Let's Go Blues

A few immediate reactions:

• Hitchcock goes way back with Armstrong, who was an assistant GM with the Dallas Stars when Hitchcock was their head coach from 1995-2002. (He was also a front office guy for Team Canada in the 2010 Winter Games, where Hitch was an associate coach.) Columbus GM Scott Howson, in contrast, fired Hitchcock 59 games after the coach led the Blue Jackets to the playoffs for the first and only time in franchise history. Guess where Hitchcock decided to coach?

• The Blues are 6-7-0 for 12 points. The Blue Jackets are 2-11-1 for 5 points. Take a look at the St. Louis roster. Take a look at the Columbus roster. The blue line alone would make St. Louis the more attractive job, with the potential to contend for a playoff spot rather than shepherding a prolonged rebuild with a goaltender whose as solid as vanilla pudding. (Keeping in mind, of course, that Hitchcock's fuse burns quickly in new gigs.)

• As for the Blues, they couldn't handle Andy Murray's drill sergeant routine, so the team flipped him for players' coach Payne and handed the keys to the locker room over to a young generation of talent with no adult supervision. Said TJ Oshie to FanHouse in Sept. 2010: "I think we're more relaxed with Payne. He's a younger guy, maybe a bit of a players' coach. He lets us play our own game."

That lasted one season. In came Jason Arnott(notes) and Jamie Langenbrunner(notes) for veteran leadership, and out went Payne for Hitchcock, a coach very much in the disciplinarian mold. (Langenbrunner played for Hitch in Dallas, incidentally.)
Hitchcock is, frankly, exactly what this team needs after meandering with a players' coach for parts of two years. Structure. Discipline. Consistency. Improved special teams. OK, it's going to be boring. Hitchcock's teams usually are. But you know what boring gets you? Strong performances from perennial underachievers, and teams that make the playoffs more often than once in six seasons.

• Why now, when the Blues hadn't bottomed out? Just speculating, but maybe Hitch had a decision to make about his future with regard to the Blue Jackets and the Blues. So the trigger was pulled before the Blues were in a position where Payne's dismissal was obvious. The bottom line is, apparently, the management felt Hitchcock was better suited to bring this team to success than Payne.

• As for the Blue Jackets … well, the assumption was that Hitchcock would slide in behind the bench with one more year on his contract with the team. Scott Arniel remains the coach, and doesn't have any meetings with Jackets brass scheduled. As he told Puck-Rakers: "I'll keep showing up until somebody tells me I'm not supposed to."

Other than his contract, there never seemed to be a compelling reason for Hitchcock to take over the disaster that are the 2011-12 Columbus Blue Jackets. So he didn't.

northwest dave wrote:Not too excited about the retread of Hitchcock, but oh...it's the Blues, I'm used to changes.

Nyghtewynd wrote:Yeah, still not calm. Absolutely horrific decision, and one that has the possibility of setting the franchise back five years. Hitch plays stupid-boring hockey and doesn't like young kids. So we have the distinct possibility of being terrible to watch, and having Oshie/Petro/etc revolt. Ridiculous decision. Davis really got screwed here. I didn't feel bad for Murray, but I feel bad for Davis.

"It's shocking and it's disappointing, but in the end, you're responsible for all the areas of your hockey team," he said. "There were pieces that weren't firing on all cylinders and it's under my umbrella of responsibility. But I also can say that we were looking at a favorable schedule ahead and ready to turn the corner. That said, if this is what gets things going, then I'm all for it. I wish nothing but the best for the team and this group of guys. They deserve it.

"I'm more than grateful, more than grateful, to this organization for giving me a chance to coach in this league. The things that I learned and will learn from this, I owe a great deal of thanks."

Read more: http://www.stltoday.com/sports/hockey/p ... z1d1cPyy1Q

Happiest guy about Ken Hitchcock’s hire in St. Louis? Jaroslav Halak

Joe Yerdon Nov 7, 2011, 8:55 AM EST
Leave a comment

Getty Images
If there’s anyone in St. Louis that could be happy about seeing Ken Hitchcock taking over for the fired Davis Payne, it should be Jaroslav Halak.

Halak’s tenure in St. Louis since arriving in a trade with Montreal before last season has been a roller coaster of emotion. Last season saw Halak play hot and cold like a little kid playing with the sink faucets. Going from stellar opponent-frustrating games that saw him stop everything under the sun to ones where he couldn’t stop a beach ball was how things went.

So far this season, the beach ball has been winning more often than not as Halak’s numbers have ballooned and Brian Elliott has become the de facto starter for the Blues. If the Blues are going to be a playoff team in the West, they cannot have things going like that.

With Hitchcock in place now, the Blues are going to become a tougher defensive team come hell or high water (or trades). That kind of change in action should favor Halak who thrived behind a defensive system in Montreal.

While the initial go of things could be tough while the team figures out his system and learns a new meaning of pain under Hitchcock, the end result should see Halak’s numbers come back down and allow Halak to find a comfort zone in goal. ESPN’s Craig Custance tweeted last night that any players not buying into Hitchcock’s way of doing things will find themselves shipped out of town and the last guy we’ll see on that list should be Halak.

While St. Louis fans might not have those Halak “STOP” signs ready right now, they might want to shine them up for future games.

@CraigCustance
Craig Custance
Spoke with someone who thinks Armstrong/Hitchcock will trade anyone who doesn't buy in: "You're going to see guys moved out of there."