GDT Game 1: 4/13/16 | 8:30PM CST | v Hawks | NBCSN/FSMW/Y98

[SamJunior]

Same old shit, if you ask me.
The offense was once again totally sacrificed on the shrine of the defense. We have seen this before against the Kings and the Hawks as well, and it didn't work.
Tarasenko - and Fabbri from time to time - is the only one who is trying to generate offense, but he's all alone with his efforts. Elliott was brilliant as I expected but he won't get us three more SO's in this series.
I'm happy with the win, but pretty skeptical at the same time. If we keep playing like this, and won't try to test Crawford with more shots and qualitative chances, the history will repeat itself, and out postseason won't last longer than six games. Again.

[theohall]

Same old shit, if you ask me.
The offense was once again totally sacrificed on the shrine of the defense. We have seen this before against the Kings and the Hawks as well, and it didn't work.
Tarasenko - and Fabbri from time to time - is the only one who is trying to generate offense, but he's all alone with his efforts. Elliott was brilliant as I expected but he won't get us three more SO's in this series.
I'm happy with the win, but pretty skeptical at the same time. If we keep playing like this, and won't try to test Crawford with more shots and qualitative chances, the history will repeat itself, and out postseason won't last longer than six games. Again.

Well, let's look beyond just "Shots on Goal" and look at total shot attempts in the game (thanks war-on-ice.com)

Chicago - 68 - 15 on their 5 power plays. And most of those 15 were from 3 back-to-back-to-back penalties with significant 5-on-3 time.
Blues - 60 - 18 on their 4 power plays.

This is NOT "sacrificing offense for team defense". 8 shot attempts short??? and the Blues are sacrificing offense??

The scarier statistic is zone starts. The Blues iced the puck way too many times in this game and Elliott freezing the puck to save the defenses bacon led to this lopsided number. Why is Elliott having to freeze the puck and the Blues ice it? Reliance on the defense to move the puck while the forwards wait for the D to get it to them. While icing are sometimes the result of missed stretch passes, as in trying to generate offense from defense without the forwards helping the D inside the D zone. Again - not sacrificing forwards offense for defense. This has been the change this season when the team has been mostly healthy. It has worked well in most games with a very few exceptions. The 20 shot attempts which completely missed the net and weren't blocked you don't see anywhere in mainstream reporting of the game. With the 1st one under the rookies belts, I'd expect them to be calmer and get more shots in front where they have to be blocked or hit the net. Also, some of the missed shots are "shot-pass" attempts looking for the deflection in front. That's the kind of goals that get scored in playoff games, not the pretty ones.

Chicago - 30 offensive zone starts
St Louis - 11 offensive zone starts.

With faceoffs being darn near 50-50 (Blues won 32 to Hawks 27), the Blues have to do a better job of forcing offensive zone faceoffs. This hasn't been an issue most of this season, but was the only big negative number I saw in this game when looking at overall statistics.

Were the Blues sacrificing offense for defense, the Hawks would not have had a butt ton of odd-man breaks. Large numbers of odd-man breaks are a direct result of letting the forwards focus more on offense while relying on defensemen alone when forwards turn the puck over while trying to generate offense.

Not so concerned when seeing the overall numbers, because those match the eyeball test, not the lopsided shots on goal numbers.

[WaukeeBlues]

I don't know what you were seeing that I wasn't but the eye test wasn't really that good.

VanRiemsdyk didn't have a good game overall and those kind of errors Keith isn't going to make in his 30+ minutes of ice time for game 2 and beyond.

The Blackhawks were phenomenal all night at blocking shots. We could not get anything through. We have to get more pucks to the net. Elliott bailed these guys out multiple times in that game and there's no way he can do that three more times on his own.

I tend to agree with SamJunior: I was not impressed last night. Panarin had several good looks that the kid is going to start burying here in short order, and even without their top defensemen and Conn Smythe winner the Hawks were a bounce away from winning this thing. We had to have that game and I'm glad we got it but I'm not optimistic.

I like that the defense (Pietrangelo in particular early on in the game) were jumping into the play to try and generate some more offense but you have to get some shots through.

Parayko was a stud all game, that guy is a revelation. It's ridiculous.

[theohall]

The Blackhawks were phenomenal all night at blocking shots. We could not get anything through. We have to get more pucks to the net. Elliott bailed these guys out multiple times in that game and there's no way he can do that three more times on his own.

Blocked shots for the game. STL 22. CHI 20. The difference in shots on goal wasn't the blocks, because the Blues actually blocked more. The issue was shots completely missing - as in not on net and not blocked at all - STL 20 - CHI 13. Why isn't anyone raving about how well the Blues did blocking shots? Just because the media is on their knees taking care of the Hawks doesn't mean the Blues weren't doing the same damn things.

That's my point about the team not sacrificing offense for defense. If they had been sacrificing O for D, they wouldn't even have 60 shot attempts much less 20 missed shots. Just be more accurate shooting in terms of getting it towards the net. If it's completely missing everything 20 times, there is zero chance of anything beneficial happening.

