Official Darryl Sutter for Blues coach bandwagon thread

simon IC

Moderator
Sponsor
Sep 8, 2007
9,219
7,606
Canada
Armstrong isn't going to cut ties with Yeo so we might as well move on from that idea and learn to deal with it.
If that is the case, maybe Armstrong is as bad as some here think. Not moving on from Yeo would be pure obstinance. Talk about short sighted! Sometimes you have to admit you made a mistake, no matter how hard it may be.
 

BlueDream

Registered User
Aug 30, 2011
25,685
14,074
As much as I want to see the Blues try a different style, it’s very intriguing to wonder what Sutter could do with this roster. He’s a good coach.
 

MissouriMook

Still just a Mook among men
Sponsor
Jul 4, 2014
7,817
8,147
We?

I sure don’t. Sutter would be a horrible choice. He succeeded with heavy teams playing dump and chase hockey. This team isn’t built for that, and will be even further from that kind of team next year as we get smaller and faster. We may need to make a change, but Sutter is a move in the wrong direction.
 

simon IC

Moderator
Sponsor
Sep 8, 2007
9,219
7,606
Canada
We?

I sure don’t. Sutter would be a horrible choice. He succeeded with heavy teams playing dump and chase hockey. This team isn’t built for that, and will be even further from that kind of team next year as we get smaller and faster. We may need to make a change, but Sutter is a move in the wrong direction.
According to Kings fans this is not the case. Sutter's success lies with his abilities as a motivator. He is able to light fires under players and get them to play to the best of their abilities. That would be perfect for our team right now. He is apparently very adaptive strategically, and is not necessarily a dump and chase guy. He responds and adapts to the roster he has to deal with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheDizee

TheDizee

Trade Jordan Kyrou ASAP | ALWAYS RIGHT
Apr 5, 2014
19,834
12,658
a good coach can get the most out of every player. he could turn even a piece of garbage like sobotka and bergie into something.

now with that said, i want both of those clowns gone too, but Sutter needs to happen. Yeo does himself ZERO favors with his ingame managing, his 2nd PP unit today consisted of a player who was scratched wed and is only playing because of a illnesss. he also had sobotka out there who would be scratched if we had replacements and jaskin who is a fringe 4th liner and has no business sniffing the PP.

I am over Yeo, nice guy but not the right coach for us. We need a hard ass coach to give these little crybabies a reality check on how to be tough both on the ice but also mentally. i dont want my team to like my coach, i want them to fear and respect him.

hire sutter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simon in canada

BlueDream

Registered User
Aug 30, 2011
25,685
14,074
I think the Blues have shown what type of coach they need. Hitchcock had success with them.

Payne, and so far Yeo, have not. These two are more of a player's coach. Too lenient.

I was done with Hitchcock, mainly because I think he needs to retire, but they do need a hard-ass coach.

You may not like Sutter's style but I think he'd get results. And I think we still have the personnel that he'd succeed with. We could play a physical game if we wanted to... we just choose not to for some reason.
 

TheDizee

Trade Jordan Kyrou ASAP | ALWAYS RIGHT
Apr 5, 2014
19,834
12,658
sutter wont tolerate our "leaders" going after the fans when they have lost 7 in a row either. that is a major red flag to me and shouldnt be tolerated period.

he is able to get the most out of subpar players. look at dustin brown, kyle clifford, penner, stoll. these are all similar players to berglund and sobotka and he got the most out of them. then he helped turn kopitar into a premier 2way center in the game.

sutter is exactly what this team needs, hell id even settle for Coach Q if the Hawks fire him. The one thing I know for sure is that Yeo needs to go.
 

