Credit Where Credit is Due (Hitchcock)

[StLHokie]

Brouwer and Brodziak.

That's one third of their regular defense and one third of their forwards, including two players in their top six.

And wasn't your point that because the lineup didn't change much, that means Hitchcock is the reason for their improvement?

Oh yeah forgot those two. Not sure why those slipped my mind.

My point was that player personnel changes have a much more significant impact on team performance than does coaching. If a coach is at a certain threshold of ability, it doesn't matter who you have coaching the team. In the end, it comes down to the player makeup. This year the team had a dramatically different player makeup, and that is what resulted in the performance change.

 

[Frenzy31]

Oh yeah forgot those two. Not sure why those slipped my mind.

My point was that player personnel changes have a much more significant impact on team performance than does coaching. If a coach is at a certain threshold of ability, it doesn't matter who you have coaching the team. In the end, it comes down to the player makeup. This year the team had a dramatically different player makeup, and that is what resulted in the performance change.

Tell that to the Sharks. Very little adjustments to their line up and look at where they are.

It isn't just one factor - there are a lot of factors, including luck that get you to the cup.

Hitch took a team that WE AS A FAN BASE QUIT ON PRIOR TO THE START OF THE SEASON - One that had major injuries through out the regular season requiring a ton of change to the line up and system - to the WCF.

I am no dying to keep Hitch. But I understand why they would.

 

[Ranksu]

Does anybody remember what day last year Army announce they will give him another year?

 

[TruBlu]

Does anybody remember what day last year Army announce they will give him another year?

May 26th, 2015. I don't remember what day was our final game against the Wild though.

 

[TheDizee]

May 26th, 2015. I don't remember what day was our final game against the Wild though.

april 26th was the last game of the season.

 

[TheOrganist]

From the article taylord posted in the Friedman/Tarasenko thread:

San Jose was just significantly better in almost every aspect, and even as the Blues won twice, most people had to acknowledge, “Well, they were pretty lucky there.” For the series, they ended up a minus-38 or so in score-adjusted possession, gave up almost 47(!) more more scoring chances, and generated fewer than 38 high-danger shot attempts of their own. They committed more penalties, and got outscored at full strength a whopping 14-6. A pretty convincing argument could be made that they were doomed from the start.

Look at these stats. I mean it's utterly embarrassing considering we had home ice and must observers had this series as 50/50 before it began. The way the Blues get dominated in possession by good teams with the talent they have on their roster is directly correlated with how the team is coach. I will always believe it. I'm not opining that a pair of seven games series didn't take a toll but the "fatigue factor" is mostly a cop out: the Blues looked gassed for most of this series because they were defending and on their heels for nearly the entire series.

 

[Chippewa]

I wanted Hitch and Army gone this season. Now I only want Hitch gone. The key difference for us this postseason was Elliott finally getting a legit chance to show what he is. And he played great. Other things like getting timely scoring from veterans like Backes and new acquisitions like Brouwer were what got us to the WCF. I'll give Army credit for all those.

But I saw the same **** from Hitch.

 

[Vladdy the Impaler]

From the article taylord posted in the Friedman/Tarasenko thread:



Look at these stats. I mean it's utterly embarrassing considering we had home ice and must observers had this series as 50/50 before it began. The way the Blues get dominated in possession by good teams with the talent they have on their roster is directly correlated with how the team is coach. I will always believe it. I'm not opining that a pair of seven games series didn't take a toll but the "fatigue factor" is mostly a cop out: the Blues looked gassed for most of this series because they were defending and on their heels for nearly the entire series.

I believe it's Hitch's system that directly caused the team to become so fatigued down the stretch, and while playing the extra game or two could just as well be the root of the problem, one cannot deny that the grinding and forechecking system takes a significant toll on all of the players after a time. If Hitch's system is truly preventing this team from maximizing its offensive potential, then it's not even a question that he needs to go. It's quite peculiar that the Sharks, despite having a significantly older roster than the Blues, somehow appeared faster, fresher, and sharper in every aspect. Could it be that their coach implements a system that utilizes skill sets but does not ultimately succumb to endless grinding and forechecking in order to take control of games?

Hitch's system is simply outdated and outmatched by today's game, which is trending more and more towards teams with skill and speed. Moreover, skilled players do not want to be stuck in a style of play that does not maximize their particular skill sets while also driving them to inevitable fatigue through endless board battles and constantly pressing a forecheck. Hence, we watched the frustration and subsequent disappearance of Vladdy Tarasenko because he seems to be getting tired of playing in Hitch's system. You can debate that last point all you want but we saw it with Oshie and I think we are seeing it with Vladdy.

It's time to move on and get a coach who can implement a system that won't cause such severe fatigue in the first place. We'll never get to the cup final if the team is completely gassed down the stretch as a result of Hitch's system.

