2024-2025 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread.

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,927
6,011
Badlands
a potent 2C and a potent 1D added to this team and it's a contender. however, those are massive pieces that franchises hunt over long years. it isn't going to happen this year so the wins like yesterdays will feel unsustainable. that style of win is one we could see again with Binner being the absolute difference maker to keep them in games long enough to capitalize, but being dominated for the first 30 minutes is not a sustainable winning formula
 

STL fan in MN

Registered User
Aug 16, 2007
7,718
5,320
a potent 2C and a potent 1D added to this team and it's a contender. however, those are massive pieces that franchises hunt over long years. it isn't going to happen this year so the wins like yesterdays will feel unsustainable. that style of win is one we could see again with Binner being the absolute difference maker to keep them in games long enough to capitalize, but being dominated for the first 30 minutes is not a sustainable winning formula
Agreed. I’d say they were dominated for more like 20 min but either way, you’re quite lucky to win when your play is that bad for 1/3ish of the game. But you could say the same for Seattle not playing a full 60. They had a really bad 2 minutes there in the 2nd and that was it to cost them the game.

I don’t want to make too many judgments after one game but I expect this team to be very inconsistent this season and for Binny/Hofer to steal some games they shouldn’t win, which will likely keep them in the mushy middle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vladys Gumption

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,927
6,011
Badlands
Agreed. I’d say they were dominated for more like 20 min but either way, you’re quite lucky to win when your play is that bad for 1/3ish of the game. But you could say the same for Seattle not playing a full 60. They had a really bad 2 minutes there in the 2nd and that was it to cost them the game.

I don’t want to make too many judgments after one game but I expect this team to be very inconsistent this season and for Binny/Hofer to steal some games they shouldn’t win, which will likely keep them in the mushy middle.
absolutely, I said in seattle's gdt that this was a game both teams deserved to lose because they both displayed their weaknesses and one was weaker. the difference in this game was Binnington now 5 wins from tying Liut #1 alltime
 
Last edited:

Majorityof1

Registered User
Mar 6, 2014
8,965
7,875
Central Florida
Agreed. I’d say they were dominated for more like 20 min but either way, you’re quite lucky to win when your play is that bad for 1/3ish of the game. But you could say the same for Seattle not playing a full 60. They had a really bad 2 minutes there in the 2nd and that was it to cost them the game.

I don’t want to make too many judgments after one game but I expect this team to be very inconsistent this season and for Binny/Hofer to steal some games they shouldn’t win, which will likely keep them in the mushy middle.

It was more than 20 minutes. We lost the advanced metrics for the 2nd badly because of how bad we started the 2nd. We lost the advanced stats battle for the game due to how bad our first 30+ minutes went. Look at the xGF% over time chart on natural stat trick, it keeps rising sharply well into the 2nd.

Ultimately it's goals not expected goals that matter. And we won that. But the bleeding didn't stop until our first goal 33 minutes and change into the game.
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,598
14,298
It was more than 20 minutes. We lost the advanced metrics for the 2nd badly because of how bad we started the 2nd. We lost the advanced stats battle for the game due to how bad our first 30+ minutes went. Look at the xGF% over time chart on natural stat trick, it keeps rising sharply well into the 2nd.

Ultimately it's goals not expected goals that matter. And we won that. But the bleeding didn't stop until our first goal 33 minutes and change into the game.
I can't remember the shots on goal count, but Seattle had 23 more shot attempts than we did at the halfway mark of the 2nd. High danger chances at 5 on 5 were 10-2 in Seattle's favor in the 1st period and then 10-2 again in the 2nd period. You are 100% correct that we were getting badly outplayed for the first half of the 2nd period.
 

taylord22

Registered User
Mar 30, 2009
1,569
429
This problem has been consistently an issue since 20-21. It's why the models hate us. It's why the pundits hate us. It's why it's excruciating to watch this team at times.

It's 1-game. It was a road game. It was an opener against a fast team that wants to put the puck on net. But this team has to raise its ceiling offensively. Offense has really changed around this team as more and more players (both high and low draft picks) are developing dynamic shots. Quick releases. Practiced 1ts. More range and angles. The last 5 years has been an explosion in the skill of shooting the puck (I would put most of that on Matthews).

We've got those guys coming into the system with Dvorsky, Snuggy and even Stenberg. But we've got one right now in Bolduc who is going to sit/get sent down to make room for more game managers who crash the net. This team is full of game managers who crash the net, along with 3 dynamic playmakers with nobody to pass the puck to but themselves.

Bolduc doesn't fix much by himself , but this offense needs to manufacture ways to be more dynamic soon. And this organization does not have the appetite to usher in 3-4 young players in the same year which is the trajectory we're potentially on.

