You Gotta Earn It!

1
We hear this all the time.

You've got to earn your ice time.

You've got to earn your spot on the roster.

We're going to sit you until you can figure some things out.

Why does this seem to apply only to the players?

"Ken, we've had some concerns about your coaching over the past several games so you're a healthy scratch tonight."

"Kirk, the power play seems to be struggling lately so we're sending you to the Wolves to work on your game."

At the extreme, if any failure is attributed to the players (paging Barn Burner) then get rid of the coaches and let the players play the game.

End of rant.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

4
I disagree, and my observations from last night will share why...because that matters ;)

There are obviously a few threads this could apply to, but I'll put it in here, because it lines up more.

1. DA. We have to be able to win those low scoring games in the playoffs, because that's what they are. No. You're wrong. You have to be able to score more than the other team. Period. If they score 3, you better have the ability, the game plan, the counter-adjustments, and chemistry already set to score 4. As I mentioned in another thread, this team has shown hard to score more than 2 goals, even in the regular season. IMHO, this is on the GM and Coach for both personnel decisions and strategy.

2. DA. Again, praising Ott for his ability to 'make the papers' :evil: WTF seriously has that done for the team? His effort is putting more energy into his mouth and getting penalties. It would be one thing if he was able to get other teams to respond and take penalties, but the number of minutes he receives vs the number he gets in response is way disproportional. I like him as a person and think he's a good guy, but his act in the playoffs has NEVER helped us. Not once IIRC. / ott rant.

3. Hitch..."we got into a track meet" BS excuse...again. Every time a team counterattacks us and we don't respond in kind with a sound adjustment, it is the fault of it becoming a "track meet" instead of realization that well coached teams make adjustments to our 'heavy/reckless/flavor of the season' team play description.

Again, I don't 'hate' DA or Hitch. I just think that they are unable to take this team, which with the talent it has and payroll it has should be 'elite' enough to win it all, to that really postseason elite level.
"Do Only Good Everyday"

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

6
BlueinNy wrote:Agree whole heartedly with #2, with Scott Upshall in the lineup, he more than replaced Ott as the "plug in where needed" special. Will be disappointed if we lose him next year. He has proven that he belongs.
Absolutely.

Upshall knows how to game with heart. Can't teach that.
I hope Snuggerud beats the shit out of Kyrou

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

7
Ozzies09tc wrote:
BlueinNy wrote:Agree whole heartedly with #2, with Scott Upshall in the lineup, he more than replaced Ott as the "plug in where needed" special. Will be disappointed if we lose him next year. He has proven that he belongs.
Absolutely.

Upshall knows how to game with heart. Can't teach that.
Which sort of fits my point - it comes down to the player. Coaches can coach till hell freezes over. Some players can/will listen, some can't/won't.
Barry Trots gets fired from Nashville. Goes to the Capitals, and may very well win a Cup, simply because he has better players than he has ever had before.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

9
You're absolutely correct barnburner.

I want hitch gone, but not just there.

I want all coaches gone except mueller and corsi (isnt he our goalie coach?)

I want every player traded for picks save for a few

Stastny, fabbri, tank, schwartz, steen, upshall, brodziak, lehtera are keepers imo, scrap the rest (brouwer can come back if at a reasonable price)

Shatty, parayko, edmunson are keepers the rest scrap

Keep elliot or allen (whichever fends a higher return you deal)

Either get picks or people who will play with heart.

Fuck the 05-08 teams were more fun to watch bc at least they gave their all
I hope Snuggerud beats the shit out of Kyrou

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

11
WebSant wrote:
Notebly Blue wrote:Who picks these players? How do they get on a team with a coach they won't listen to?
Ding, ding, ding.

We have a winner.
I should probably elaborate on this just a little bit.

The players on the team aren't on the team because they volunteered.

They are on the team because you picked them.

If they're not doing as well as you would like then quite a bit of the responsibility for that is on your shoulders.

And, if they really aren't up to the task then replace them.

In business, one thing that separates a good boss from a bad boss is that a good boss can coax higher levels of performance from employees.

That's why I have a hard time with blaming the players.

Management said almost two years ago that this team needed more killer instinct.

http://hockeysimplified.blogspot.com/20 ... d-out.html

If we still don't have that, whose fault is that?

Not the players, in my book.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

13
It definitely falls largely on the coach and management. I mean, if it's all about the players, who needs a coach? Coaches are the leader of the team. They set strategy. They motivate, inspire and get the most out of people. They make personnel decisions. They are IN CHARGE. The General Manager decides the make up of the team, maximizes asset management along with a bunch of other things. These are all very important.

