2024-2025 Blues Multi-Purpose Thread.

[PocketNines]

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]

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.

 

[PocketNines]

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

 

[Majorityof1]

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]

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]

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.