Mike Yeo for 4 years....

[BleedBlue14]

Yes, both have achieve 30+ points in a season over their careers. Both players achieved that level a long time ago, with other organizations, not on the 4th line, and not in their twilight of their careers.

As an aside to that has anyone seen Scottie Upshalls numbers in the WHL talk about a top 5 fantasy player in juniors my god lol like 90 points 100+ PIMS

 

[PiggySmalls]

I don't think anyone will find many people on here that think the Blues will continue winning at the pace we are at. But this start provides a much needed buffer come December/January. Maybe my expectations aren't high compared to most as I still see this team as 2 years out from being a contender. My biggest pat on the back I have had for Yeo and his coaches are how much more effective our 5v5 play has been. I don't recall in recent year where the blues production has been so well at even strength.

 

[mw2noobbuster]

Of course the pace is unsustainable but even when the Blues are losing, they're still controlling play and creating chances. Much better than losing while snoozing under the Hitch era.

 

[EastonBlues22]

So ends our first full season under Yeo. I'm curious to hear what the general consensus is on Yeo now that it's over.

I'm going to wager that most here ended up being disappointed by how the season turned out, even given the contextual caveats involved, and that disappointment will be reflected in the opinions expressed here. Still, it seems like a good time to see where people generally stand and how they feel about him going into next season.

 

[mw2noobbuster]

I personally don't think he'll end up being the man to lead this core to a cup. Made so many questionable lineup calls this season. Don't think it's fair to call for his head after only one full season, though.

 

[PiggySmalls]

My biggest worry with Yeo is this season’s gameplay and horrible PP has been consistent with his seasons as HC of the Wild. To me that screams bad coaching for the NHL level. In AHL and lower leagues, personnel turnover helps keep coaches message fresh. But I fear we are stuck with him for at least 1 year.

 

[stl76]

So ends our first full season under Yeo. I'm curious to hear what the general consensus is on Yeo now that it's over.

I'm going to wager that most here ended up being disappointed by how the season turned out, even given the contextual caveats involved, and that disappointment will be reflected in the opinions expressed here. Still, it seems like a good time to see where people generally stand and how they feel about him going into next season.

You really think right now is a good time for a reasonable measured assessment of the season?

Honestly, it seems like you're fishing for a specific response.

 

[AjaxManifesto]

Yeo gets 1 more year to get this fixed.

 

[EastonBlues22]

You really think right now is a good time for a reasonable measured assessment of the season?

It's a good time to start the conversation. It might not start out great, but working through the venting to more reasonable positions is a healthy process that should ultimately leave everyone in a better place.

Besides, what else are we going to do? I'm not playing golf in 40 degree weather.

 

[Itsnotatrap]

We have to figure out a way to get to a functional PP, and Wild fans are saying good luck with that.

 

[Dbrownss]

The defensive zone system was increasingly aggravating as the season progressed. The Blues just didn't seem interested in separating players from the puck. Just stick on puck.


This roster while not a cup contender was better then what we saw in the 2nd half of the season.

The PP is inexcusable. Someone has to lose their job over that. The weapons are there but zero idea how to use them.

 

[Celtic Note]

I was never a fan of Yeo and that opinion has only been reinforced.

His management of our goaltenders was pretty poor. He is loyal to a fault. The ride or die, then sabbatical approach was bizarre with Jake.

This goes without saying, but the PP was horrendous. This has been a problem throughout his career. Why force a scheme that requires a strong RHS as a main contributor? Why force people into positions where they aren’t as successful (see Tarasenko’s usage). Finally, if the PP isn’t working, then why not change the structure?

The defensive scheme has been statistically strong in shot suppression (3rd in the league), but in scoring chances allowed we were 10th. So we are allowing a greater number of scoring chances as a percentage of shots allowed. The strange thing is we were 4th in high danger scoring chance suppression. So our scoring chances allowed being higher must be a result of rush chances or as a result of our forwards doing something to allow this to occur otherwise our high danger chances would be higher. I would also ask how much if our success is based on the personnel versus coaching strategy? We have a top defensive D group and we have a solid cast of forwards who are relatively strong defensively. So, again our defensemen are doing well. Regardless of these questions, defense isn’t a problem.