Barnburner, I know I don't post a lot, and I respect you, but at the same time man.. you are such an old school apologist. 90% of your posts are defending the status quo, blaming the players, or trying to point out how unreasonable other people are or something. You are intelligent and add valuable opinions as well. We root for the same team. But to you and all those who are fully on the "it's all the players" bandwagon, wake up! It's about this organization's losing culture. It's about Doug Armstrong sometimes being a really good GM but sometimes being really bad. He has managed assets badly at times. He has stuck by a coach that has mostly lost this team a long time ago and for who the game has passed by. You want to stick by Hitch just to make a point?? What? That it's all the players? That's idiotic. This is the way of the world. Good coaches get fired all the time. Sometimes it's a bad fit or bad circumstances. But things are stale and Hitch needs to go. It's also about Hitch preaching all these changes every year, and then even after they seem to work somewhat, at the slightest hint of trouble, he goes back to his old faithful boring ass system that won't work in the playoffs.

To Doug Armstrong, we need more speed and skill at forward. And no, fucking Hitch, we don't just need to play a faster style, we ALSO need faster players. We don't need more grinders. We don't need more Dallas retreads. We don't need to keep shelling out shitty contracts to third and fourth line players.

To Hitch, you need to be less averse to risk. You need to take risks and play a fast game in today's NHL. I know that's scary because you aren't as in control then, but you need to change your style and stick with it. You need to make an intelligent assessment of your players and make your line combos based on that, and stick with it even through some adversity. If it really doesn't work, then fine, change it. But not at the slightest hint of trouble.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

14
SteveW7744 wrote:It definitely falls largely on the coach and management. I mean, if it's all about the players, who needs a coach? Coaches are the leader of the team. They set strategy. They motivate, inspire and get the most out of people. They make personnel decisions. They are IN CHARGE. The General Manager decides the make up of the team, maximizes asset management along with a bunch of other things. These are all very important.

Barnburner, I know I don't post a lot, and I respect you, but at the same time man.. you are such an old school apologist. 90% of your posts are defending the status quo, blaming the players, or trying to point out how unreasonable other people are or something. You are intelligent and add valuable opinions as well. We root for the same team. But to you and all those who are fully on the "it's all the players" bandwagon, wake up! It's about this organization's losing culture. It's about Doug Armstrong sometimes being a really good GM but sometimes being really bad. He has managed assets badly at times. He has stuck by a coach that has mostly lost this team a long time ago and for who the game has passed by. You want to stick by Hitch just to make a point?? What? That it's all the players? That's idiotic. This is the way of the world. Good coaches get fired all the time. Sometimes it's a bad fit or bad circumstances. But things are stale and Hitch needs to go. It's also about Hitch preaching all these changes every year, and then even after they seem to work somewhat, at the slightest hint of trouble, he goes back to his old faithful boring ass system that won't work in the playoffs.

To Doug Armstrong, we need more speed and skill at forward. And no, fucking Hitch, we don't just need to play a faster style, we ALSO need faster players. We don't need more grinders. We don't need more Dallas retreads. We don't need to keep shelling out shitty contracts to third and fourth line players.

To Hitch, you need to be less averse to risk. You need to take risks and play a fast game in today's NHL. I know that's scary because you aren't as in control then, but you need to change your style and stick with it. You need to make an intelligent assessment of your players and make your line combos based on that, and stick with it even through some adversity. If it really doesn't work, then fine, change it. But not at the slightest hint of trouble.
I'll admit to being "old school" in much of my thinking. Being 6 years older than Moses, I guess it comes with the territory. Let me try and clear things up just a little. By my comments on the players, I do not absolve management. After 34 years as a supervisor in the trucking industry, I am well schooled in the respective responsibilties. I've been through the times when my people made mistakes again and gain, against everything I ever told them. The mistakes they made, were often their fault, BUT -AS THEIR SUPERVISOR, THEY WERE MY RESPONSIBILITY. If I didn't figure out a way to bring their performance up to snuff, or make necessary changes, then it was my butt on the line.
If we do not get past the second round this year, then I am on board with saying goodbye to Hitch. For various reasons, I think Army gets more time. Not necessarily because he deserves it. With two years left on his contract,it's not likely Stillman is going to fire him.
The point that I've tried (perhaps badly) to make, is that I'm tired of watching coaches pay the price for players with swelled egos, or who think they are above having to put out the effort needed to win. (I take issue with anyone who watched last year's playoff and believed those players were giving everything they had. They ran into adversity, and quit. Simple as that.) Players who believe (rightfully it seems) that if they don't like the coach, all they have to do is lose, and he will be replaced with a "players coach."
If Hitchcock continues to preach for his players to play a certain way, and they continue to wander off in undisciplined play, that is indeed his responsiblity, because he hasn't figured out a way to get their heads out of their collective asses.
However, while that is his responsibility, it's the players fault, because they are the ones that are not committing themselves to doing everything necessary to win.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