mk80

Registered User
Jul 30, 2012
7,962
8,490
Sutter is the same coach as Hitch and to an extent Yeo is. They all play a defense first style of hockey, and are stubborn about changing. In the case of Hitch and Sutter teams flourish under them when they are new in their regime but over time they lose the room because they don't have an adaptive style of hockey for today's modern game (we saw that with Hitch when he took over, and Dallas is seeing that bloom happen this year). Also Sutter had much more solidly built team in LA, and the Stars are a well assembled roster by Jim Nill. The Blues like most teams are getting away from the heavy hitting, slow pace game, and adapting their roster to a speed and skill game played by the majority of teams in the league. The problem is, Armstrong saw that change in style just two seasons ago, and teams like Pittsburgh, Nashville, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Dallas, Edmonton, etc, etc. were building their rosters for that game during the time period Hitch was going year to year with his contracts. If you want consistent success out of a coach in today's NHL DO NOT hire a Sutter, Hitch or Yeo type coach. Look Gerard Gallant, Travis Green, Mike Johnson, Pete Deboer younger coaches that can relate to young players and coach a very adaptive system to speedy and skilled players. Or you look for older coaches that are willing to change with the times of the game. Hiring Sutter, or a similar person would set you back years, further than what we are going through with Yeo.

And honestly what we are going through this year is what I predicted would last season, I knew when Armstrong made the determination to finally break away from the physical, big bodied, grinder, type of lineup we would have a step back to go forward season. Apparently it came a season later than I expected.
 

mk80

Registered User
Jul 30, 2012
7,962
8,490
I would honestly go the route that teams have done recently and bring in a coach with a lot of recent success in the AHL or Major Junior hockey. I would ask permission to speak to Sheldon Keefe of the Toronto Marlies.
 

PiggySmalls

Oink Oink MF
Mar 7, 2015
6,107
3,516
I just don’t know if Blues management or the fans want to wait on an AHL or Juniors coach to get acclimated to coaching at the NHL level. Most of those coaches do not have early on success. There are plenty of good options down there though. I’d just rather see how they do as NHL assistant coach first.
 

GoldenSeal

Believe In The Note
Dec 1, 2013
6,774
6,050
Out West
They need a hard-ass coach with vision. A coach that sees a problem, sits down a player who isn't holding up his own weight, whether he's a 1.5m a year or a 10.5m a year player. A coach that solves problems by understanding the talents of the team and not trying to follow some playbook, who also looks at his prospects and plugs them in to see what we have in them. A coach that is willing to stand up to the GM for what they need to win and a coach who rewards effort but punishes sloth. If the majority of these fit Sutter, damn well hire him.
 

mk80

Registered User
Jul 30, 2012
7,962
8,490
Who ever is our powerplay coach he needs to step back and get new one.
I believe Yeo is in charge of the powerplay. I have no proof but that is just my speculation. Its something that his Minnesota teams struggled with that makes me think that.

Our PP under Hitch wasn't the best, but it was better than this.
 

Ranksu

Crotch Academy ftw
Sponsor
Apr 28, 2014
19,671
9,303
Lapland
I believe Yeo is in charge of the powerplay. I have no proof but that is just my speculation. Its something that his Minnesota teams struggled with that makes me think that.

Our PP under Hitch wasn't the best, but it was better than this.

I don't know how much it is we don't have guy like Shattenkirk at blueline? I like tho Dunn's game at blueline so if he could develope Shatternkirk's replacement we're fine.
 

BlueDream

Registered User
Aug 30, 2011
25,685
14,074
Sutter is the same coach as Hitch and to an extent Yeo is. They all play a defense first style of hockey, and are stubborn about changing. In the case of Hitch and Sutter teams flourish under them when they are new in their regime but over time they lose the room because they don't have an adaptive style of hockey for today's modern game (we saw that with Hitch when he took over, and Dallas is seeing that bloom happen this year). Also Sutter had much more solidly built team in LA, and the Stars are a well assembled roster by Jim Nill. The Blues like most teams are getting away from the heavy hitting, slow pace game, and adapting their roster to a speed and skill game played by the majority of teams in the league. The problem is, Armstrong saw that change in style just two seasons ago, and teams like Pittsburgh, Nashville, Winnipeg, Minnesota, Dallas, Edmonton, etc, etc. were building their rosters for that game during the time period Hitch was going year to year with his contracts. If you want consistent success out of a coach in today's NHL DO NOT hire a Sutter, Hitch or Yeo type coach. Look Gerard Gallant, Travis Green, Mike Johnson, Pete Deboer younger coaches that can relate to young players and coach a very adaptive system to speedy and skilled players. Or you look for older coaches that are willing to change with the times of the game. Hiring Sutter, or a similar person would set you back years, further than what we are going through with Yeo.

And honestly what we are going through this year is what I predicted would last season, I knew when Armstrong made the determination to finally break away from the physical, big bodied, grinder, type of lineup we would have a step back to go forward season. Apparently it came a season later than I expected.
I disagree with a few things here.

First of all I would argue that Yeo has very few similarities to Hitchcock and Sutter. Yeo is different. Is he a defensive-minded coach? Or has he just coached teams that have good defensive personnel? I would argue it's more the latter. The Blues and Wild are pretty similar in that they have strong D cores and good forwards but lacking starpower. I think we are seeing a coach who is struggling to find a system and create offensive creativity more than we are one with a great defensive scheme or anything like that. The team right now looks closer to they did under Davis Payne than Ken Hitchcock.

And that leads me to my next point. Payne flamed out quickly here. As for some of your other suggestions, Mike Johnson? Are you referring to the ex-Penguins coach who was awful for them? Or Travis Green who coaches a bad Canucks team? I'm not sure that's such the path to success like you are saying. Young coaches are very hit or miss. The Blues are on their 2nd one right now and are failing again.

Guys like DeBoer, Gallant, McLellan already had experience before they took their current roles and the Blues didn't get any of them. I'm not sure who else we could target that fits that bill. The only other successful coaches that comes to mind is someone like Quenneville if he gets fired (which would be a very stupid move by Chicago) or same thing with Alain Vigneault, who I would also take.

I do hear your point about guys like Hitchcock and Sutter getting be too much after a while. I can see why players start to tune them out. But Sutter has had success. He's a proven winning coach. I think people are really overlooking how strong this guy's track record is. He has coached 4 teams (Chicago, SJ, Calgary and LA) and has taken them deep into the playoffs. Over 3 years in Chicago, they went to the 3rd round once. Over 3 years in Calgary, they went to the Stanley Cup once. Over 6 years in LA, he won 2 Cups and went to the 3rd round another time. Made it to the 2nd round a few times in SJ.

There are very few coaches in this league with that kind of success. And I think people need to decide if they want a team they find more fun to watch or one that wins. A lot of times they overlook winning, and while I do want to get faster, I don't believe we automatically can't do that with Sutter. Not every good team in the league is blazing fast either. Anaheim and Boston are both more in the mold of what the Blues currently are and they have contended in the past and are currently contending again right now.

Unfortunately, this is all a moot point because I'm sure Yeo will get another chance next season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: simon in canada

simon IC

Moderator
Sponsor
Sep 8, 2007
9,219
7,606
Canada
I disagree with Hitch and Sutter being lumped together. Hitch is not the best communicator, and demands 100% buy in to his system. That system is becoming obsolete and he refuses to adapt. Hitch also relies too much on veterans, and is simply incapable of changing strategy in game. Sutter is a motivator, and has proven to be very effective with youth. He certainly can adapt in game which was demonstrated in the way he simply out-coached Hitch twice in the playoffs. He is stern and demanding, but gets results, and he doesn't use the freeze out benching tactic favored by Hitch. His championships are fairly recent, and even though I admit the game is changing rapidly, I don't think Sutter would be "behind the times".
 

account deactivated

Registered User
Feb 28, 2008
10,737
5,088
ATX
I thought Ruff's offensively driven system would work much better in St. Louis than it did in Dallas because you guys have a much better defense corps and goaltending than we did when we employed it. I know that nobody really cares for Ruff, but I'm curious to see how it would work with the Blues. I also just want to see Tarasenko score 50 goals (though not at the Stars expense).
 

MacDonald4MVP

Registered User
May 7, 2016
9,931
5,269
I honestly think most coaches are stuck in a past and the game just passed them by. Here's how one of the better blueliners in the league plays without the puck.

giphy.gif





Here's what your average coach points to as a good standard when he ends up scratching above player for lack of "reliability".
 

mk80

Registered User
Jul 30, 2012
7,962
8,490
I disagree with a few things here.

First of all I would argue that Yeo has very few similarities to Hitchcock and Sutter. Yeo is different. Is he a defensive-minded coach? Or has he just coached teams that have good defensive personnel? I would argue it's more the latter. The Blues and Wild are pretty similar in that they have strong D cores and good forwards but lacking starpower. I think we are seeing a coach who is struggling to find a system and create offensive creativity more than we are one with a great defensive scheme or anything like that. The team right now looks closer to they did under Davis Payne than Ken Hitchcock.

And that leads me to my next point. Payne flamed out quickly here. As for some of your other suggestions, Mike Johnson? Are you referring to the ex-Penguins coach who was awful for them? Or Travis Green who coaches a bad Canucks team? I'm not sure that's such the path to success like you are saying. Young coaches are very hit or miss. The Blues are on their 2nd one right now and are failing again.

Guys like DeBoer, Gallant, McLellan already had experience before they took their current roles and the Blues didn't get any of them. I'm not sure who else we could target that fits that bill. The only other successful coaches that comes to mind is someone like Quenneville if he gets fired (which would be a very stupid move by Chicago) or same thing with Alain Vigneault, who I would also take.

I do hear your point about guys like Hitchcock and Sutter getting be too much after a while. I can see why players start to tune them out. But Sutter has had success. He's a proven winning coach. I think people are really overlooking how strong this guy's track record is. He has coached 4 teams (Chicago, SJ, Calgary and LA) and has taken them deep into the playoffs. Over 3 years in Chicago, they went to the 3rd round once. Over 3 years in Calgary, they went to the Stanley Cup once. Over 6 years in LA, he won 2 Cups and went to the 3rd round another time. Made it to the 2nd round a few times in SJ.

There are very few coaches in this league with that kind of success. And I think people need to decide if they want a team they find more fun to watch or one that wins. A lot of times they overlook winning, and while I do want to get faster, I don't believe we automatically can't do that with Sutter. Not every good team in the league is blazing fast either. Anaheim and Boston are both more in the mold of what the Blues currently are and they have contended in the past and are currently contending again right now.

Unfortunately, this is all a moot point because I'm sure Yeo will get another chance next season.

My apologies I got my Mikes crossed with Pittsburgh, I meant Mike Sullivan not Johnson. I will concede some of those points that you bring up that it sometimes does take a young coach time to adjust to the NHL same as called up player. However, Travis Greene was wanted by a handful of teams but Vancouver wouldn't give any permission to talk to him. Sheldon Keefe is currently one of the highest rated coaching prospects due to his recent success with the Toronto Marlies and shouldn't be discounted if there is to be a coaching search this summer for us.

All that said, for better or worse I have a strong feeling Yeo will be behind the bench next season.
 

PiggySmalls

Oink Oink MF
Mar 7, 2015
6,107
3,516
With JBow and upshall injuries just adding to all the other injuries this season. There’s near zero chance Yeo is fired.
 

carter333167

Registered User
Apr 24, 2013
6,958
3,120
I honestly think most coaches are stuck in a past and the game just passed them by. Here's how one of the better blueliners in the league plays without the puck.

giphy.gif





Here's what your average coach points to as a good standard when he ends up scratching above player for lack of "reliability".


Interesting post.

Since this is a thread about Sutter, I would note that the Kings under his tenure consistently stepped up at the red line, not the blue line.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->