Offensively, Yeo was given a flawed team, but it wasn’t so bad that we would be 23rd in scoring. It’s not like we weren’t getting shots either. We were tenth there. Our scoring chances were 13th and our high scoring chances were 28th. So apparently we are not going to the net. This seems to be a coached strategy given how little we do it. I am guessing our shot generation was largely from the point given how well our defensemen scored.

 

[DatDude44]

Fire him now hire Alain Vigneault

 

[Note Worthy]

I certainly wouldn’t mind if Yeo was shown the door but that’s not going to happen; not right now anyway. He might be on a short leash next season but with all the injuries Army will use that to not fire him.

 

[Alklha]

I'm not a fan of Yeo, but I would have a problem with firing him this summer. A revolving door for coaches isn't in the best interests of a team.

Armstrong made the decision to hire him, so it's on Armstrong to give him a fair chance. Yeo got the immediate response after Hitchcock was moved on, and then part of the issues this season was the roster.

After 2 years is the earliest a GM should be looking at a coach he hired. If he is looking at him before that, he should be looking in the mirror.

 

[Evocable Manager]

He hasn't provided me with any reason for any real optimism about his potential as a coach. I can't say whether he should be fired or not, I don't expect it to happen so I don't think that debate is even worth the time.

Our special teams were straight up terrible. 30th ranked PP and 18th ranked PK. Typically an NHL coach will tell you that if you combine the two statistics, the number should add up to 100-105 (depending on the coach). If it adds up to somewhere in that range it means your special teams are decent. Ours added up to 95.1. That is beyond brutal. The PP got a lot of the attention and deservedly so, but the PK wasn't much better.

In the end our offense is flawed and I think more blame is on Armstrong than Yeo for this season. Retooling our forward core to inject a mix of youth along with speed/skill and tenacity should really help this club.

 

[carter333167]

He is everything that he was in Minnesota...in a scary and eery way. Someone can post the Minnesota article discussing his issues if they care to do so but the Zebra has not changed his stripes.

The minute someone better is available, we should jump on the opportunity.

 

[67Blues]

Injuries make it hard to completely evaluate the team, and having a goaltender who is Jekyl and Hyde doesn't help much. But, Yeo has blame in this disaster too, especially special teams and the inability to adjust the game scheme in real time when things aren't working. I'll withhold judgement until we see what type of roster Army provides next year along with how, if any, of the kids make the transition.

 

[TK 421]

I'm not a fan of Yeo, but I would have a problem with firing him this summer. A revolving door for coaches isn't in the best interests of a team.

Armstrong made the decision to hire him, so it's on Armstrong to give him a fair chance. Yeo got the immediate response after Hitchcock was moved on, and then part of the issues this season was the roster.

After 2 years is the earliest a GM should be looking at a coach he hired. If he is looking at him before that, he should be looking in the mirror.

He can look in the mirror, realize he made a mistake and still fire Yeo. This mandatory 2 years thing you said seems really arbitrary. Why wait when you can clearly see the same pattern that all Yeo teams have gone through?

 

[Dbrownss]

I'm not a fan of Yeo, but I would have a problem with firing him this summer. A revolving door for coaches isn't in the best interests of a team.

Armstrong made the decision to hire him, so it's on Armstrong to give him a fair chance. Yeo got the immediate response after Hitchcock was moved on, and then part of the issues this season was the roster.

After 2 years is the earliest a GM should be looking at a coach he hired. If he is looking at him before that, he should be looking in the mirror.

