Speculation: Who will be the coach in 2016-17?

[Chojin]

Does anybody remember how the coaching responsibilities are divided currently?

 

[Ranksu]

Does anybody remember how the coaching responsibilities are divided currently?

No, please educate us.

 

[542365]

What its 16 years ago?

Lets look last 4 post-season Hitch has won 1 playoff series. I didn't find worse record last 4 year by any other coach who has been playoffs 4 year in a row.

I think its not nonsense to say Hitch is worst NHL coach in past last 4 years.

First, that's not what you said. Even if it is what you said, that's nonsense too. He's the WORST coach in the NHL over the past 4 years? We must have an awfully talented squad to overcome Hitch's incompetence to challenge for the President's Trophy while playing in the league's toughest division. Give him credit, he's a great coach. Great, not the best in the league, but a great coach nevertheless. I'm not sure how anyone on that list would excite people more than keeping Hitch. I was all for changes after last playoff series in hopes of going after Babcock. It's easy to say get rid of him, but who's going to replace him? Is that guy going to be any better? Different, almost certainly, but truly better? I honestly doubt that. I blame the failures in the playoffs on the players. I question some of Hitch's decisions in the playoffs, but he's not the reason we lost those series by any means. I don't think a coach has that much of an impact on the game.

 

[Ranksu]

First, that's not what you said. Even if it is what you said, that's nonsense too. He's the WORST coach in the NHL over the past 4 years? We must have an awfully talented squad to overcome Hitch's incompetence to challenge for the President's Trophy while playing in the league's toughest division. Give him credit, he's a great coach. Great, not the best in the league, but a great coach nevertheless. I'm not sure how anyone on that list would excite people more than keeping Hitch. I was all for changes after last playoff series in hopes of going after Babcock. It's easy to say get rid of him, but who's going to replace him? Is that guy going to be any better? Different, almost certainly, but truly better? I honestly doubt that. I blame the failures in the playoffs on the players. I question some of Hitch's decisions in the playoffs, but he's not the reason we lost those series by any means. I don't think a coach has that much of an impact on the game.

I'll give credit all Hitch's regular season records like I have said he's maybe the best coach in regular season. Western is tough regular and post-season, but finally we get downgrade team Wilds compare to Chicago and Kings. Even Mike Yeo did beat Hitch. I think that finally proved Hitch cannot adjust what is needed what comes to gameplan and in game changes when series is in the line.

So if we fail again post-season we'll trade another player who didn't buy-in Hitch system? When we question Hitch authority and his system not to find winning formula to post-season?

Maybe a bit offensive minded coach could be that needed thing for us? But who that is I don't know, maybe you are right there isn't, but I just don't believe Hitch anymore after last year lost against Wilds. Maybe we could go in the end if our youngsters finds last year Ottawa Senators zone and they overperfomance, I believe players not Hitch.

 

[intangible]

I don't see Boucher being unemployed all year.

Hitch needs to go, and soon, honestly. Allen is what's keeping us in games, and Tarasenko is the only thing consistently reinvigorating everyone. Parayko has been a nice surprise. But none of those are on Hitch.

Honestly, if Hitch was one of my employees, he'd be fired already. He keeps putting Bouwmeester and Pietrangelo out there at the same time, and it's disheartening. They're the worst pairing we have, and it's not even close. Gunnarson isn't any more inspiring, but my expectations are low for him; I expect much better from two defensemen who are supposedly high calibre and used to be prior to being paired together. The experiment has failed, which is evident by all the times both of them chase into corners together, there's little to no chemistry together, and they look completely lost. Split them up, stop trying to force what clearly isn't going to work, or be fired.

...though I'm equally unconfident that Armstrong would put someone effective in his place. He'd probably choose Muller or Shaw, neither of whom should be here anymore, either, in my opinion.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

I don't see Boucher being unemployed all year.

Hitch needs to go, and soon, honestly. Allen is what's keeping us in games, and Tarasenko is the only thing consistently reinvigorating everyone. Parayko has been a nice surprise. But none of those are on Hitch.

Honestly, if Hitch was one of my employees, he'd be fired already. He keeps putting Bouwmeester and Pietrangelo out there at the same time, and it's disheartening. They're the worst pairing we have, and it's not even close. Gunnarson isn't any more inspiring, but my expectations are low for him; I expect much better from two defensemen who are supposedly high calibre and used to be prior to being paired together. The experiment has failed, which is evident by all the times both of them chase into corners together, there's little to no chemistry together, and they look completely lost. Split them up, stop trying to force what clearly isn't going to work, or be fired.

...though I'm equally unconfident that Armstrong would put someone effective in his place. He'd probably choose Muller or Shaw, neither of whom should be here anymore, either, in my opinion.

I'm just curious, but what more do you possibly want? Not every player on every team is going to play flawlessly. Gunnarson has his good and bad times but it's not as if he's being paid to be an All Star. And I challenge you that JayBo and Petro are the worst pair this team has, especially, when they are constantly out on the penalty kill, more susceptible to lackluster play.

Hitch has proved to be a very good coach with this team. He turned this team around when he got here and has made some very big impacts on players he was led into when hired. The regular season performance speaks for itself. I only give up on Hitch if another playoff exit happens in the first round, if not it's time to fire Army first, who has built this team with some questionable moves.

Again, I'm all for keeping Hitch in the future but instead keeping Army on a bit of a short leash.

I honestly don't really understand why their is so much hate on Hitch for his regular season play. Playoffs, I get it, but he's kept this team competitive in a very strong division.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I don't see Boucher being unemployed all year.

Hitch needs to go, and soon, honestly. Allen is what's keeping us in games, and Tarasenko is the only thing consistently reinvigorating everyone. Parayko has been a nice surprise. But none of those are on Hitch.

Honestly, if Hitch was one of my employees, he'd be fired already. He keeps putting Bouwmeester and Pietrangelo out there at the same time, and it's disheartening. They're the worst pairing we have, and it's not even close. Gunnarson isn't any more inspiring, but my expectations are low for him; I expect much better from two defensemen who are supposedly high calibre and used to be prior to being paired together. The experiment has failed, which is evident by all the times both of them chase into corners together, there's little to no chemistry together, and they look completely lost. Split them up, stop trying to force what clearly isn't going to work, or be fired.

...though I'm equally unconfident that Armstrong would put someone effective in his place. He'd probably choose Muller or Shaw, neither of whom should be here anymore, either, in my opinion.

Posts like this are meaningless to me unless you identify who you think Armstrong SHOULD hire. So...Boucher then?

It's easy to voice criticism of Hitch/Armstrong, but who is the better choice?

 

[KirkOut]

Posts like this are meaningless to me unless you identify who you think Armstrong SHOULD hire. So...Boucher then?

It's easy to voice criticism of Hitch/Armstrong, but who is the better choice?

Yep. It's the same way with those who hate on Pietrangelo and Bouwmeester. People say we should trade one of those guys because they make too many mistakes. I'm sure whoever replaces them in this hypothetical will be a vast improvement

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

Yep. It's the same way with those who hate on Pietrangelo and Bouwmeester. People say we should trade one of those guys because they make too many mistakes. I'm sure whoever replaces them in this hypothetical will be a vast improvement

Maybe we should just stay the course, because it IS a formula for success... We've advanced in the playoffs...no wait...we haven't....

 

[KirkOut]

Maybe we should just stay the course, because it IS a formula for success... We've advanced in the playoffs...no wait...we haven't....

I don't see your point really. We should trade Tarasenko too I guess because we've never won with him. We need to get better, and trading Pietrangelo would make us worse, just like trading Tarasenko would. There are ways to improve the team that don't involve trading our best defenseman.

 

[Chojin]

Hitch is doing a great job during the regular season, as always, but he's still made no changes to address why we got spanked by Minnesota, Los Angeles, and Chicago in the playoffs. Therefore, I can't see us doing any better in the playoffs, and I expect that Hitch won't be back next year.

There's a really good chance Guy Boucher gets picked up after the next coach is fired, but if not, I'd really like to see him coach here.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I don't see your point really. We should trade Tarasenko too I guess because we've never won with him. We need to get better, and trading Pietrangelo would make us worse, just like trading Tarasenko would. There are ways to improve the team that don't involve trading our best defenseman.

How do you get worse, if you don't know who you get for him? Unless it is a Pronger for Brewer trade, then I'm not too concerned about trading anyone. Petro and Tank would be difficult to trade, unless you cashed in and made yourself conceivably better. No one EVER thought Lindros would be traded....do you think the Nordiques regret it? I think Shatty is untouchable considering there is no replacement at this point. Who said anyone on the boards had to agree? I see Petro and JBo's lack of attention to the front of the net as a big problem. Outside of Allen standing on his head, it would be a lot worse than what it has been. The playoffs are won there. If you wish to be a regular season giant, then stick with the Hitch plan. it's your perogative. We can have different opinions....it's okay....

 

[MortiestOfMortys]

How do you get worse, if you don't know who you get for him? Unless it is a Pronger for Brewer trade, then I'm not too concerned about trading anyone. Petro and Tank would be difficult to trade, unless you cashed in and made yourself conceivably better. No one EVER thought Lindros would be traded....do you think the Nordiques regret it? I think Shatty is untouchable considering there is no replacement at this point. Who said anyone on the boards had to agree? I see Petro and JBo's lack of attention to the front of the net as a big problem. Outside of Allen standing on his head, it would be a lot worse than what it has been. The playoffs are won there. If you wish to be a regular season giant, then stick with the Hitch plan. it's your perogative. We can have different opinions....it's okay....

I don't think the Nordiques regret it because they don't exist anymore . But no, I don't think the organization would regret getting Peter Forsberg, not to mention Duchesne, Hextall, Ricci + 2 more guys for Lindros. I don't think we're getting that return for Alex Pietrangelo though. One could hope, I guess. One main difference is Pietrangelo isn't demanding to be traded like Lindros was. Sort of forced their hand there.

 

[Daley Tarasenkshow]

Hitch is doing a great job during the regular season, as always, but he's still made no changes to address why we got spanked by Minnesota, Los Angeles, and Chicago in the playoffs. Therefore, I can't see us doing any better in the playoffs, and I expect that Hitch won't be back next year.

There's a really good chance Guy Boucher gets picked up after the next coach is fired, but if not, I'd really like to see him coach here.

Wouldn't 'changes' more fall onto the hands of Army than Hitchcock.

To me, Army should be on the hot seat, not Hitch.

 

[intangible]

I'm just curious, but what more do you possibly want? ... And I challenge you that JayBo and Petro are the worst pair this team has, especially, when they are constantly out on the penalty kill, more susceptible to lackluster play.

...

I honestly don't really understand why their is so much hate on Hitch for his regular season play. Playoffs, I get it, but he's kept this team competitive in a very strong division.

What more do I possibly want? A coach who knows how to actually change his strategy. The same two guys who apart are great defensemen are horrendous when paired together. I'm clearly not the only one who sees this, yet Hitch seems blind to it. Gunnar is the weakest defensemen we have, yet I'm more confident when he's out there than when Bouw and Piet are out there together. And I find that sad that this experiment continues despite its clear lack of success.

p.s. I don't care about regular season success. It's meaningless. In fact, I'd be in favor of paring down the meaningless regular season and expanding the playoffs. It shouldn't take 82 games to get to a point to where we pare it down to 16 teams for mere 7 game series. I get it's all about the revenue, but regular season success means nothing, gets you nowhere inherently, and isn't an indicator of playoff success.

I don't know that Boucher is necessarily the answer, but at least with him at the helm I would feel a sense of hope. What doesn't give me a sense of hope is sending the same two world-caliber players out there together when they clearly struggle as a pairing. It ain't working, and it's time to change it up.

Posts like this are meaningless to me unless you identify who you think Armstrong SHOULD hire. So...Boucher then?

It's easy to voice criticism of Hitch/Armstrong, but who is the better choice?

You are aware that you can voice criticism without having to voice the appropriate solution, right? Like, I can say that 2+3 doesn't equal 6 without having to say it equals 5. It might make my argument stronger, but it isn't necessary. Anyway, see above for explanation.

Yep. It's the same way with those who hate on Pietrangelo and Bouwmeester. People say we should trade one of those guys because they make too many mistakes. I'm sure whoever replaces them in this hypothetical will be a vast improvement

I don't know who's calling for one to be traded, but I just want them split up. Personally, I think it's ridiculous when I hear calls for any of Shatty, Piet, or Bouw to be traded; all have a place here, and with Parayko are the strongest top-4 I can think of (Hawks might come close, though).

Maybe we should just stay the course, because it IS a formula for success... We've advanced in the playoffs...no wait...we haven't....

Exactly. It'd be one thing if we had even an inkling of success from Hitch's and Army's regime. A WCF would be a great indicator. Not even saying a Cup. Just something other than a fantastic regular season, then immediately pooping out in the first or second rounds of the playoffs, never ending in a way where we say, "Well, it was hard-fought, but they were just the better team." Every time it's, "The Blues just looked like they gave up." I expect better.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Criticizing Hitchcock without identifying who you think would be better doesn't really lead to much of a discussion....just a complaint session. I'd love to know who would be better, and why. Who is available for Armstrong to hire assuming he does let Hitchcock go?

 

[Ranksu]

Criticizing Hitchcock without identifying who you think would be better doesn't really lead to much of a discussion....just a complaint session. I'd love to know who would be better, and why. Who is available for Armstrong to hire assuming he does let Hitchcock go?

I think there isn't better option then Hitch, Idk not so well other coaches. I only have seen Hitch system and he cannot get it done so it leaves players have to find away and win it.

Hitch 'reckless' is meaningless word. They are back for old bad habits.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

I think there isn't better option then Hitch, Idk not so well other coaches. I only have seen Hitch system and he cannot get it done so it leaves players have to find away and win it.

Hitch 'reckless' is meaningless word. They are back for old bad habits.

I do see that he has loosened up a lot from past years. Guys are making drop passes (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way), the defense is MUCH more active offensively (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way) and he doesn't blow a gasket. Its clear that the team is being coached to allow this type of increased creativity and expression of skill. The team looks much more dangerous offensively (which has allowed them to come back and tie games when they fall behind).

But then the injuries came, and I don't think we've really seen what Hitch's vision for this system with these players looks like. We've been watching a watered down version of it. Now that Stastny is back, if the lines can have some consistency and the D-pairs can get in sync, I think we'll see something more like the first couple weeks of the season. At any rate, they aren't playing at the pace they were then, and I think it has everything to do with just trying to survive through those injuries.

Well, they did, so I think the next quarter of the season is a time to more accurately evaluation what "Reckless Hitch Hockey" looks like. But to say that its the same as the last couple years, I think that's unfair to Hitch. Those kinds of moves in years past would have seen a guy lose ice time and get an icy glare. Now, its part of the plan (and the trade-off is that the goalies have to be up to the task of canceling the break downs).

 

[yubbers]

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I don't think the Nordiques regret it because they don't exist anymore . But no, I don't think the organization would regret getting Peter Forsberg, not to mention Duchesne, Hextall, Ricci + 2 more guys for Lindros. I don't think we're getting that return for Alex Pietrangelo though. One could hope, I guess. One main difference is Pietrangelo isn't demanding to be traded like Lindros was. Sort of forced their hand there.

Yes Lindros did AND they still made a haul. Pronger was a forced hand supposedly as well and they muffed it. So an unforced hand for Petro might bring?? Perhaps a #1 center and his eventual replacement? That would be greater than trading away Shatty for a #1 center and creating a gaping hole on our PP without another deal.

 

[ledzeppelinfan1]

I do see that he has loosened up a lot from past years. Guys are making drop passes (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way), the defense is MUCH more active offensively (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way) and he doesn't blow a gasket. Its clear that the team is being coached to allow this type of increased creativity and expression of skill. The team looks much more dangerous offensively (which has allowed them to come back and tie games when they fall behind).

But then the injuries came, and I don't think we've really seen what Hitch's vision for this system with these players looks like. We've been watching a watered down version of it. Now that Stastny is back, if the lines can have some consistency and the D-pairs can get in sync, I think we'll see something more like the first couple weeks of the season. At any rate, they aren't playing at the pace they were then, and I think it has everything to do with just trying to survive through those injuries.

Well, they did, so I think the next quarter of the season is a time to more accurately evaluation what "Reckless Hitch Hockey" looks like. But to say that its the same as the last couple years, I think that's unfair to Hitch. Those kinds of moves in years past would have seen a guy lose ice time and get an icy glare. Now, its part of the plan (and the trade-off is that the goalies have to be up to the task of canceling the break downs).

This. Great post.

 

[PerryTurnbullfan]

I do see that he has loosened up a lot from past years. Guys are making drop passes (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way), the defense is MUCH more active offensively (which sometimes leads to rushes the other way) and he doesn't blow a gasket. Its clear that the team is being coached to allow this type of increased creativity and expression of skill. The team looks much more dangerous offensively (which has allowed them to come back and tie games when they fall behind).

But then the injuries came, and I don't think we've really seen what Hitch's vision for this system with these players looks like. We've been watching a watered down version of it. Now that Stastny is back, if the lines can have some consistency and the D-pairs can get in sync, I think we'll see something more like the first couple weeks of the season. At any rate, they aren't playing at the pace they were then, and I think it has everything to do with just trying to survive through those injuries.

Well, they did, so I think the next quarter of the season is a time to more accurately evaluation what "Reckless Hitch Hockey" looks like. But to say that its the same as the last couple years, I think that's unfair to Hitch. Those kinds of moves in years past would have seen a guy lose ice time and get an icy glare. Now, its part of the plan (and the trade-off is that the goalies have to be up to the task of canceling the break downs).

This is very good. I agree that with a full roster some of the more risky things we are seeing may be more productive that he is trying for zone entry and on the rush. He needs a better game plan in the zone. The question is...when does he pull the plug on it as he has in years past and go back to his roots? He did that last year in the playoffs. I'd like to see him continue to keep it more open come playoff time too, but history tends to repeat itself in his case. Control the diamond, not the perimeter...that's what cost us the Minnesota series and the easiest way to defense and beat the Blues now.

 

[2 Minute Minor]

This is very good. I agree that with a full roster some of the more risky things we are seeing may be more productive that he is trying for zone entry and on the rush. He needs a better game plan in the zone. The question is...when does he pull the plug on it as he has in years past and go back to his roots? He did that last year in the playoffs. I'd like to see him continue to keep it more open come playoff time too, but history tends to repeat itself in his case. Control the diamond, not the perimeter...that's what cost us the Minnesota series and the easiest way to defense and beat the Blues now.

Its not really feasible to play one way all year, and then a totally different way in the playoffs. I see teams try it unsuccessfully every year. You can't be lazy on the back-check all year and then suddenly be airtight in the post-season. There will be mental errors, and those teams get weeded out.

Hitch knows this. But how WILL he coach the team in the playoffs? And what will the starting goalie bring mentally to the game. If we get the version of Allen that played starting from the LAK loss, I like the Blues' chances in any series. They can score, and they know it.

My biggest concern the past couple weeks has been the absence of sustained pressure. I believe it stems from a lack of intensity which is just one of those ups and downs through a long season, and playing a non-rival game. If this becomes a longer pattern, I'll become concerned. I think they just hadn't had any practices in too long. If my suspicions are correct the next game should be a solid performance.

 

[Celtic Note]

Posts like this are meaningless to me unless you identify who you think Armstrong SHOULD hire. So...Boucher then?

It's easy to voice criticism of Hitch/Armstrong, but who is the better choice?

So people can't voice criticism about either unless they have your blessing?

I advocate for MacLean after the season ends. Can I voice my opinions on Army and Hitch now?

 

[Celtic Note]

Hitch is doing a great job during the regular season, as always, but he's still made no changes to address why we got spanked by Minnesota, Los Angeles, and Chicago in the playoffs. Therefore, I can't see us doing any better in the playoffs, and I expect that Hitch won't be back next year.

There's a really good chance Guy Boucher gets picked up after the next coach is fired, but if not, I'd really like to see him coach here.

Why would you like to see him coached here?