The way that Utah used Gunther's shot, excessively, to create chaos and predictable retrievels for their forecheckers is something most teams are doing more of. The Blues haven't even started. The average shot distance has gone from inside 15ft to trending toward 25ft, typically approaching a 45 degree angle, in the past 10 years. With players having higher quality shots combined with individual goalie/movement data, many systems have the weak side winger positioning themselves to retrieve off an angle vs. simply crashing the net. When it works it results in a scoring chance + ToP.

It's really hard to develop good forecheckers when 1.) the book on how the Blues cycle the puck is written in cement and 2.) it's really difficult to get in game reps when you're that predictable

Their selective approach to shooting used to work when we had 3 additional shooters in O'Reilly, Tarasenko, and Perron. But now, there's no reason that we shouldn't be trying to add more variety and volume to our attack.

Again, it was 1-game. But this has been a consistent issue, and my alarm bells started going off in camp when it was clear nothing was systematically changing in terms of how we generated offense. I'm not going to pretend it's a simple change, and maybe there's an argument that you're better off waiting to change when you're forced to infuse multiple skill players, but I would think it's better to start adding some flavors now. I hope to see it.

I've had arguments with others that have suggested we don't have the blue-line to manufacture offense and ToP this way, but my counter argument has been that we don't have a blue line conducive to how we want to manufacture offense today, so it feels like a wash.
 

Stupendous Yappi

Idiot Control Now!
Sponsor
Aug 23, 2018
8,991
14,286
Erwin, TN
It was more than 20 minutes. We lost the advanced metrics for the 2nd badly because of how bad we started the 2nd. We lost the advanced stats battle for the game due to how bad our first 30+ minutes went. Look at the xGF% over time chart on natural stat trick, it keeps rising sharply well into the 2nd.

Ultimately it's goals not expected goals that matter. And we won that. But the bleeding didn't stop until our first goal 33 minutes and change into the game.
I can't put much weight into that stretch of play. It was a bizarre schedule, and its pretty tough to get your juices ready on the road at such an early time. They slept through the first period. I don't think that's representative of anything. I want to give it a couple more games before I consider any trends in play.

This problem has been consistently an issue since 20-21. It's why the models hate us. It's why the pundits hate us. It's why it's excruciating to watch this team at times.

It's 1-game. It was a road game. It was an opener against a fast team that wants to put the puck on net. But this team has to raise its ceiling offensively. Offense has really changed around this team as more and more players (both high and low draft picks) are developing dynamic shots. Quick releases. Practiced 1ts. More range and angles. The last 5 years has been an explosion in the skill of shooting the puck (I would put most of that on Matthews).

We've got those guys coming into the system with Dvorsky, Snuggy and even Stenberg. But we've got one right now in Bolduc who is going to sit/get sent down to make room for more game managers who crash the net. This team is full of game managers who crash the net, along with 3 dynamic playmakers with nobody to pass the puck to but themselves.

Bolduc doesn't fix much by himself , but this offense needs to manufacture ways to be more dynamic soon. And this organization does not have the appetite to usher in 3-4 young players in the same year which is the trajectory we're potentially on.

The way that Utah used Gunther's shot, excessively, to create chaos and predictable retrievels for their forecheckers is something most teams are doing more of. The Blues haven't even started. The average shot distance has gone from inside 15ft to trending toward 25ft, typically approaching a 45 degree angle, in the past 10 years. With players having higher quality shots combined with individual goalie/movement data, many systems have the weak side winger positioning themselves to retrieve off an angle vs. simply crashing the net. When it works it results in a scoring chance + ToP.

It's really hard to develop good forecheckers when 1.) the book on how the Blues cycle the puck is written in cement and 2.) it's really difficult to get in game reps when you're that predictable

Their selective approach to shooting used to work when we had 3 additional shooters in O'Reilly, Tarasenko, and Perron. But now, there's no reason that we shouldn't be trying to add more variety and volume to our attack.

Again, it was 1-game. But this has been a consistent issue, and my alarm bells started going off in camp when it was clear nothing was systematically changing in terms of how we generated offense. I'm not going to pretend it's a simple change, and maybe there's an argument that you're better off waiting to change when you're forced to infuse multiple skill players, but I would think it's better to start adding some flavors now. I hope to see it.

I've had arguments with others that have suggested we don't have the blue-line to manufacture offense and ToP this way, but my counter argument has been that we don't have a blue line conducive to how we want to manufacture offense today, so it feels like a wash.
I'm not arguing with any of this, but are you saying that Bannister hasn't changed the offensive philosophy at all?
 

taylord22

Registered User
Mar 30, 2009
1,569
429
I'm not arguing with any of this, but are you saying that Bannister hasn't changed the offensive philosophy at all?

I think Bannister has made small adjustments. The power play for instance - but that was less systematic and more player/roles. I also think he's been a positive influence in bringing out more offense from certain players. And, he certainly has beat the drum for activating the D more. But, a more passive D was something Berube was forced into due to how leaky we were.

What I’m suggesting is definitely not a small change that you can build inside of a single training camp. It goes beyond the ice and into the video and skills coaches, as well as their analytics dept. But, it’s a long road that needs paving before you start bringing the young guns aboard. And a hoard of young guys are likely to be knocking at the door as soon as next year.

It was 1-game, but combined with the pre-season, there are a lot of familiar issues appearing 5 on 5. Maybe we slowly start to see a more concerted, dynamic approach to how we get pucks to the net throughout the course of the year.
 

TheOrganist

Don't Call Him Alex
Feb 21, 2006
4,285
1,863
This problem has been consistently an issue since 20-21. It's why the models hate us. It's why the pundits hate us. It's why it's excruciating to watch this team at times.

It's 1-game. It was a road game. It was an opener against a fast team that wants to put the puck on net. But this team has to raise its ceiling offensively. Offense has really changed around this team as more and more players (both high and low draft picks) are developing dynamic shots. Quick releases. Practiced 1ts. More range and angles. The last 5 years has been an explosion in the skill of shooting the puck (I would put most of that on Matthews).

We've got those guys coming into the system with Dvorsky, Snuggy and even Stenberg. But we've got one right now in Bolduc who is going to sit/get sent down to make room for more game managers who crash the net. This team is full of game managers who crash the net, along with 3 dynamic playmakers with nobody to pass the puck to but themselves.

Bolduc doesn't fix much by himself , but this offense needs to manufacture ways to be more dynamic soon. And this organization does not have the appetite to usher in 3-4 young players in the same year which is the trajectory we're potentially on.
Love the data and technical info re: shooting but it’s not really a coincidence that the Blues went from a consistently solid puck possession team in the Petro era to a possession black hole post-2020. Not breaking any news here but many of the predictable offensive issues stem from the backend. Hopefully Broberg assists in making incremental improvements in this realm but Lindstein and Jiricek are the keys to becoming a team that doesn’t chase.

As for the offense, I think Bolduc will be a fixture with the NHL club for most of the yr and his development as a legit shooting threat will be akin to the Neighbors watch last yr in terms of growth. And as mentioned, it’s encouraging we have some legit shooters in the system who aren’t far away who can bring a more enhanced element to this area of our offense.

It’s going to take a while though for this team to control play again and I’ve resigned myself to that fact.
 

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
8,066
8,676
Love the data and technical info re: shooting but it’s not really a coincidence that the Blues went from a consistently solid puck possession team in the Petro era to a possession black hole post-2020. Not breaking any news here but many of the predictable offensive issues stem from the backend. Hopefully Broberg assists in making incremental improvements in this realm but Lindstein and Jiricek are the keys to becoming a team that doesn’t chase.

As for the offense, I think Bolduc will be a fixture with the NHL club for most of the yr and his development as a legit shooting threat will be akin to the Neighbors watch last yr in terms of growth. And as mentioned, it’s encouraging we have some legit shooters in the system who aren’t far away who can bring a more enhanced element to this area of our offense.

It’s going to take a while though for this team to control play again and I’ve resigned myself to that fact.
The bolded here is a really good point. Defending really isn’t about physicality anymore, it is more about killing plays, gaining possession, and transitioning out of the zone to offense. Sometimes that starts with a hit, but mostly it’s about stick work and positioning now.
 

BlueMed

Registered User
Jul 18, 2019
2,944
3,525
a potent 2C and a potent 1D added to this team and it's a contender. however, those are massive pieces that franchises hunt over long years. it isn't going to happen this year so the wins like yesterdays will feel unsustainable. that style of win is one we could see again with Binner being the absolute difference maker to keep them in games long enough to capitalize, but being dominated for the first 30 minutes is not a sustainable winning formula

And that's why the offer sheets were so significant. Broberg and Holloway are two candidates with an opportunity to prove to this team that they can fill those roles.
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,927
6,011
Badlands
And that's why the offer sheets were so significant. Broberg and Holloway are two candidates with an opportunity to prove to this team that they can fill those roles.
that is the first time I have heard that. really? broberg could ever become a potent 1D and holloway could ever become a potent 2C?

I was talking more about truly real players for those spots, not a couple decent pieces. The Cup needs truly real players there not hopes and dreams
 

Linkens Mastery

Conductor of the TankTown Express
Jan 15, 2014
20,384
18,093
Hyrule
I'm definitely not expecting Broberg and Holloway to magically become 1D and 2C players. I COULD see Broberg being a 1st line caliber player, but, that doesn't mean 1D, more like 2/3D. I think Holloway ends up being a Winger. Dvorsky will end up being the 2C, it's just the matter of when.
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,927
6,011
Badlands
This problem has been consistently an issue since 20-21. It's why the models hate us. It's why the pundits hate us. It's why it's excruciating to watch this team at times.