[dmiles2186]

The hawkgobblers on nbcsn were seriously depressed that the Blackhawks lost. (Frank) them and their homer announcers.

Yeah, in the postgame show they agreed the Hawks should have won. Hoping we can not get outshot 2-1 going forward though.

I don't disagree with them though. The Blues looked like the better team early in the first until they started lining up for a free trip to the sin bin. A good chunk of the 2nd, the Hawks were the better team. Almost all of the 3rd, the Hawks were the better team. We started to get sloppy, Ells bailed the team out a few times. And then it gets to OT, and again, we're not setting up in the offensive zone, the Hawks are getting the bulk of the chances. We won when what looked to be a pass when off of one of their guys and in. I am 100% over the moon that the Blues won this game, but if it wasn't for Ells (who was somehow the #2 star), we lose this game. To put it simply, the Hawks played almost as good a road game as you can play and just came away short.

As for Ells, we all want to see a Blues goalie steal a playoff game. Well, it happened last night. Here's to hoping there's more.

[cardsfan04]

I don't understand how any Blues fan can look at a 1-0 playoff OT win against the Blackhawks negatively. If the roles were reversed, we'd be hearing, "all that matters is the final score."

[cprice12]

I'm not going to complain about any playoff win against anyone...especially when the Blues didn't play poorly at all and one in which they shut out the defending cup champs.

It's not all about shots on net guys. The Blues simply looked good for most of the game. They had offensive pressure, their passes were on point, and they really did a good job with Kane & Panarin's line, (which scares me). They moved the puck well in the offensive zone and didn't get hemmed in by Chicago that much.

Their PK was fantastic and allowed them to whether some pretty ticky tack calls in the first period...that also helped bump up Chicago's shot total a bit as well.

When the Blues played poorly this year, they were sloppy, their passes wouldn't connect, they weren't generating good chances and had little offensive pressure. That wasn't the case for most of the night last night. How anyone can compare their effort last night with poor efforts in the past is beyond me.

Parayko, Pietrangelo, Fabbri, Shattenkirk, Elliott all looked exceptional.
Schwartz should have ended this game in regulation but he whiffed on that shot when he had an open net and it ended up going off of Toewes' skate. He doesn't miss those.

I thought Berglund was invisible for most of the night. Backes didn't/couldn't do a whole lot offensively until OT.

Tarasenko needs to shoot more. I appreciate his creativity, and I understand he doesn't want to shoot it into shin guards, but he has to put it towards the net more. He passed up a number of opportunities to shoot and decided to dish it off. Change the shooting angle and put it towards the net and maybe you get a deflection.

Now...with all of that said, yes...the Blues do need to get more shots on net as they shot wide an awful lot, but give credit to Chicago for getting into the shooting lanes and forcing those misses. That's something they need to improve before game #2...and they've said as much. And the numbers may say that the Blues may have blocked as many shots as the Hawks, but it sure seemed like the Blues had a lot more quality chances blocked. It's not like they weren't generating chances and not taking shots...they absolutely were.

They did give up far too many odd man chances, but by forcing them wide or blocking/forcing a bad pass and not giving them the best look on those rushes they played them pretty well considering. And of course, Elliott was a wall. We can't say enough about his play.

Chicago turned it up in the last 5 minutes of regulation and the first part of OT and didn't give the Blues much. That was the only real time during the game that Chicago really took over the play.

I'm not saying the Blues shouldn't try to play better or that there is nothing to work on though. They'll likely need to step it up some.
They did have a few moments where they were sloppy (but Chicago did too) but they covered that up and of course had too many shots wide/blocked.

A lot of folks are saying Chicago had a moral victory as they withstood the hits by the Blues and got a lot of shots through and had some good chances.
Chicago can have 3 more moral victories as far as I am concerned. I'll take the actual W's.

[StL Dan]

I'm not complaining one bit. A win is a win is a win. You take that win and build on it.

If I want to get analytical with the game, sure, the Hawks have a few guys that can create their own scoring opportunities. Panarin, Toews and Kane are so quick and or strong - they are able to exploit the slightest lane in the defense and find a bit of open ice to get good, strong shot off. The most impressive display of that was Panarin's 3rd period (I think) shot as he split the defense in the slot, moved to his forehand then released a wicked snap shot that Moose stopped with perfect positioning which allowed him to deflect the shot with his shoulder. Those three players - and a few others - were able to get those kind of looks 6 or 7 times. The Blues gave up too many odd man rushes too. Moose stood on his head. He was a stud.

To the Blues credit, they didn't flake out and veer from their system. They continued to get pucks in deep and work the cycle. And, even though they didn't score on their 4 PP opportunities, and in a few cases, didn't even get a shot on goal, I liked the way they moved the puck and got shots off. Chicago did a great job of clogging the middle and blocking most attempts.

I can't wait for Saturday night's game. The Blues have a lot to build off of and hopefully come out flying.

[cprice12]

I can't wait for Saturday night's game. The Blues have a lot to build off of and hopefully come out flying.

You mean Friday night's game.

[StL Dan]

I can't wait for Saturday night's game. The Blues have a lot to build off of and hopefully come out flying.

You mean Friday night's game.

LOL...yep! I think I'm getting my Cards and Blues schedules a little mixed up, or maybe I'm suffering from lack of sleep from staying up to watch the whole game last night.

Here are Hitch's post game comments:

https://www.facebook.com/foxsportsmidwe ... 446065254/

[midgensa]

I saw a lot of what has been talked about in this thread last night.

We have a ton of guys producing that have not been a part of the "disappointments."

Parayko, Brouwer, Fabbri and even Elliott (who has had to watch as Miller and Allen were letdowns) all stepped up and showed the past is the past!

I think that this win was very solid. We were sloppy, arguably outplayed and found a way to win. We will NOT be outplayed the entire series and Jaden, Vlad, Alex and Robby will find the net in flurries at some point.

In my opinion, the way the game was played ... this was a very tough road loss for the Blackhawks. They know they have to win at least one on the road and if they couldn't win this won, where is it going to come from?

I feel very good going forward. We hit them hard. Some of their stars spent a ton of time on the ice and got hit. We won the game. And Elliott is better than Crawford right now. There is a ton to be optimistic about.

You know ... if we weren't the Blues

[StL Dan]

I agree...the Blues found a way despite being out shot and out played at times. IMO, this series may well come down to how well the Blues D can limit, re-direct and block shots because they aren't going to be able to stop the Hawks 2 top lines. They are just too darn good at finding and exploiting open space. We can't expect Moose to stand on his head every night either, but, he may have to at least 4 times for the Blues to advance.

[Krigloch the Furious]

Tarasenko needs to shoot. Less drop pass garbage.
Schwartz has been meh for a few weeks now.
Fabbri is a badass.
Parayko is a badass.
Edmunson needs to calm down. Lots of wtf passes from that guy.
Gunnarsson didn't suck. Weird.
Less penalties!
Brian Elliott is a monster
Need to make Crawford work

Cool they won, do it 3 more times and I'll be happy. I will not get excited for this team until they prove they can move on.

Sent from my R2 unit

[cprice12]

Tarasenko needs to shoot. Less drop pass garbage.
Schwartz has been meh for a few weeks now.
Fabbri is a badass.
Parayko is a badass.
Edmunson needs to calm down. Lots of wtf passes from that guy.
Gunnarsson didn't suck. Weird.
Less penalties!
Brian Elliott is a monster
Need to make Crawford work

Cool they won, do it 3 more times and I'll be happy. I will not get excited for this team until they prove they can move on.

Sent from my R2 unit

Yeah, Gunnarson played quite well.
He has been pretty steady all year and has been a nice surprise.
And agreed on Schwartz. He had some chances last night, a couple real good ones and he just missed on one tip and totally shanked that sure goal one timer. Would be great if he could contribute on the scoreboard going forward.

[Krigloch the Furious]

Schwartz is normally a good puck possession guy. Much stronger than he looks. He just hasn't done that in a long time. No idea what his problem is.

Sent from my R2 unit

[cprice12]

Schwartz is normally a good puck possession guy. Much stronger than he looks. He just hasn't done that in a long time. No idea what his problem is.

Sent from my R2 unit

He's also a thief...which we haven't seen a lot of lately either.

[cardsfan04]

Wouldn't surprise me if Schwartz is still hampered by that injury somewhat. I doubt he'll be 100% until next year.

[tjk002]

Wouldn't surprise me if Schwartz is still hampered by that injury somewhat. I doubt he'll be 100% until next year.

Can someone explain Backes comment in his post game interview meant about Schwartz losing teeth last night meant? Did he get smoked in the face? Or was he just commenting about him missing the empty net?

[Kerfuffle]

My thoughts - evenly matched game. Goalie duel all night. Elliott stood on his head. Both teams had chances and both had a lot of missed shots - I chalk that up to nerves in the first playoff game. We got a break when Schwartz missed a wide open net. Tank had severalbchances to shoot but passed instead - again nerves - easily corrected by Hitch. Both teams great defense. Glad we get Keith back for Friday. When 3rd started i figured it would be a fluke goal or some wacky bounce that would win it for either team and that's what eventually happened in OT. If all the games are played this evenly this could go 7.

[tjk002]

Wouldn't surprise me if Schwartz is still hampered by that injury somewhat. I doubt he'll be 100% until next year.

Can someone explain Backes comment in his post game interview meant about Schwartz losing teeth last night meant? Did he get smoked in the face? Or was he just commenting about him missing the empty net?

Never mind, just saw a video of the post game celebration, blood pouring out of Schwartz mouth. Guess he lost some teeth during the game. Didn't see it happen at the game.