Head Coach in Limbo Thread

[Oaklandblue]

Calling this right now: Hitch resigns one year as coach. This pretty much proves to me our commitnent to winning.

You suck Stillman.

So you are saying our owner sucks and that our team isn't committed to winning all on an assumption you are making?

- I'm assuming the team played like dogshit in the playoffs

- I'm assuming we are letting a coach who is NOT under contract to decide if he wants to continue coaching a team after four years of near-failure to advance in the playoffs. Different players, same results.

- I'm assuming that we want to stick with Army and Hitch and not make a real offer to get a real gamechanger as Babs, like firing Army and giving Babs a blank check to run the organization as he sees fit.

- I'm assuming that we sign players of questionable quality to high money contracts, making insignfigant trades and acquiring players who are not the solution that they are advertised, to date

- I'm assuming that the team on paper isn't the team that appears on the ice. Brave on paper, gutless otherwise. Count how many Finals we've made it to, or how many times in four years we've made the second round.

- I'm assuming that Stillman is mishandling money by spending to the cap to support all of this nonsense while claiming to be a huge fan of the Note. Maybe shit is different in Missouri but I thought if you spent to the cap, you'd have a team that could at least do something, but no, we aren't overspending money on Ott and Berglund and some others who consistantly fail to produce in the playoffs at a level that they should.

- I'm assuming that the organization is afraid to trade real assets to acquire real players that can help us now. I'm assuming that we continue to get into the Prospects Game and build teams around players who MIGHT end up being PRETTY GOOD or GOOD which rarely, if ever, becomes the case.

In short: What assumption?

In short: the assumption you started your post with: "Calling this right now: Hitch resigns one year as coach. This pretty much proves to me our commitment to winning. "

That hasn't happened yet. There has been no confirmation on this. Thus, an assumption. It very well could happen and if it does, kudos to you. But for now...'tis an assumption.

ASSUMPTION
1. a thing that is accepted as true or as certain to happen, without proof.

I'm not disagreeing on you with some of your other 'assumptions' that you list there. But you predict that Hitch gets a 1 year deal, then you say it 'proves' the Blues' commitment to winning. Then you say our owner sucks for giving Hitch a predicted one year deal that hasn't taken place.

Letting a coach who is not under contract or in discussion of one to choose their own future (which is what Stillman did) after a fourth year of bounce and an unhealthy lockerroom vibe says all one needs to know.

[cprice12]

From what the guys on NHL Network radio have been saying (and they've talked with some people close to Babcock... apparently) it's either Detroit or Buffalo.

I think Babcock knows that this Detroit team isn't getting any younger and while they have some good players in the system that can keep them competitive, they're not going to be winning a cup any time soon no matter how good a coach he is.

Enter Buffalo. You got Eichel coming in who is already NHL ready, a slew of young studs already in the system... it makes sense if Babcock wants a challenge that he would join an organization that he would leave an imprint on and help build from the ground up. He'd also be entering the Buffalo scene on essentially perfect timing; right as they are about to turn the corner on this rebuild.

Who the hell would want to coach the Blues? A team with a lack of a killer instinct in the playoffs, with a ton of veterans who may not be as open to a new coaching style as a ton of youngsters in Buffalo?

It's also my understanding that Babcock wants some kind of a say in the player personnel on the roster. A more NBA-esque type situation. Buffalo would make more sense from that standpoint too.

Just my thought.

And...as it turns out...nobody "close to the Babcock" knew what the hell they were talking about.

He's going to Toronto on a 6 year, 50 million contract. Making him the highest paid coach in NHL history by far. The first three years on the contract are reportedly worth $8 million per...which is almost 3 times what Queneville makes, and he was the highest paid coach...or so they say.
Finding head coaching salaries is tough.

Babcock's salary with Toronto is unreal. It's like someone offering Ovechkin $25-ish million per season over his current $10 million per.

Nuts. But they have the money...and it doesn't count against the cap...so...

[Oaklandblue]

From what the guys on NHL Network radio have been saying (and they've talked with some people close to Babcock... apparently) it's either Detroit or Buffalo.

I think Babcock knows that this Detroit team isn't getting any younger and while they have some good players in the system that can keep them competitive, they're not going to be winning a cup any time soon no matter how good a coach he is.

Enter Buffalo. You got Eichel coming in who is already NHL ready, a slew of young studs already in the system... it makes sense if Babcock wants a challenge that he would join an organization that he would leave an imprint on and help build from the ground up. He'd also be entering the Buffalo scene on essentially perfect timing; right as they are about to turn the corner on this rebuild.

Who the hell would want to coach the Blues? A team with a lack of a killer instinct in the playoffs, with a ton of veterans who may not be as open to a new coaching style as a ton of youngsters in Buffalo?

It's also my understanding that Babcock wants some kind of a say in the player personnel on the roster. A more NBA-esque type situation. Buffalo would make more sense from that standpoint too.

Just my thought.

And...as it turns out...nobody "close to the Babcock" knew what the hell they were talking about.

He's going to Toronto on a 6 year, 50 million contract. Making him the highest paid coach in NHL history by far. The first three years on the contract are reportedly worth $8 million per...which is almost 3 times what Queneville makes, and he was the highest paid coach...or so they say.
Finding head coaching salaries is tough.

Babcock's salary with Toronto is unreal. It's like someone offering Ovechkin $25-ish million per season over his current $10 million per.

Nuts. But they have the money...and it doesn't count against the cap...so...

If Babs takes on a GM-like role as well, they made off like bandits and have a real future ahead of them.

[gaijin]

I'm seeing he got $50 mil for 8 years, not 6.

But still...

[WaukeeBlues]

I just hope this means that the coaching dominos start to fall pretty quickly now.

Get it done Blues, make a decision... sheesh

[ComradeT]

This coaching decision is oddly reminiscent of the Blues pursuit of a second line center during last season. Kind of getting sick of their taking things slowly only to get them wrong.

F- (what'd you expect, a C+?)

[cprice12]

I'm seeing he got $50 mil for 8 years, not 6.

But still...

Correct...that was a type-o on my part. 8 years, not six.
But they are saying the contract is front loaded and the first three years he'll be making $8 million per.

That is crazy insane for a coach. Both in terms of length of contract and salary.
Anything short of a cup now for Toronto will be a monumental failure.

I'm not even mad the Blues didn't get him. No way they can afford to pay Babcock anything remotely close to that. With that said...I bet all of the other coaches that are about to be hired are loving it. They'll likely ask for more as well.

[Kerfuffle]

I know some of you were hoping Babcock was coming to the Blues but I didn't see any chance of that happening considering how they left off with Hitchcock. Before you can hire someone you have to vacate the current coach. And the Blues did the wishy-washy with Hitch - which makes one ask 'is he staying or going'? It would look bad if Armstrong said it's up to Hitch to decide if he wants to come back and then go out and hire Babcock. The more I think about it, I believe the problem is Armstrong and not Hitch. You gotta have a GM that can make a decision. The paralysis/analysis thing is a weak position to manage from.

[Nyghtewynd]

By the way, you're not allowed to say the obvious about Armstrong here. You get called names if you do.

Your 2015-2016 St. Louis Blues: Rearranging the Deck Chairs.

[ecbm]

I know some of you were hoping Babcock was coming to the Blues but I didn't see any chance of that happening considering how they left off with Hitchcock. Before you can hire someone you have to vacate the current coach. And the Blues did the wishy-washy with Hitch - which makes one ask 'is he staying or going'? It would look bad if Armstrong said it's up to Hitch to decide if he wants to come back and then go out and hire Babcock. The more I think about it, I believe the problem is Armstrong and not Hitch. You gotta have a GM that can make a decision. The paralysis/analysis thing is a weak position to manage from.

Yeah, pretty much though I think the main reason MB wasn't coming was because he had largely made the decision to go to Toronto long ago.

Agree about DA & KH too. The whole club seems like a set of cliques who are happy with whatever performance they end up putting out there as long as the situation doesn't change. I'd really like to hear Armstrong say: what I've been doing is not working so I'm going to try something different. It'll never happen.

And as for those priorities?

I guess Sobotka is totally stonewalling DA?

I guess 91's not talking contract yet?

And we still have no coach ten days out from June?

And, serious question: did the Blues ever have an Assistant GM before now?

Again,

[theohall]

And, serious question: did the Blues ever have an Assistant GM before now?

Yes. He is currently the GM for Columbus: Jarmo Kekalainen.

[ecbm]

And, serious question: did the Blues ever have an Assistant GM before now?

Yes. He is currently the GM for Columbus: Jarmo Kekalainen.

Thanks. Man, I miss that guy.

Still, the position had been vacant for two seasons and Kekalainen was also the head of scouting. Brodeur's position has essentially been created for him.

[theohall]

And, serious question: did the Blues ever have an Assistant GM before now?

Yes. He is currently the GM for Columbus: Jarmo Kekalainen.

Thanks. Man, I miss that guy.

Still, the position had been vacant for two seasons and Kekalainen was also the head of scouting. Brodeur's position has essentially been created for him.

IMO, having an "assistant GM" whether he is the assistant or head of scouting gives more opportunities to scout players in more locations. Other teams have also recently added assistant GMs for similar reasons. Brodeur's name also might help when it comes to future FAs with the way players seem to love him.

[ecbm]

And, serious question: did the Blues ever have an Assistant GM before now?

Yes. He is currently the GM for Columbus: Jarmo Kekalainen.

Thanks. Man, I miss that guy.

Still, the position had been vacant for two seasons and Kekalainen was also the head of scouting. Brodeur's position has essentially been created for him.

IMO, having an "assistant GM" whether he is the assistant or head of scouting gives more opportunities to scout players in more locations. Other teams have also recently added assistant GMs for similar reasons. Brodeur's name also might help when it comes to future FAs with the way players seem to love him.

Oh, I don't have any problem with this. I like Brodeur. But this isn't the sort of announcement that's going to excite Blues fans right now, you know?

[dmiles2186]

No surprise, it's that legacy-driven kick for the ego.
https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/601438188968611840

[ecbm]

No surprise, it's that legacy-driven kick for the ego.
https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/601438188968611840

I'd take a job that amped up my ego and guaranteed me $50M too. Especially if I had already achieved the greatest success possible in my field. Just sayin'...

[WaukeeBlues]

No surprise, it's that legacy-driven kick for the ego.
https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/601438188968611840

I'd take a job that amped up my ego and guaranteed me $50M too. Especially if I had already achieved the greatest success possible in my field. Just sayin'...

No joke. If you're perceived as a talented enough coach to hand pick the franchise you want to coach and you pick the one with arguably the greatest historical tradition and fan following in this league... hell, more power to you.

I can't begrudge a guy for earning his ability to coach wherever he wants and then unabashedly picking the biggest market, biggest powerhouse (in terms of dollars) franchise.

[dmiles2186]

No surprise, it's that legacy-driven kick for the ego.
https://twitter.com/SWhyno/status/601438188968611840

I'd take a job that amped up my ego and guaranteed me $50M too. Especially if I had already achieved the greatest success possible in my field. Just sayin'...

No joke. If you're perceived as a talented enough coach to hand pick the franchise you want to coach and you pick the one with arguably the greatest historical tradition and fan following in this league... hell, more power to you.

I can't begrudge a guy for earning his ability to coach wherever he wants and then unabashedly picking the biggest market, biggest powerhouse (in terms of dollars) franchise.

I agree with you guys, didn't mean to make it seem otherwise. I mean, I get it. You've won a Cup with the Wings. What could too that? Restoring a stories franchise to glory. If he can achieve that, they'll erect statues of him all over Toronto.

Also, 50 mil doesn't hurt.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cprice12]

I know some of you were hoping Babcock was coming to the Blues but I didn't see any chance of that happening considering how they left off with Hitchcock. Before you can hire someone you have to vacate the current coach. And the Blues did the wishy-washy with Hitch - which makes one ask 'is he staying or going'? It would look bad if Armstrong said it's up to Hitch to decide if he wants to come back and then go out and hire Babcock. The more I think about it, I believe the problem is Armstrong and not Hitch. You gotta have a GM that can make a decision. The paralysis/analysis thing is a weak position to manage from.

I'ts not up to Hitch. And there is nothing wishy-washy about it. He has already stated that he wants to come back. Armstrong and co. need to decide if they want him back. They have spoken about it a number of times.

The whole, "I need to think about it" from Hitch was a bunch of bull. Everyone knows he wants to come back...but Armstrong doesn't have him as his first choice.
Armstrong was exploring options and one of those options was Babcock. Hitch is, essentially, on the back burner.

If the Blues have other choices they would rather have, they are going after them first...and if none of them work out, then Hitchcock may be retained as the fall back plan. Armstrong is simply keeping his options open with Hitch.

And apparently there has been a lot of transparency between Hitch and Armstrong during this process...so none of this is blindsiding Hitch. Some people like to speculate that Hitchcock might be pissed that he hears the Blues are going after other options...but he is apparently aware of all of it. Hitch and Army are friends, and they are open about what is going on.

Hitch apparently understands the organization's desire to see who else may be interested in the job...how could he not understand? He's not stupid. 4 straight playoff series losses...all with home ice advantage, and in years when they were considered serious cup contenders. He knows the club wants to win and he hasn't gotten the job done. I'm sure he wants a shot at redemption, but he also understands management's position. At least that is what I have heard.

Armstrong has never had an issue with "making a decision"...at least not that the public knows of. He has never been shy to pull the trigger on a deal if he feels it will help the team. Although, I wish something would be get done...only because I'm just tired of waiting.

[ecbm]

I know some of you were hoping Babcock was coming to the Blues but I didn't see any chance of that happening considering how they left off with Hitchcock. Before you can hire someone you have to vacate the current coach. And the Blues did the wishy-washy with Hitch - which makes one ask 'is he staying or going'? It would look bad if Armstrong said it's up to Hitch to decide if he wants to come back and then go out and hire Babcock. The more I think about it, I believe the problem is Armstrong and not Hitch. You gotta have a GM that can make a decision. The paralysis/analysis thing is a weak position to manage from.

I'ts not up to Hitch. And there is nothing wishy-washy about it. He has already stated that he wants to come back. Armstrong and co. need to decide if they want him back. They have spoken about it a number of times.

The whole, "I need to think about it" from Hitch was a bunch of bull. Everyone knows he wants to come back...but Armstrong doesn't have him as his first choice.
Armstrong was exploring options and one of those options was Babcock. Hitch is, essentially, on the back burner.

If the Blues have other choices they would rather have, they are going after them first...and if none of them work out, then Hitchcock may be retained as the fall back plan. Armstrong is simply keeping his options open with Hitch.

And apparently there has been a lot of transparency between Hitch and Armstrong during this process...so none of this is blindsiding Hitch. Some people like to speculate that Hitchcock might be pissed that he hears the Blues are going after other options...but he is apparently aware of all of it. Hitch and Army are friends, and they are open about what is going on.

Hitch apparently understands the organization's desire to see who else may be interested in the job...how could he not understand? He's not stupid. 4 straight playoff series losses...all with home ice advantage, and in years when they were considered serious cup contenders. He knows the club wants to win and he hasn't gotten the job done. I'm sure he wants a shot at redemption, but he also understands management's position. At least that is what I have heard.

Armstrong has never had an issue with "making a decision"...at least not that the public knows of. He has never been shy to pull the trigger on a deal if he feels it will help the team. Although, I wish something would be get done...only because I'm just tired of waiting.

Can you link to any evidence of any of these things you say have happened? You seem to assume several things and assert them as fact: "everyone knows..."

Hitchcock very much implied that whether or not he comes back is up to him-otherwise who gives a shit if he has to consider his future? It wouldn't matter. Armstrong was sitting right next to Hitch when he implied that and, pointedly, didn't contradict him. I have no idea how you come to the conclusion that the Blues' situation is this cut and dried. Very well connected pundits can't even agree on the extent to which the Blues courted Babcock. Nothing is clear right now.