 

[Bluesguru]

I believe it's Hitch's system that directly caused the team to become so fatigued down the stretch, and while playing the extra game or two could just as well be the root of the problem, one cannot deny that the grinding and forechecking system takes a significant toll on all of the players after a time. If Hitch's system is truly preventing this team from maximizing its offensive potential, then it's not even a question that he needs to go. It's quite peculiar that the Sharks, despite having a significantly older roster than the Blues, somehow appeared faster, fresher, and sharper in every aspect. Could it be that their coach implements a system that utilizes skill sets but does not ultimately succumb to endless grinding and forechecking in order to take control of games?

Hitch's system is simply outdated and outmatched by today's game, which is trending more and more towards teams with skill and speed. Moreover, skilled players do not want to be stuck in a style of play that does not maximize their particular skill sets while also driving them to inevitable fatigue through endless board battles and constantly pressing a forecheck. Hence, we watched the frustration and subsequent disappearance of Vladdy Tarasenko because he seems to be getting tired of playing in Hitch's system. You can debate that last point all you want but we saw it with Oshie and I think we are seeing it with Vladdy.

It's time to move on and get a coach who can implement a system that won't cause such severe fatigue in the first place. We'll never get to the cup final if the team is completely gassed down the stretch as a result of Hitch's system.

I don't buy the fatigue excuse. There's no shortcut to a Stanley Cup title. Any team that wins it will have to leave it all on the ice. The Blues may have looked gassed against the Sharks but the real story was the Sharks were just a bad matchup for the Blues. A team that mirrored our style, a team that was big, a team that played a defensive system, a team that had a skilled top 6 and a team that had a good set of defensemen. The first goal of the game meant everything in this series as the team who scored first won every game. When the Blues had the lead or when they were tied with San Jose, they played much better. When the Sharks had the lead, they really focused on shutting the Blues down. It was a tough matchup.

 

[simon IC]

The notion that too much grinding and forechecking is too tough on the players really bothers me. So you don't like grinding and forechecking? Hmm ... maybe professional hockey player is not the ideal career choice for you. Perhaps you could consider figure skating?

 

[NORiculous]

From the outside...

The goalie contravercy doesn't look positive:

Starts Allen at the beginning of the year and rides him till the injury, then rides Elliott half way because of that Allen injury. Elliott gets so hot, it "hard" to go back to Allen. Then, he gets two weak games from Elliott in the playoffs. Replaces him with Allen that had not played in I don't know how long. Says that Elliott never had such a long series and needed a rest... and comes back with Elliott after a lose by Allen who, again, had not played ( except previous game) in I don't know how long.

I mean come on, Elliot played 1/2 of the year. That seemed like a very lame excuse to me. To me, Hitch shot himself in the foot with his goalie managment.

If u pick Elliott, then Elliott it is If u pick Allen, then Allen it is. But goingback and forth, riding the hot hand doesn't have a good reputation in the NHL.

Anyways, that's how it felt from the outside. Blues still had a great year and if you can pick a goalie and stick with him, I think that it can't hurt the results.

 

[carter333167]

From the outside...

The goalie contravercy doesn't look positive:

Starts Allen at the beginning of the year and rides him till the injury, then rides Elliott half way because of that Allen injury. Elliott gets so hot, it "hard" to go back to Allen. Then, he gets two weak games from Elliott in the playoffs. Replaces him with Allen that had not played in I don't know how long. Says that Elliott never had such a long series and needed a rest... and comes back with Elliott after a lose by Allen who, again, had not played ( except previous game) in I don't know how long.

I mean come on, Elliot played 1/2 of the year. That seemed like a very lame excuse to me. To me, Hitch shot himself in the foot with his goalie managment.

If u pick Elliott, then Elliott it is If u pick Allen, then Allen it is. But goingback and forth, riding the hot hand doesn't have a good reputation in the NHL.

Anyways, that's how it felt from the outside. Blues still had a great year and if you can pick a goalie and stick with him, I think that it can't hurt the results.

Hitch needs to go....that egotistical blather and double-speak after game 4 and a self-created goalie controversy were the final straw.

The reason it worked this year is that the players simply started playing for themselves. Hitch as much as admitted that he did very little coaching from February forward.

I would trade 10 Hitches for a smart, offensive minded coach. This team has more than Hitch has gotten out of them.

 

[BuLLeT1291]

Via Nick Kypreos on Twitter.

"Sound like @StLouisBlues run was enough for Armstrong to bring back Ken Hitchcock. Formal announcement could come as early as this week."

 

[oilinblood]

Tell that to the Sharks. Very little adjustments to their line up and look at where they are.

It isn't just one factor - there are a lot of factors, including luck that get you to the cup.

Hitch took a team that WE AS A FAN BASE QUIT ON PRIOR TO THE START OF THE SEASON - One that had major injuries through out the regular season requiring a ton of change to the line up and system - to the WCF.

I am no dying to keep Hitch. But I understand why they would.

DO you seriously believe the Sharks didnt make significant changes to their roster this year to last? without even thinking...just looking at a game 6 line-up card i can see 4 names whipping the competition this post season.
Totally different team.

 

[KingBran]

DO you seriously believe the Sharks didnt make significant changes to their roster this year to last? without even thinking...just looking at a game 6 line-up card i can see 4 names whipping the competition this post season.
Totally different team.

Thornton, Pavelski, Burns, Hertl, Wingles, Vlasic, Braun, Coture... Pretty much the same exact core.

Jones and Ward are the only real significant difference.

I see the same team that was able to step it up a notch because they got a great coach behind them that put a style in their brains that made sense for their team.

All those years of failure, they get a new coach who has had some success in the NHL. Did NOT win a cup 17 years ago, is NOT one of the top coaches for regular season records because he has not coached for so long and look where they are.


That's one thing I always found funny about Hitch supporters. They talk about how amazing he is in regular season records and such. Truth be told, he has coached a TON of games. And just by that he SHOULD be up there in some of those records. Hitch played it smart though. Save for 1 or 2 seasons he always coached a team that was supposed to be good even before he joined the club. He kept them level. Never took them to the next level.

So bummed were stuck with him for another year.

 

[Note Worthy]

Thornton, Pavelski, Burns, Hertl, Wingles, Vlasic, Braun, Coture... Pretty much the same exact core.

Jones and Ward are the only real significant difference.

I see the same team that was able to step it up a notch because they got a great coach behind them that put a style in their brains that made sense for their team.

All those years of failure, they get a new coach who has had some success in the NHL. Did NOT win a cup 17 years ago, is NOT one of the top coaches for regular season records because he has not coached for so long and look where they are.


That's one thing I always found funny about Hitch supporters. They talk about how amazing he is in regular season records and such. Truth be told, he has coached a TON of games. And just by that he SHOULD be up there in some of those records. Hitch played it smart though. Save for 1 or 2 seasons he always coached a team that was supposed to be good even before he joined the club. He kept them level. Never took them to the next level.

So bummed were stuck with him for another year.

In the 18 years he's coached a full season in the NHL, 13 of them he's had a winning percentage of over .600.

So the "he's just coached a lot of games so that's why his name is at the top of the records" narrative is false.

Good try though.

 

[KingBran]

In the 18 years he's coached a full season in the NHL, 13 of them he's had a winning percentage of over .600.

So the "he's just coached a lot of games so that's why his name is at the top of the records" narrative is false.

Good try though.

Maybe read my entire post before responding. I clearly pointed out that he has always coached what are considered good team. The exception to this is CBJ which *gasp* he had a .503 win% (125-123)

The DAL, PHI and STL teams he coached were supposed to be great. All these great teams he has coached and he has just 1 cup that was won almost two decades ago.

His win% in the playoffs is .518%. 86-80.

Woo... effing... hoo.


He craps the bed come playoff time with every team he coaches. Even the stacked teams he coaches can't get it done.


It's not just the players or his recent stint with this team. It's a trend. And it's a bad one. And were stuck with it for another year.

 

[Note Worthy]

Maybe read my entire post before responding. I clearly pointed out that he has always coached what are considered good team. The exception to this is CBJ which *gasp* he had a .503 win% (125-123)

The DAL, PHI and STL teams he coached were supposed to be great. All these great teams he has coached and he has just 1 cup that was won almost two decades ago.

His win% in the playoffs is .518%. 86-80.

Woo... effing... hoo.


He craps the bed come playoff time with every team he coaches. Even the stacked teams he coaches can't get it done.


It's not just the players or his recent stint with this team. It's a trend. And it's a bad one. And were stuck with it for another year.

I did read your post. You clearly said "I would expect him have a high number of wins because he's coached a ton of games."

I was simply refuting that narrative. Again, good try.

 

[KingBran]

I did read your post. You clearly said "I would expect him have a high number of wins because he's coached a ton of games."

I was simply refuting that narrative. Again, good try.

...because they were good teams. That context has to be there. Without it, it's a dumb statement as you are making sure to point out. I like how you ignore the playoff stats I posted though.

 

[Note Worthy]

...because they were good teams. That context has to be there. Without it, it's a dumb statement as you are making sure to point out. I like how you ignore the playoff stats I posted though.

And why were they good teams? And if they were just good teams and that's it, why couldn't Davis Payne stick around then?

I "ignored" the playoff stats because I was refuting a narrative that had nothing to do with the playoffs. Why would I bring that up?

 

[KingBran]

And why were they good teams? And if they were just good teams and that's it, why couldn't Davis Payne stick around then?

I "ignored" the playoff stats because I was refuting a narrative that had nothing to do with the playoffs. Why would I bring that up?

Hull, Modano, Hatcher, Amonte, LeClair, Hanzus, Recchi... etc.

Yes, those were good teams.

I have no doubt if Payne stuck around the Blues would have been contenders for the past few seasons at least. But the rebuild was "done" in the eyes of the GM and owner and they wanted a coach with experience. Can't fault Payne for that. Blues were 6-7 with a whole lot of hockey to play left in the season Payne was fired. The ended up taking first in the central and bombing out in the second round. Who knows what would have happened if Payne stayed?

You are the one who brought up winning %. So I thought you would want to see it from all angles.