David Pastrnak

Getty Images

Should Bruins break up top line next season?

9 Comments

The Boston Bruins and their fans are likely still smarting from falling one win short of a Stanley Cup victory against the St. Louis Blues, but the bottom line is that this was an impressive run. Really, it cemented the notion that Bruins management has done a lot right in finding ways to extend this group’s window of contention, where other teams would age out of elite play.

Still, there was one thing that bothered me about the Bruins: their lack of experimentation toward the end of the regular season.

Most teams don’t get the chance to tinker without big consequences

For a long time, it was clear that the Bruins would meet the Toronto Maple Leafs in Round 1 of the 2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs. There was also plenty of advance notice that the Bruins were unlikely to slip from the second seed.

While other NHL teams can be dinged for a lack of experimentation as well, the Bruins (and Maple Leafs) were in a rare position in this age of parity: they basically knew where they were going to land in the playoff branches, and didn’t really face much of a threat of dropping out of their position for some time.

In other words, if the Bruins wanted to try a bunch of different things – treating the rest of the regular season as a virtual hockey science lab – they wouldn’t have faced severe consequences, even if those experimentations blew up in their faces in the form of losses.

Instead, the Bruins more or less played things out.

If there was one question I would’ve wanted answered if I were in Bruce Cassidy’s shoes,* it would be: “What if we broke up the line of Brad Marchand, Patrice Bergeron, and David Pastrnak?”

* – And, make no mistake about it, this would be a bad deal for the Bruins, because Cassidy is overall a very bright coach, and I’d struggle to keep a team under one Too Many Men on the Ice penalties per period.

[More: How will the Bruins look next season?]

Hitting a wall at the worst possible time

Overall, it’s fine that the Bruins leaned toward not messing with a good thing. For the most part, that trio absolutely caves in opponents with their mix of smart defensive play, blistering passing, and dangerous sniping.

Unfortunately, that group hit some serious roadblocks during the postseason, particularly as the St. Louis Blues’ defense found ways to short circuit that top line, and the Blues’ own best players feasted to a surprisingly lopsided degree. This tweet really captures how one-sided things often were during the 2019 Stanley Cup Final:

Yikes. Yikes.

While wear and tear cannot be ignored during the grind of a deep playoff run, it’s fair to ask if the Bruins didn’t have enough of a Plan B for if the top line sputtered. To some extent, you can understand why: because they basically never ran into that problem during the regular season.

Yet, lacking alternate options might have made the Bruins easier to “solve.” Consider this striking excerpt from the latest edition of Elliotte Friedman’s “31 Thoughts.”

When it came to the Patrice Bergeron/Brad Marchand/David Pastrnak line, one Blue said they were determined “not to be fooled by their deception.” Those three are excellent at creating havoc through the neutral zone via the different routes they take. The Blues focused on where they wanted to get to (especially Marchand’s and Pastrnak’s preferred one-timer locations) instead of how they got there.

Attached at the hip

The Bruins certainly provided the Blues and other opponents with a lot of “tape” on the top line, so to speak, as they kept them glued together during the regular season.

Via Natural Stat Trick, Patrice Bergeron played more than 729 minutes with Brad Marchand at even-strength during the regular season, while Bergeron was only away from Marchand for less than 46 minutes. David Pastrnak saw a little bit more time away from that duo, but still spent far more time with them.

It’s striking, actually, that Pastrnak spent almost as much time away from Bergeron and Marchand during the smaller sample of the playoffs (123:12 without Marchand, 134:07 without Bergeron, in 24 games) as Pastrnak spent away from them during the regular season (202 away from Marchand, 182:27 away from Bergeron), and injuries exaggerated those regular season numbers.

You could argue that Pastrnak was moved around because of desperation, rather than inspiration, during the postseason, as things weren’t clicking. So it wasn’t exactly as if those swaps were happening in ideal circumstances.

But what if the Bruins had more combinations in their back pocket?

Roads less taken

Cassidy had the luxury of finding out a little bit more about how other duos or trios might click, but he chose not to do so. Could Marchand and Bergeron really propel their own lines, and how much does Pastrnak need at least one of those guys to thrive? Might Marchand find chemistry with David Krejci, and could Bergeron really click with Jake DeBrusk? If the drop-off from spreading the wealth vs. going top-heavy was small, then the Bruins might have been able to throw different looks against the Blues, rather than playing into their hands.

