Playoff Push Thread

Alklha

Registered User
Sep 7, 2011
16,875
2,751
Even if by some miracle we get into the playoffs, I can see us getting swept. It will be ugly.
That isn't the Blues M.O.

Going into the playoffs with no optimism? They have to build the optimism before they can crush it in the next ridiculous way.

Just like when we all accepted we weren't making the playoffs and they go 8-1-1 to give us optimism, before a crushing defeat against the worst team in the League to start a slide.
 

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
7,868
8,199
They were also turtl-ing because they have no faith in their goaltender. I mean Christ, they gave him a 3-1 lead and he pissed it away. I've defended Allen a lot. If you're going to put a list together of who to blame for last night, #1 is Allen followed by #2 being Yeo.
If Yeo starts Allen tomorrow night like he hinted at in his post-game press conference, then he becomes Public Enemy #1 as far as I'm concerned. At that point, I would be proud to sponsor the #YeoMustGeo movement because he would clearly not understand what is the weakest link on the team he is supposedly "leading."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Weiss1604

TheBluePenguin

Registered User
Apr 15, 2015
6,591
6,645
St Louis
I thought I would sleep off my anger after last nights collapse.....

latest
 

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,135
13,086
If Yeo starts Allen tomorrow night like he hinted at in his post-game press conference, then he becomes Public Enemy #1 as far as I'm concerned. At that point, I would be proud to sponsor the #YeoMustGeo movement because he would clearly not understand what is the weakest link on the team he is supposedly "leading."

I don't have confidence in either goalie at this point. Hutton's injury came at the worst possible time and he was not good in Arizona when he came in as the backup. I hate judging a rusty goalie's performance in relief, so I don't think it is all that useful. But it's the only sample we have in the last month and before that Hutton only had 2 quality starts in his previous 6 and was sub-.880 in 3 of those games. He was also bad in relief in that stretch, but again I'm not sure how much weight to put in that.

I think Yeo's mistake with the goalies came by starting Allen instead of Hutton against Arizona. I agreed with riding Allen while Hutton was out and starting Allen in the 2 games after his return (SJ and Vegas). But there was no reason not to give Hutton a start on the tail end of back to backs on the road. After that debacle, starting Allen made sense against Washington and it made sense last night. And now here we, in a situation where you'd like to rely on Hutton this weekend but the decision not to start him against Arizona means you're guessing about his level of rust while staring at Hutton's stat line of 2-3-2, .881 SV% and 3.63 GAA since his start in Minnesota on 2/6/18.

I don't like Yeo's decision making that got us here. But now that we are here, I'd start Allen. Last night was a dumpster fire but his last 8 games are significantly better than Hutton's and he bounced back from a bad Chicago game well a couple weeks ago. I'm not confident that he won't get shelled, but I'm equally unconfident about Hutton making his first start in a month given his play in February. From an asset management standpoint, if you want to move Allen this summer then getting shelled tomorrow night isn't going to hurt his value nearly as much as benching him in a playoff chase. If he plays decently or well, it helps his value some.

I'm honestly not sure whether Yeo is riding Allen because he believes he will bounce back or if he is simply giving him the chance to play himself out of town.

Edit for more stats, none of them pretty:

Hutton' stats since the start of February: 7 starts, 3-3-2, .895 SV% and 3.15 GAA. Pulled once in those 7 starts and posted a sub-.880 in 3 of those 7 starts (43%).

Allen's stats since the start of March: 13 starts, 8-5-1, .910 and 2.46 GAA. Pulled once in those 13 starts and posted a sub-.880 in 6 of those starts (46%).

Allen's stats since the start of February: 20 starts, 9-10-1, .899 SV% and 2.75 GAA. Pulled in 2 of those starts and posted a sub-.880 in 10 of those starts (50%).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BergMan

Shwabeal

Registered User
Feb 24, 2016
786
405
While it didn't directly hurt a team we're competing with for a Wild Card spot, the Stars did us a solid by scoring 3 unanswered in the 3rd to beat the Sharks last night. That loss leaves the #2 seed in the Pacific still completely up for grabs with LA 2 points behinf the Sharks and the Ducks 3 points back with a game in hand. SJ still has a hell of a lot to play for tomorrow night against the Avs instead of having a nice 4 point cushion and only needing 1 point to clinch home ice in round one. Colorado will be getting San Jose's A squad tomorrow and a crowd that should be loud.



Either Strickland reads HF or Brian is Andy Strickland :sarcasm:
 
  • Like
Reactions: stl76 and Brian39

Brian39

Registered User
Apr 24, 2014
7,135
13,086
Haha, I'd trade jobs with Andy in a heartbeat, but alas I'm writing about the Blues here when I have downtime from my real job.
 

TruBlu

Registered User
Feb 7, 2016
6,784
2,923
So tonight's game is pretty much meaningless for us since row is the tie breaker. We have to beat the Avs in any fashion and we are in.
 

WATTAGE4451

Registered User
Jan 4, 2018
1,885
1,411
So tonight's game is pretty much meaningless for us since row is the tie breaker. We have to beat the Avs in any fashion and we are in.
winning against hawks means blues can get in with overtime loss to avalanche. avalanche in overtime wouldnget them tied with blues on row but theyd lose head to head tiebreaker as blues would have 5points vs avs 4
 
  • Like
Reactions: MissouriMook

Zamadoo

Hail to the CHIEF
Apr 4, 2013
1,851
1,529
I am super pumped for tonight's game! I'm predicting Husso with the win. I just don't see any way we don't come out and absolutely destroy the Hawks. We've even had a day to think about it. I'm hoping Schmaltz and Soshnikov can get back in as well.

Bottom 6/pairing, Starting Goalie:
Soshnikov-Sobotka-Thompson
Jaskin-Barbashev-Thorburn

Bortz-Schmaltz

Husso
 

TruBlu

Registered User
Feb 7, 2016
6,784
2,923
winning against hawks means blues can get in with overtime loss to avalanche. avalanche in overtime wouldnget them tied with blues on row but theyd lose head to head tiebreaker as blues would have 5points vs avs 4
You mean a shootout, right? An overtime win would give the Avs a row, at which point we'd be tied and the first game where we won wouldn't count. I'm not sure I understand the crazy rules they do for these, but I saw where the first game we won wouldn't count and it would go to goal difference, which would put the Avs in. It pretty much looks like we have to win in any fashion tomorrow or lose in a shootout to keep the Avs from getting the row so none of the other stuff goes into effect.
 

WATTAGE4451

Registered User
Jan 4, 2018
1,885
1,411
You mean a shootout, right? An overtime win would give the Avs a row, at which point we'd be tied and the first game where we won wouldn't count. I'm not sure I understand the crazy rules they do for these, but I saw where the first game we won wouldn't count and it would go to goal difference, which would put the Avs in. It pretty much looks like we have to win in any fashion tomorrow or lose in a shootout to keep the Avs from getting the row so none of the other stuff goes into effect.
we have played 4 games against avs and are 3-1 the first gets dropped, but even then, if we lose to avs in overtime we are 2-1-1 with 5 points while avs are 2-2 with 4 points .

thus we win on head to head toebreaker.

there is no scenario where it can possibly go to goal differential tiebreaker between us. because we win head to head tiebreaker bybgetting a point vs avs and if we get 0 points we wouldnt have enough to even be tied with avs.
 

EastonBlues22

Registered User
Nov 25, 2003
14,807
10,496
RIP Fugu ϶(°o°)ϵ
You mean a shootout, right? An overtime win would give the Avs a row, at which point we'd be tied and the first game where we won wouldn't count. I'm not sure I understand the crazy rules they do for these, but I saw where the first game we won wouldn't count and it would go to goal difference, which would put the Avs in. It pretty much looks like we have to win in any fashion tomorrow or lose in a shootout to keep the Avs from getting the row so none of the other stuff goes into effect.
If the Blues get a ROW in Chicago, that puts them at 41 ROW with 94 points.

An subsequent OT loss to Colorado would leave Colorado with 95 points/41 ROW and the Blues with 95 points/41 ROW. Since the first tiebreaker (ROW) would be tied, it goes to the second tiebreaker which is points gained in games between the two teams. If an odd number of games has been played during the season, the first game at home for the team that hosted more games is not counted toward that total. The Blues currently have 4 points gained under those rules to Colorado's 2 points. An OT loss would leave the Blues with 5 points and Colorado with 4 points, and the Blues would make the playoffs based on that tiebreaker in that very specific scenario.

If Colorado wins in a SO, they don't get the ROW, and the Blues would make the playoffs based upon the first tiebreaker (their 41 ROW to Colorado's 40 ROW).

Basically, earning a ROW in Chicago means that Colorado needs to beat the Blues in regulation to make the playoffs. Anything else and the Blues advance. It may seem like a small edge, but roughly a quarter of all NHL games go to OT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jura and stl76

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
7,868
8,199
we have played 4 games against avs and are 3-1 the first gets dropped, but even then, if we lose to avs in overtime we are 2-1-1 with 5 points while avs are 2-2 with 4 points .

thus we win on head to head toebreaker.

there is no scenario where it can possibly go to goal differential tiebreaker between us. because we win head to head tiebreaker bybgetting a point vs avs and if we get 0 points we wouldnt have enough to even be tied with avs.
That sounds painful. I'm not sure the league should be resorting to such violence to determine who gets into the playoffs. :laugh:
 

stl76

No. 5 in your programs, No. 1 in your hearts
Jul 2, 2015
9,061
8,341
If the Blues get a ROW in Chicago, that puts them at 41 ROW with 94 points.

An subsequent OT loss to Colorado would leave Colorado with 95 points/41 ROW and the Blues with 95 points/41 ROW. Since the first tiebreaker (ROW) would be tied, it goes to the second tiebreaker which is points gained in games between the two teams. If an odd number of games has been played during the season, the first game at home for the team that hosted more games is not counted toward that total. The Blues currently have 4 points gained under those rules to Colorado's 2 points. An OT loss would leave the Blues with 5 points and Colorado with 4 points, and the Blues would make the playoffs based on that tiebreaker in that very specific scenario.

If Colorado wins in a SO, they don't get the ROW, and the Blues would make the playoffs based upon the first tiebreaker (their 41 ROW to Colorado's 40 ROW).

Basically, earning a ROW in Chicago means that Colorado needs to beat the Blues in regulation to make the playoffs. Anything else and the Blues advance. It may seem like a small edge, but roughly a quarter of all NHL games go to OT.
Thank you for explaining this madness. Basically, beating the hawks would give us a slightly larger margin for error against the avs. What could possibly go wrong? :sarcasm:
 

AjaxManifesto

Pro sports is becoming predictable and boring
Mar 9, 2016
24,671
16,111
St. Louis
<sigh>

This hasn’t been a fun season.

The only thing worse would be a 110+ point season followed by a 4 game 1st round blow out.

This is a bubble team that got our hopes up with a great start and is banking on that start right now with .500 caliber play.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad