of talent.

Pietrangelo is not Scott Stevens. It is fine to show some offensive ability if you have it, while still keeping the defensive positioning sound. Petro did all of that in this game.

Overview

This is one of those games you just stick the two points in your back pocket and move on. No need to review the tape or dwell too much on the mistakes.

It was merely a sloppy game that the Blues could have done better in. They won in spite of themselves and little more.

Binnington was what we have come to expect from him. He was not perfect, but he was more than good enough.

The offense showed spurts here and there, but only 13 shots combined between the first and third periods leaves plenty to be desired. The defense was good, overall, but they were flat for a good amount of the game, which gave the Wild far too long in the offensive zone.

But, there are no major negatives to take away from this game either. The Blues mainly just played down to their competition and did not put their foot on their throat. When you can win in that situation, so much the better.