So, with all of that in mind, how much should the Bruins consider breaking up the top line for 2019-20, or at least portions of 2019-20?

Interestingly, there might be a political element to consider, too: would they grumble at being broken up? In particular, it could be a tough sell to pitch that idea to Bergeron and Marchand, specifically.

Expanding Marchand’s even-strength minutes from 2015-16 to 2018-19 with Natural Stat Trick, the results are pretty comical. Marchand spent 2,461 minutes and 40 seconds with Bergeron during that time period, and just 368:46 without Bergeron. That’s the hockey equivalent of a common law marriage.

If there’s no argument for breaking up the veterans, then maybe continued experimentation with Pastrnak is in order. Theoretically, Bergeron and Marchand could carry a lesser linemate, as that’s the general pattern around the NHL, as teams just don’t often enjoy the option to load up with their three best forwards and still have some talent left over not to get bombarded when their other three lines are on the ice.

Consistency vs. versatility

Again, the Bruins have done an impressive job finding other players, and this post is mainly asking the question regarding whether they can get even better, or at least more versatile.

This interesting piece by Steve Conroy of the Boston Herald discusses David Krejci wanting a more stable partner on the right wing to go with Jake DeBrusk on the Bruins’ mostly effective, but occasionally hot-and-cold second line.

To be fair, Krejci wants stability, where I would argue that the Bruins should try a number of different looks:

“We did touch on that a little bit, but that’s not really something I can control,” Krejci said. “We have lots of good players here who can play on that side, so I’m not worried about that. We have lots of players. But what I would like to have is consistency of the lines so you create some chemistry. You always go through some ups and downs. Everyone does. But if you stay together as a line, in your difficult time of the year, the two other guys can lift you up, or the other way around.”

Conroy brings up some options as right-handed shooters, from Pastrnak to interesting young forward Karson Kuhlman. I’d also throw Charlie Coyle‘s name in the hat, as while he’s mostly served as third-line center for the Bruins, Coyle also played at RW at times during his Wild years.

The thing is, coaches do what Krejci doesn’t like, and get the line blender going for reasons. During an 82-game season, you’re going to experience streaks, but also injuries. You also must battle stagnancy and predictability.

But, really, finding different looks comes down to the playoff contests after the 82-game season.

***

Would the Bruins have won it all if they could have kept the Blues a bit more off balance? Maybe, maybe not. You could also argue that staying the course helped the Bruins get as far as they did, in the first place.

Either way, these are the questions the Bruins should grapple with, and experiments they should undergo more often than they did in 2018-19. Chances are, their cap situation won’t allow them to add much and will probably force them to lose a nice asset like Marcus Johansson, so it’s about getting the most out of what they already have.

Cassidy & Co. deserve credit for getting a whole lot out of this group, already, yet maybe there are a few more answers that simply haven’t been explored, or explored enough to truly know?

LOOKING BACK, AND AHEAD, FOR BRUINS

James O’Brien is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @cyclelikesedins.

Stanley Cup Buzzer: Bruins, Blues are going to Game 7

8 Comments
  • Don’t blame it on the jinx. Superstitions didn’t stump St. Louis; instead, it was superlative play from Tuukka Rask. He shut down the Blues while they really carried the play through the first 40 minutes of Game 6, and then the Bruins blew open what had been just a 1-0 game heading into the third period. Prepare for the agony and ecstasy of a Game 7 in the Stanley Cup Final, hockey fans.

Boston Bruins 5, St. Louis Blues 1 (Series tied 3-3; Game 7 airs at 8 p.m. ET on Wednesday [NBC; stream here])

This one was a lot closer than it indicated, and not just because Zdeno Chara scored an empty-netter for Boston. While Jordan Binnington was the star of Game 5 for St. Louis, Rask stole one (or at least two-thirds of this one) for Boston, and the Bruins ran away with the final frame to sap any drama from the latter stages of Sunday’s contest. Really, if you step back and look at the series, it only seems fitting that this one is going the distance.

[NBC 2019 STANLEY CUP PLAYOFF HUB]

1. Tuukka Rask

Even the one goal Rask allowed tells part of the story of his Game 6, as it initially looked like he made the save, by Ryan O'Reilly‘s attempt barely went over the red line.

Really, the Blues didn’t deserve to be shut out, not that goose eggs only happen by merit. They put forth a ferocious effort, although their special teams let them down at key times. Rask made 28 out of 29 saves in this one, although there was one close call that will really leave you scratching your head.

It’s tough to make a definitive argument for a specific Blues player to win the Conn Smythe, if they get it, as it’s been a team effort. The Bruins have enjoyed some nice performances from plenty of other cast members, but if a Boston player gets it, it’s going to Rask. He’s been dynamite.

[More on Rask’s big Game 6 performance.]

2. Brad Marchand

Consider this a collective award for “The Perfection Line.” Even with Patrice Bergeron failing to generate a point in Game 6, his effort was considerable, including six shots on goal.

It’s really a jump ball between Marchand and David Pastrnak, though, as both forwards ended Game 6 with a goal and an assist. For my money, Marchand’s goal was the most crucial of the contest. The Blues were really pouring it on, and the Bruins couldn’t squander a 5-on-3 power play opportunity. They didn’t, thanks to some great puck movement, and a nice finish by Marchand. That 1-0 goal wouldn’t serve as the game-winner, but Boston really needed it.

Marchand assisted on Pastrnak’s pretty 4-1 goal, which was a nice display of skill and poise, while throwing a bucket of ice water on any semblance of resistance after ROR shrunk Boston’s lead to a more tenable 3-1.

3. Charlie McAvoy

The second star basically went to two forwards, while the third goes to the overall Bruins’ defensive effort, personified most boldly by McAvoy.

Now, you could make an argument for Jake DeBrusk and the Bruins’ second line, as they made a difference in Game 6, with DeBrusk shining when things were tight. Other Bruins defensemen could jockey for the third billing; Chara scored that empty-netter and showed courage once again, while Brandon Carlo‘s bouncer was the GWG.

And, yes, a very cursory glance at McAvoy’s stats (zero points, what could have been a problematic penalty against Vladimir Tarasenko) wouldn’t impress.

If you dig deeper, you’ll realize how crucial McAvoy was. McAvoy really tilted the ice in his favor during his 25:22 TOI, including almost 21 minutes of tough five-on-five play. He was on the right end of the possession battle to an impressive extent; according to Natural Stat Trick, McAvoy was on the ice for 15 shots for and only six against at even-strength. McAvoy stands far above his other Bruins teammates in other, fancier measures, as well.

Oh yeah, and he also helped Rask keep that puck out – somehow – on that memorably batty play.

Hot take: the Bruins  better make sure they sign McAvoy, who’s a pending RFA.

Factoids

  • Being that the Blues had been swept in all of their previous Stanley Cup Final appearances, it’s redundant to say that this is new for them, and the Bruins have played in a Game 7 in a Stanley Cup Final. This is, however, new for Boston, as this is the first time the Bruins will host a Game 7 of a Stanley Cup Final. Every other “Original Six” team has already hosted at least one Game 7 of a SCF.
  • Karson Kuhlman is the 21st different Bruins player to score at least one goal during this run. The Bruins have tied the 1987 Philadelphia Flyers for the record for most unique scorers during a single postseason. Clearly, Tuukka Rask needs to break the tie. (Sportsnet points out John Moore as a more realistic, less entertaining option.)
  • Speaking of Rask, Sportsnet notes that he has an absurd .966 save percentage on the road during his last seven road playoff games.
  • Torey Krug has six points during this Round 4 series. Only one other Bruins defenseman has generated more points during a Stanley Cup Final series: Bobby Orr scored eight in 1972 and seven in 1974.
  • The Bruins are now 25-1 in playoff games when Brad Marchand scores a goal. His seven goals in Stanley Cup Final games (19 games played) ties Marchand for second all-time among Bruins, with Orr (eight goals in 16 GP) and Johnny Bucyk (eight goals in 24 GP) tied for first. Marchand is currently tied with Wayne Cashman, who generated seven goals in 26 games.

How to watch Game 7

Game 7 of the 2019 Stanley Cup Final airs on NBC at 8 p.m. ET on Wednesday (stream here).

James O’Brien is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @cyclelikesedins.

Bruins’ ‘Perfection Line’ far from perfect lately

Getty Images
2 Comments

They’ve been dubbed ‘The Perfection Line,’ but lately, in reality, they’ve been far from it.

Patrice Bergeron, with Brad Marchand and David Pastrnak flanking, have been one of the talking points of the playoffs, especially heading into the Stanley Cup Final. In the first three rounds, the line combined for 46 points, at times taking games into their respective hands and conjuring up a win.

They earned the moniker, surely. But perfection has evaded them as of late.

Through five games, they’ve combined for nine points — four, if you take away a lopsided 7-2 win in Game 3. In pivotal games such as Games 4 and 5, they combined for just two assists.

It’s a slump the Bruins can ill-afford at the moment. Their top unit on the power play is manned by the same three players, and that power play is 0-for-5 in their past two games after going 6-for-14 in the first three.

Last I checked, perfection isn’t spelled s-l-u-m-p.

Bruins head coach Bruce Cassidy addressed the rut during the off-day on Saturday.

The line’s production dried up both Round 2 and 3, at times, and Cassidy believes that they can work themselves out of it again, particularly Marchand.

“We asked him to attack a little more,” Cassidy said. “What happens with Brad is if the puck’s not going in, he wants to make plays for Pasta, because Pasta can score, Berg, they’re all 30-goal scorers, so [Brad] defers a little bit.

“We tried to get him out of that mindset and just play. If the pass is there, obviously make it, but don’t be afraid to shoot. You saw it the other night, he rang one off the post, had one cross screen and nice blocker save, [Sean] Kuraly almost got the rebound, so there was some stuff going on there for him. I thought Pastrnak was closer than that, had a block on a wraparound, so he’s getting inside. That encourages me. So I feel they’re close, but St. Louis is tough. It’s tough to get inside, they defend well, goaltender’s playing well. So it’s a good battle right now.”

If there’s a good omen here, it’s that the first time Boston faced elimination in these playoffs, perfection was, indeed, the deciding factor.

The Bruins found themselves trailing the Toronto Maple Leafs 3-2 in their Round 1 series. With their backs up against the wall, Marchand exploded for two goals and an assist, Pastrnak assisted twice and Bergeron added a helper of his own for a six-point night for the line and a win that forced a Game 7.

Given who the Blues have played the Bergeron line as of late, it appears Boston is going to need another one of those Herculean efforts on Sunday to send the series back to Boston for the 17th Game 7 in Stanley Cup Final history — and first, ironically, since Boston won it all in 2011.

“I do believe they were better, closer to scoring than they have been,” Cassidy said. “And I’ve said it: listen, we want them to score, but we’ve gotten production all playoffs from different players. It’s why we’re still playing. That’s the mindset tomorrow. Your best players need to be your best players, but if they defend well and we have a good defensive game, you know, we’re in it, I feel someone will step up. Probably them, because they usually do.

“But same token, we don’t want to put so much pressure on them they get outside their overall game, their defensive game, because they’re a good line all-around and we don’t want them to lose that.”

For what it’s worth, Boston pushed the pace with 39 shots in Game 5, 13 of which came from Bergeron’s line, and got very unlucky when Noel Acciari was slew-footed, leading to David Perron‘s 2-0 goal that would be all the difference in a 2-1 St. Louis win.

Give that line another 13 shots and the story could be vastly different. The Bruins will be hoping that’s the case.

Blues-Bruins Game 6 is Sunday night at 8 p.m. ET on NBC and the NBC Sports app.

MORE BLUES – BRUINS COVERAGE:
Bruins vs. Blues: Three keys to Game 6 of Stanley Cup Final
Blues looking to seize opportunity, close out storybook season
• Pucks tell the story of Blues’ rollercoaster season
• Bruins’ Chara was more than just brave in Game 5
• Chara, Dunn join jaw-dropping club of playing through pain
• Bruins, Blues in familiar places heading into Game 6


Scott Billeck is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @scottbilleck

Pastrnak’s tape job makes for incredibly unique stick

Getty Images
2 Comments

BOSTON — Marc Savard knows plenty about taping hockey sticks. The former NHLer shows viewers the different ways players tape their sticks on his YouTube channel. There is one player in the league whose tape job drives Savard crazy.

“The blade is scary,” Savard said about David Pastrnak‘s unique tape job during a Feb. 2018 episode. “I don’t know how he plays with this and produces the way he does and is as successful as he is with this tape job.”

It’s a very simple look for Pastrnak: three stripes up top of the shaft of his 77-flex, BAUER Nexus 2N model and only three stripes of black tape on the blade. A completely different pattern than what most players use.

“When I was a kid you had to buy your own tape and it wasn’t cheap,” said Pastrnak in a promotional video for Bauer Hockey. “We’d always use less tape so you could have it for a long time. For some reason it brings me luck — the three stripes on the top and three stripes on the bottom.”

Getty Images

Pastrnak said he’s not good with scissors, hence why he keeps tape away from the toe of the blade. The lack of coverage on his blade clearly doesn’t affect his on-ice production having recorded 132 goals and 284 points in 320 career NHL games.

In Pastrnak’s eyes, having so little tape on the blade makes him feel more comfortable handling and shooting the puck. Any more tape and he feels less control.

Pastrnak’s teammates find the way he tapes his sticks very unusual, and you won’t find them copying the 23-year-old forward’s style.

“Absolutely not. I cannot do that,” said defenseman Steve Kampfer. “I wouldn’t even attempt to. I’ll leave that for skill guys.”

“It’s pretty wild stuff there,” said forward Danton Heinen. “I haven’t see anybody do it like that. He’s obviously unbelievable with it, so it works for him. That’s awesome. It’s not something I’ll be doing.”

Game 5 of the 2019 Stanley Cup Final airs on NBC at 8 p.m. ET on Thursday (stream here).

MORE: A look at Ryan O’Reilly unusual blade

————

Sean Leahy is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @Sean_Leahy.

Why Blues’ discipline has disappeared in Stanley Cup Final

Getty
3 Comments

Through the first three games of the Stanley Cup Final the message has been the same for the St. Louis Blues, so much so that it is almost becoming annoying to keep typing it and saying it.

That message: Stop. Taking. Penalties.

Through the first three games of the series the Blues been completely unable to do that, having already tallied 34 penalty minutes heading into Monday’s Game 4 (8 p.m. ET, NBC; Live Stream).

This is not sitting well with the Blues for a number of reasons, from the fact the Bruins’ power play has already scored six goals, to the fact it is a drastic change from what we saw from the Blues for the entire season prior to this series.

During the regular season the Blues averaged just 7.35 penalty minutes per game, one of the lowest marks in the entire NHL.

In their three playoff series’ before the Final (against the Winnipeg Jets, Dallas Stars, and San Jose Sharks) they actually saw their average drop down to just 6.30 penalty minutes per game, which was the lowest per-game average of any team in the 2019 Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Everything we saw from the Blues this season was that they were one of the most disciplined teams in the NHL. They did a better job staying out of the penalty box than almost any other team in the league and they did not give their opponents an opportunity to burn them on the power play and change a game with bad penalties.

But in the three games against the Bruins the Blues have been averaging more than 11 penalty minutes per game and have already been shorthanded 14 times in the series. This has been a massive problem, not only because it has zapped the Blues of any momentum they have been able to build at times, but because the Bruins’ power play unit is still clicking at an all-time great success rate.

[NBC 2019 STANLEY CUP PLAYOFF HUB]

Coach Craig Berube was asked about what is leading to the increase in penalties, and while he acknowledged that his team could be more disciplined, he also made it clear he does not agree with all of the calls.

“Well, there’s a few things,” said Berube. “First of all we were the least penalized team in the league in the first three rounds, now all of a sudden we’ve taken 14 penalties in one series. So I don’t know. I don’t buy into all of that, to be honest with you. I think that we could definitely be more composed after the whistle. I think we’ve let some frustration get in there where we maybe do too much after the whistle. So we’ll clean that up, for sure. But like I said, we were the least penalized team in the league coming into this series. I don’t agree with all of the calls.”

When it was pointed out to Berube that the number of penalties usually decreases this late in the playoffs, he once again referenced the fact the Blues were the least penalized team through the first three rounds.

“Like I said, we were the least penalized team in the playoffs coming into this round,” he said. “Now all these penalties. Again, there’s nothing we can really do about what’s happened. Going forward, well, we can talk about being more disciplined, which we have, and playing between the whistles tomorrow. That can help.”

This is the reaction we should expect from a coach at this point in the season. There is acknowledgement that their team can be better, while there is also an attempt at publicly working the officials in an effort to try and buy some calls later in the series.

But none of this answers the question as to WHY the Blues are taking more penalties.

The answer to that question might be fairly simple: this is what tends happens when teams play the Bruins in the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

When looking at the 2018-19 regular season numbers, the Bruins were one of the most penalized teams in the NHL by averaging more than nine penalty minutes per game, the second highest total in the league.

Every single one of their opponents (the Toronto Maple Leafs, Columbus Blue Jackets, Carolina Hurricanes, and now the Blues) were among the eight least penalized teams in the league, all averaging less than 7:40 in penalty time per game. Looking at those numbers and it would be easy to conclude ahead of time that it might be the Bruins that have to be more disciplined.

In each individual playoff series, the numbers have completely flipped.

While the Bruins have seen a dramatic drop in penalty minutes this postseason, every single one of their opponents has seen their penalty minutes increase when they play the Bruins.

This same trend has happened in pretty much every postseason series the Bruins have played over the past three seasons, where no matter how disciplined a team is during the regular season, they take more penalties in the playoffs against Boston, and no matter how many penalties the Bruins take during the regular season, they take less in the playoffs.

This is not some conspiracy where the Bruins are simply “getting all the calls” and getting favorable officiating in their favor, but rather a combination of factors that are taking place.

I have some theories as to what those factors are.

1. Good teams tend to draw more penalties. For all of the “big bad Bruins” mystique that still follows this team around, the Bruins are an extremely skilled team that dominates possession, plays with the puck, and has elite high-end players all over their lineup. They can beat you in transition, they score off the rush on the power play, they have some of the most productive players in the league on their roster. Guess what happens when skilled players dominate possession and play with the puck for significant stretches of games? Lesser talented teams and players have to cheat more and take penalties in an effort to stop them. Play against Brad Marchand, David Pastrnak, and Patrice Bergeron for 20 minutes every night and you are probably going to take a penalty or two at some point.

2. Teams overthink it against the Bruins. This goes back to the whole “big bad Bruins” thing where teams get stuck in a mindset that a matchup with them is going to be physical, so they have to increase their own physicality, match the intensity, and try to impose their will (or whatever other cliche teams spout off in the playoffs). There is a fine line between between being physical at the right time and in the right situations, and being physical just for the sake of being physical. The former is sometimes a necessity, the latter can quickly lead to recklessness. Throw in the powder keg that is four-to-seven games against Brad Marchand and all of his shenanigans and you have the perfect storm for teams to just completely lose their composure as they chase hits and get caught up in post-whistle scrums. The Bruins seem to know how to walk this line and can do just enough to throw teams off their game and draw an extra penalty or two. Sometimes that is all you need to be the difference in a game. The Blues have a bigger team and tend to play a physical game, but there is no denying that in these first three games they have tried to do even more, both during play and after the whistles. It is hurting them.

3. Keeping things even. One thing that does tend to happen in playoff games is a large percentage of them seem to end with the penalty and power play distribution being fairly even. It is the whole “let them play” mindset where the on-ice officials do not want to be the ones responsible for deciding a game with a call or series of calls. This, of course, drives teams and fans bonkers because everyone just wants to see consistency and the calls made as they should be. Sometimes teams will take more penalties than their opponent, and that is okay. It is the way sports works. If you look at some of the individual series with the Bruins, their drastic decrease in penalties from the regular season combined with their opponents drastic increase has, in some cases, resulted in the penalty split being pretty close to even, just as it was in Rounds 2 and 3 against the Columbus Blue Jackets and Carolina Hurricanes. But that has not been the case in this series, and it wasn’t the case in Boston’s two Round 1 matchups against the Toronto Maple Leafs the past two seasons where there was a pretty big split, which again goes back to points 1) and 2).

Whether it is one of these factors are a combination of all three the Blues really need to be better if they are going to even this series and eventually take control of it. If they keep doing what they have done over the first three games they are going to quickly find themselves out of this, missing a prime opportunity to win the franchise’s first ever Stanley Cup.

They have to be better when it comes to trying to slow down the Bruins’ offense.

They have to be better when it comes to avoiding the post-whistle scrums and taking extra runs at players.

They simply have to be better.

MORE BLUES-BRUINS:
The Wraparound: Blues look to flip the page
Blues vs. Bruins: Three keys to Game 4 of Stanley Cup Final
PHT Power Rankings: Conn Smythe watch entering Game 4
Stanley Cup Final: Sean Kuraly breaking through for Bruins
Vince Dunn back in Blues’ lineup

Adam Gretz is a writer for Pro Hockey Talk on NBC Sports. Drop him a line at phtblog@nbcsports.com or follow him on Twitter @AGretz.