It's 1-game. It was a road game. It was an opener against a fast team that wants to put the puck on net. But this team has to raise its ceiling offensively. Offense has really changed around this team as more and more players (both high and low draft picks) are developing dynamic shots. Quick releases. Practiced 1ts. More range and angles. The last 5 years has been an explosion in the skill of shooting the puck (I would put most of that on Matthews).

We've got those guys coming into the system with Dvorsky, Snuggy and even Stenberg. But we've got one right now in Bolduc who is going to sit/get sent down to make room for more game managers who crash the net. This team is full of game managers who crash the net, along with 3 dynamic playmakers with nobody to pass the puck to but themselves.

Bolduc doesn't fix much by himself , but this offense needs to manufacture ways to be more dynamic soon. And this organization does not have the appetite to usher in 3-4 young players in the same year which is the trajectory we're potentially on.

The way that Utah used Gunther's shot, excessively, to create chaos and predictable retrievels for their forecheckers is something most teams are doing more of. The Blues haven't even started. The average shot distance has gone from inside 15ft to trending toward 25ft, typically approaching a 45 degree angle, in the past 10 years. With players having higher quality shots combined with individual goalie/movement data, many systems have the weak side winger positioning themselves to retrieve off an angle vs. simply crashing the net. When it works it results in a scoring chance + ToP.

It's really hard to develop good forecheckers when 1.) the book on how the Blues cycle the puck is written in cement and 2.) it's really difficult to get in game reps when you're that predictable

Their selective approach to shooting used to work when we had 3 additional shooters in O'Reilly, Tarasenko, and Perron. But now, there's no reason that we shouldn't be trying to add more variety and volume to our attack.

Again, it was 1-game. But this has been a consistent issue, and my alarm bells started going off in camp when it was clear nothing was systematically changing in terms of how we generated offense. I'm not going to pretend it's a simple change, and maybe there's an argument that you're better off waiting to change when you're forced to infuse multiple skill players, but I would think it's better to start adding some flavors now. I hope to see it.

I've had arguments with others that have suggested we don't have the blue-line to manufacture offense and ToP this way, but my counter argument has been that we don't have a blue line conducive to how we want to manufacture offense today, so it feels like a wash.
this is exceptional analysis

you're 100% right that teams are designing attack to get the goalies moving. shot blocking systems have gotten so good that the offensive hack is strategic angle-ry. the chance for the open guy getting the rebound at that right circle for the sharp angle takes so much strenuous work and discipline to interrupt.

one of the reasons I have huge confidence in Binner is he is a great reader of the play and suddenly there's both a glorious chance and a fantastic Binner angle, but the season feels like a grind of 82 games watching him survive this
 

BlueMed

Registered User
Jul 18, 2019
2,944
3,525
that is the first time I have heard that. really? broberg could ever become a potent 1D and holloway could ever become a potent 2C?

I was talking more about truly real players for those spots, not a couple decent pieces. The Cup needs truly real players there not hopes and dreams

That's up to the players to prove it. Both players have the skating ability and the physical tools. Now they need to apply their work ethic and dedication.
 

PocketNines

Cutter's Way
Apr 29, 2004
13,927
6,011
Badlands
That's up to the players to prove it. Both players have the skating ability and the physical tools. Now they need to apply their work ethic and dedication.
It's a serious longshot for both to become that. It's not for Dvorsky to become a 2C but it will take time. We hope Jiricek could blossom past his injuries but I am not holding my breath and that will also be years
 

BlueMed

Registered User
Jul 18, 2019
2,944
3,525
I'm definitely not expecting Broberg and Holloway to magically become 1D and 2C players. I COULD see Broberg being a 1st line caliber player, but, that doesn't mean 1D, more like 2/3D. I think Holloway ends up being a Winger. Dvorsky will end up being the 2C, it's just the matter of when.

It's a serious longshot for both to become that. It's not for Dvorsky to become a 2C but it will take time. We hope Jiricek could blossom past his injuries but I am not holding my breath and that will also be years
That's not really up to the fans though. It's up to the players, and it's still too early to have that level of certainty. Both players were drafted very high (Broberg 8th overall and Holloway 14th overall), and they were fairly underutilized in Edmonton. Would it really be that improbable for Broberg to put up 40+ points playing 20+ minutes per night on both even strength and specialty teams? Would it really be that improbable for Holloway to put up 50+ points as a 2C? This and next season will give both players the opportunity to demonstrate such, and if they do, then Alex Steen can resign them at their deserved market values.
 
Last edited:

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad