Hitchcock Re-signs for 1 Year

[WaukeeBlues]

For all the crap that Tim Tebow gets, the guy said something that has always stuck with me. "I play to win. I can't stand losing. I can't be around it. If that's not what you're about, I can't be next to you."

I'm paraphrasing but that's the basic jist of it. I love it. I want a team full of guys that want to vomit when they lose a playoff game. That their brains just burn getting into the locker room after a series loss. A team that just has a thorn in their head and heart all summer training for next season, pissed off that this has happened to their team.

From what I've seen, that attitude of player isn't in our locker room, or if it is, it's not in sufficient numbers.

I may not know everything about hockey but I know winning a state title in high school was the biggest high of my sports life, and losing to our rival who knocked us out the next year made me want to break the glass. The way Jaden Schwartz nearly broke his stick after the game 6 loss to the Kings in 2013... we need more of that.

Link

</rant>

[Nyghtewynd]

I'll believe that the fanbase is actually upset when I see half-filled arenas. Until then, I have to assume that the fanbase are a bunch of simpleton rubes, and that we're therefore getting what we deserve.

[cprice12]

I'll believe that the fanbase is actually upset when I see half-filled arenas. Until then, I have to assume that the fanbase are a bunch of simpleton rubes, and that we're therefore getting what we deserve.

I don't think the idea that because fans show up to games it means they are perfectly happy with the decisions of the team. I never understood that logic...probably because it's not true.

Now, it is perfectly logical to think that a team's owner may not care as much about winning if they are selling out games every night and making a lot of money with a team that isn't a contender...because why should they spend more money for a CHANCE they may win? I get the idea of boycotting in that scenario. But THAT isn't the case with Stillman's ownership group.

It's obvious this franchise and ownership group wants to win, and wants to win badly...and they are doing what they think is best to accomplish that. They have spent a LOT of money...more than they probably should in this market...and you wonder how long they can maintain that. I think it's obvious that this ownership group is not concerned with making as much money as they can. They want to win. That is their #1 priority...they've stated as much. A lot of teams say that and it's fluff and just things the fans want to hear, but the Blues back it up with the amount of money they are spending and the moves they make to try to make the team better every year.

If you ask me, boycotting Blues games to protest bringing Hitch back or not trading Ott or whoever, isn't a well thought out response from fans. The last thing you want to do is cost the ownership group more money and over time force them into cutting payroll and taking a step back...and god forbid put the team up for sale again. That is a drastic scenario...but still.

If you want to voice your displeasure, get tickets right behind the Blues bench and put a sign up on the glass...or whatever. That kind of thing, over time, will be noticed without financially putting the franchise in jeopardy. Anyway...you get the idea.

I'm not on board with bringing Hitch back...but it is what it is. I'm not going to change a damn thing because I am a die hard fan. I'm still going to go to a handful of games...still going to watch every game...still going to run this site...still going to do the podcast...etc. I may find myself disgustingly mumbling to myself about some of Hitch's decisions more than last year...but that's part of the deal with being a fan. Or maybe that's just me.

[cprice12]

Who else should we get to coach?

Babcock, Bylsma, Carlyle, De Boer, Julien?, Dave Lowry, MacLean, McClellan, Adam Oates, even f'in Muller, basically anyone who isn't Hitchcock since he obviously has not worked out. Would you keep a clearly ineffective and very highly paid employee because an improvement on him isn't standing right in front of you? It's a fallacious argument. Clearly, you don't think he's ineffective. I'll ask: on what do you base that? Part of my judgment that he's ineffective is the assumption that there is someone out there who is a better fit for this club right now. Before you ask-if I knew, for sure, who that would be I wouldn't trapped in a f'ing cubicle.

Seriously?
I'm not crazy about bringing Hitch back...but replacing him with anyone just to get him out of here would be stupid...just like dumping Oshie, Backes or whoever for the best offer would also be stupid.

I have issues with a lot of what Hitchcock did and didn't do...and the apparent failure to implement "speed" into the "system" and just now realizing that we had better start picking up the pace in these games is beyond stupefying to me. Was speed not deemed important until now? He needed to review 24-26 games on tape to realize this? Who didn't know this? Whatever. Hitch isn't stupid. I'm thinking it's just an excuse they fed to the media to usher in a change in gears with the system.

But saying anyone would be better than Hitchcock just isn't being honest. Yes, his playoff record lately has been atrocious...but he has the best record in the NHL over the past 4 years...so he is doing something very right...just not at the right time. He has one more shot at it and if you believe what was said in the press conference a change in the system is coming and some younger players will be infused and Tarasenko & Schwartz & co. (the younger core) will play a bigger role.

Part of me is upset...but part of me is excited to see what changes will be made now and how effective they will be.

[WaukeeBlues]

...The last thing you want to do is cost the ownership group more money and over time force them into cutting payroll and taking a step back...

Here's the whole point: A step back from what?

At this stage, the Blues can only take 2 steps back.

1) A lower seed in the playoffs (irrelevant, see, e.g. L.A. Kings)
2) Missing the playoffs entirely

Why is it so much worse to miss the playoffs entirely as opposed to bowing out in the first round? Because the latter is all that this current team, coach and staff have shown they are capable of doing. In destructive and collapsing fashion.

There's no step back for this team. "But they're a good team, they've shown that." No they are not. This is not a good hockey team. I don't give one iota of a $hit what they do in the regular season any more and it is no longer any evidence for me whatsoever of the "talent" of this team. None. Zero. Because it doesn't matter. The only reason it matters at all is that the Blues make the playoffs, which they unfortunately most likely will next season. And as I've already indicate I hope they don't. I'd rather have a shot at the first overall pick than being embarrassed again in the first round of the playoffs.

YES cut payroll. I'd be fine with that. Trade players even if it's not for fair value. I'm also fine with that. Virtually ANYTHING this team does would be better than staying put. I don't care what you do but do NOT just trot out the same cast of characters and hope that the outcome is different. </rant>

[theohall]

My issue with bringing Hitch back...

He said it's important to win the division, conference, President's Trophy and to make the playoffs. No where have I seen him say it's more important to build a playoff winning team and win in the playoffs. That division/conference/President's crap - so f'in what!!!!

Build a playoff winner. See Chicago and LA.

[abc789987]

I'll believe that the fanbase is actually upset when I see half-filled arenas. Until then, I have to assume that the fanbase are a bunch of simpleton rubes, and that we're therefore getting what we deserve.

I really feel like I'm not even going to follow this team next year until the playoffs. I can't keep getting so emotionally invested for them to crush me year after year... Maybe if I only watch them once the playoff start it will not hurt so bad when they lose yet again...

[Nyghtewynd]

I'll believe that the fanbase is actually upset when I see half-filled arenas. Until then, I have to assume that the fanbase are a bunch of simpleton rubes, and that we're therefore getting what we deserve.

I don't think the idea that because fans show up to games it means they are perfectly happy with the decisions of the team. I never understood that logic...probably because it's not true.

Hey, you spend your money however you want. It's a free country. And that sign-against-the-glass stuff and fan protest stuff may work in European soccer. But there's no reason to believe that any American owner cares about anything other than profits. When you hit someone in the wallet, they listen. And so what if he cuts payroll? What will happen...we'll be as irrelevant as we are now? Stillman will move the team? Rams fans are learning that there isn't much value in being held hostage.

I don't plan on spending a single dime on this franchise until they look competent. I hope others do the same.

[ecbm]

Seriously?

Yes, seriously-I assume it is possible that any reasonably-credentialed (I'm sure you noticed the list in my post) hockey coach might get more playoff success out of the Blues roster than Hitchcock, whose high water mark I believe we have seen. I assume that what I've seen from this coaching staff and squad the last four seasons will be, with limited variation, repeated next season. I'd rather take a chance on something different in hopes of a different result than to cling to...what exactly?...even with a serious risk of greater failure. I'm just not personally down with the Armstrong "never admit what you're doing isn't working" approach. He's motivated by fear and a desire to prove himself right more than by winning and the ambition to do so.

part of me is excited to see what changes will be made now and how effective they will be.

I'm completely sincere when I say: good for you. That's not how I-and I think this is true of a lot of Blues fans-feel any more at all. All the futility I observed from this club in the 80s & 90s was trying enough especially after that period was followed by the club being asset-stripped and handed around between speculators and owners generally uninterested in, you know, hockey. Now this, in which it feels like the club has intentionally shut the window on this squad. Last year-I had hope going into the offseason and the season. That's gone.

[Oaklandblue]

There is far, far too much undeserved optimism here for a team whose front office refuses to change and adapt to try to win, from a core who don't have the guts, heart or drive to want to win and from a fanbase whose expectations are always set at taking whatever consolation prize they can get, no matter how small.

After four decades, that really sounds like the identity of the Blues, don't it?

[WaukeeBlues]

Seriously?

Yes, seriously-I assume it is possible that any reasonably-credentialed (I'm sure you noticed the list in my post) hockey coach might get more playoff success out of the Blues roster than Hitchcock, whose high water mark I believe we have seen. I assume that what I've seen from this coaching staff and squad the last four seasons will be, with limited variation, repeated next season. I'd rather take a chance on something different in hopes of a different result than to cling to...what exactly?...even with a serious risk of greater failure. I'm just not personally down with the Armstrong "never admit what you're doing isn't working" approach. He's motivated by fear and a desire to prove himself right more than by winning and the ambition to do so.

part of me is excited to see what changes will be made now and how effective they will be.

I'm completely sincere when I say: good for you. That's not how I-and I think this is true of a lot of Blues fans-feel any more at all. All the futility I observed from this club in the 80s & 90s was trying enough especially after that period was followed by the club being asset-stripped and handed around between speculators and owners generally uninterested in, you know, hockey. Now this, in which it feels like the club has intentionally shut the window on this squad. Last year-I had hope going into the offseason and the season. That's gone.

Great post. Entirely accurate. And that sentence I emphasized is dead on.

It's clear to me now that the whole crew needs to go: Head coach, GM, and core players. I've largely been a fan of Army. Some of his moves I've hated but that's with any GM. But this is asinine. With this season and the moves he's made (rather, NOT made) and his statements saying he doesn't intend on making any changes... he's just as much a problem as the rest of this team.

He won't get canned unless the Blues fail this year. Again. It's incredible to me that in the modern sports era of "fire a coach 10 games into the season if it's not working" that Army still clings to Hitchcock and this roster like a goddamn toddler looking for his ba-ba.

[Kerfuffle]

NHL channel late last night said something to the effect that Armstrong has evaluated this team and decided that changing the makeup would be a step backwards and not forward and therefore has elected to stay with the current group. Translation = no major changes folks this offseason, just a 'try harder' message to the troops.

[WaukeeBlues]

NHL channel late last night said something to the effect that Armstrong has evaluated this team and decided that changing the makeup would be a step backwards and not forward and therefore has elected to stay with the current group. Translation = no major changes folks this offseason, just a 'try harder' message to the troops.

The only prayer I have is that just by the nature of contracts and the salary cap, the Blues are going to be shedding some players and giving others a bigger role. If absolutely nothing else. Will that be enough to change things? Probably not. But I'm taking what I can get at this point.

I don't see any way on God's green earth that Barret Jackman is back next year. Thank freaking God. During the presser, it was pointed out that Bortuzzo and Lindbohm would likely get expanded roles which I'm in favor of.

[cardsfan04]

I was open to the idea of bringing somebody else in to coach, but I'm fine with Hitch being back.

I guess I'm in the extreme minority, but I think we can win with Hitch and our current core. Haven't and can't aren't the same thing. I'm for sensible changes. If we find a better coach or a trade makes sense, go for it. But, I think we can win with our current roster and coaches, or one very similar to what we currently have.

[glen a richter]

I find it hard to believe that this teams players actively WANT to lose. What I do believe very firmly is two things:

1) Hitch's system is not adapted to the modern game and he needs to fix that. The players could adjust (probably) if they were forced to, and that's on Hitch and the staff to emphasize to them.

2) They do have horrible confidence issues which however they got those confidence issues I don't care. What I do care about is that they are flat out awful in the playoffs and each successive playoff failure compounds because next year when they hit round 1, what thought will be in every one of their heads the minute they lose a game or go down 2 goals early? "Oh no, it's happening again!" The minute they start thinking that, it's over. The only way this core can win the Cup is if they go on a 16 game win streak. One loss is four losses for them.

#1 was not adequately addressed, so either the players have to change or they have to put a full time shrink on the payroll because these guys have one thing in their heads and they need to get someone professional to put something different in their heads.

[dmiles2186]

I was open to the idea of bringing somebody else in to coach, but I'm fine with Hitch being back.

I guess I'm in the extreme minority, but I think we can win with Hitch and our current core. Haven't and can't aren't the same thing. I'm for sensible changes. If we find a better coach or a trade makes sense, go for it. But, I think we can win with our current roster and coaches, or one very similar to what we currently have.

I want to think this way, I wish I could think this way. Hitch is back? Fine, we can't change that. The roster is a different story. JR had a quote that sums up my feelings almost to a T.

http://sports.live.stltoday.com/Event/B ... ium=direct

No, I don't think it would surprise me. This is a talented team, but for me, there are too many question marks about will and determintation and executing when it counts. Honestly, I've been fooled too many times by this group, thinking they had what it takes to go to the next level. Plain and simple, I'm not willing to believe that this group can do it without changes.

[glen a richter]

I think some of y'all are suffering from some serious Stockholm Syndrome. May want to get that checked out sometime before the Blues check out of next years playoffs.

[PGABluesFan]

Spent yesterday afternoon hitting golf balls next to Army. I try to keep their day jobs out of the conversation just out of respect, as his time at the club is his personal time, but it was everything in me not to pick his brain and wonder what the hell is going on and why the only "change" so far has been the addition(full time) of Marty. I guess it is a bit early though....hockey is still being played.

[ecbm]

Isn't it joyful entertainment to think/talk about this club right now?

[Oaklandblue]

Isn't it joyful entertainment to think/talk about this club right now?

If the club we are speaking of is the New York Rangers, then yes. Hell yes.