Yeos success outside of the start to this season was on the shoulders of Super Allen. The team tightened up defensively, and that was about it. I will give him some credit for utilizing the defense more then Hitchock but his forecheck system is ultra passive and looks to "box in" the puck carrier. Which is quickly beaten because of the gaps the Blues players give. I watch other teams skate to pucks, contest and battle for it. A Blues player will glide towards the puck then back off and try to stop the pass...... I by no means completely understand systems but this is what I see in a nut shell. The Blues don't force turn overs they are content with conceding control of the puck and trying to pick off passes.

It looked like the team became weary of the system and got "lazy". It does seem like a boring style of hockey. We give Parayko crap for not using his body, but I've seen enough Blues skate past a check to come to the conclusion that its coached. The Wild were a very passive team under Yeo too

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

I was never a fan of Yeo and that opinion has only been reinforced.

His management of our goaltenders was pretty poor. He is loyal to a fault. The ride or die, then sabbatical approach was bizarre with Jake.

This goes without saying, but the PP was horrendous. This has been a problem throughout his career. Why force a scheme that requires a strong RHS as a main contributor? Why force people into positions where they aren’t as successful (see Tarasenko’s usage). Finally, if the PP isn’t working, then why not change the structure?

The defensive scheme has been statistically strong in shot suppression (3rd in the league), but in scoring chances allowed we were 10th. So we are allowing a greater number of scoring chances as a percentage of shots allowed. The strange thing is we were 4th in high danger scoring chance suppression. So our scoring chances allowed being higher must be a result of rush chances or as a result of our forwards doing something to allow this to occur otherwise our high danger chances would be higher. I would also ask how much if our success is based on the personnel versus coaching strategy? We have a top defensive D group and we have a solid cast of forwards who are relatively strong defensively. So, again our defensemen are doing well. Regardless of these questions, defense isn’t a problem.

Offensively, Yeo was given a flawed team, but it wasn’t so bad that we would be 23rd in scoring. It’s not like we weren’t getting shots either. We were tenth there. Our scoring chances were 13th and our high scoring chances were 28th. So apparently we are not going to the net. This seems to be a coached strategy given how little we do it. I am guessing our shot generation was largely from the point given how well our defensemen scored.

Last season Blues allowed the lowest rush shots/breakaways in the league though. This season just by watching them they definitely seemed to have allowed more on a game to game bases.

 

[Alklha]

He can look in the mirror, realize he made a mistake and still fire Yeo. This mandatory 2 years thing you said seems really arbitrary. Why wait when you can clearly see the same pattern that all Yeo teams have gone through?

My point is that you can't have someone in charge who is going to change his mind on a whim. If you want success then you need a level of commitment to your vision.

What has Mike Yeo done that should make Armstrong reconsider his position?

We're playing like a Mike Yeo team. I might not like it, you might not like it... but this is what Doug Armstrong signed up for.

You can say that missing the playoffs was a failure, but we played the majority of this season with 4 players who could be described as top-6. It's difficult to win with that lack of talent, unless one of the players is a legit #1 centre. Which Schenn isn't. We didn't even have an established third line; we had Berglund, a player returning from 3 years in the KHL and then hoping a prospect/fourth liner can step up. That's before we start on Allen.

Armstrong making a coaching change would be him blaming Yeo for his own failures in roster construction.

 

[Evocable Manager]

Why is it either Yeo or the roster?

Neither the roster or the coaching were sufficient. We had a flawed enough roster that it's tough to muster up consistent offense. Yet a good enough roster that with the right strategical implementations we should've been a playoff team.

The roster falls on Armstrong and the coaching falls on Yeo. Neither get a pass in my book.

 

[mw2noobbuster]

Mike Yeo's system, when working, is really good. We were seeing it in the beginning of the season. Problem is, is that Yeo is unable to make proper adjustments when the team is slumping.

 

[Note Worthy]

Mike Yeo's system, when working, is really good. We were seeing it in the beginning of the season. Problem is, is that Yeo is unable to make proper adjustments when the team is slumping.

So a continuation of Ken Hitchcock essentially.