15
barnburner wrote:
I'll admit to being "old school" in much of my thinking. Being 6 years older than Moses, I guess it comes with the territory. Let me try and clear things up just a little. By my comments on the players, I do not absolve management. After 34 years as a supervisor in the trucking industry, I am well schooled in the respective responsibilties. I've been through the times when my people made mistakes again and gain, against everything I ever told them. The mistakes they made, were often their fault, BUT -AS THEIR SUPERVISOR, THEY WERE MY RESPONSIBILITY. If I didn't figure out a way to bring their performance up to snuff, or make necessary changes, then it was my butt on the line.
If we do not get past the second round this year, then I am on board with saying goodbye to Hitch. For various reasons, I think Army gets more time. Not necessarily because he deserves it. With two years left on his contract,it's not likely Stillman is going to fire him.
The point that I've tried (perhaps badly) to make, is that I'm tired of watching coaches pay the price for players with swelled egos, or who think they are above having to put out the effort needed to win. (I take issue with anyone who watched last year's playoff and believed those players were giving everything they had. They ran into adversity, and quit. Simple as that.) Players who believe (rightfully it seems) that if they don't like the coach, all they have to do is lose, and he will be replaced with a "players coach."
If Hitchcock continues to preach for his players to play a certain way, and they continue to wander off in undisciplined play, that is indeed his responsiblity, because he hasn't figured out a way to get their heads out of their collective asses.
However, while that is his responsibility, it's the players fault, because they are the ones that are not committing themselves to doing everything necessary to win.
I have been a supervisor before as well, and I can tell you some people definitely will complain no matter how you are with them. They flat out just don't want to do their job. I'm sure there are players that are somewhat similar in hockey. But most supervising jobs are different from hockey. Hockey coaches need to command more respect and inspire more than most supervisors do by the nature of what the sport demands.

Have you ever been an employee who felt no matter what you did your work wasn't appreciated? Have you ever felt like your boss was an idiot? Or like your effort was being wasted on a sinking ship?

I believe there were quitters last year. But I'm also open to the possibility that they were so dis-spirited by Hitch's idiotic game planning that it was hard to put out max effort. Hockey is immensely demanding as you know. It's not always as simple as "Do this!" and then you do it. You are pouring out so much energy. If you don't believe in what you are doing, it's hard to compete at that level. I think the team knew that his strategy wasn't going to work, but he was too stubborn to see it or adjust. That's my hunch. I could be wrong. No one wants quitters on the team. But I also don't want a coach that so many people want to quit on because he has lost them. I think that's what's happened.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

16
Honestly, and I've been saying this for years, I just don't the the Blues, even playing perfectly, can beat Chicago if THEY'RE also playing perfectly, assuming there's no 'luck' involved. I've felt that way about some of the LA and Chicago teams that we lost to in the past. The 'Hawks and Kings just had far more shots at the blue-chip talent pool than the Blues did (as I mentioned in another thread).

That doesn't mean the Blues can't win, because NO team plays perfectly all the time, and 'luck' can very much be a factor. The games are played on ice, not on paper, and there's an old saying (originally about chess, I think) that the winner of close games is the side that makes the NEXT-to-last mistake.

IMHO, the Blues played closer to the upper limit of their talent through most of the regular seasons than teams like Chicago and LA did. That's why those teams seemed to have an 'extra gear' in the playoffs that the Blues didn't. Sadly, I still think that's the case.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

17
RAFritchey wrote:Honestly, and I've been saying this for years, I just don't the the Blues, even playing perfectly, can beat Chicago if THEY'RE also playing perfectly, assuming there's no 'luck' involved. I've felt that way about some of the LA and Chicago teams that we lost to in the past. The 'Hawks and Kings just had far more shots at the blue-chip talent pool than the Blues did (as I mentioned in another thread).

That doesn't mean the Blues can't win, because NO team plays perfectly all the time, and 'luck' can very much be a factor. The games are played on ice, not on paper, and there's an old saying (originally about chess, I think) that the winner of close games is the side that makes the NEXT-to-last mistake.

IMHO, the Blues played closer to the upper limit of their talent through most of the regular seasons than teams like Chicago and LA did. That's why those teams seemed to have an 'extra gear' in the playoffs that the Blues didn't. Sadly, I still think that's the case.
While there is no doubt that Chi/LA/Wash/NYR have more true talent that us, those teams are and have been beatable in a playoff series by teams at the same level of the Blues talent. The difference, and hate to keep bring this up, is that when those top elite teams bring their best game, to beat them you then also have to adjust.

IIRC, and maybe my memory has changed over the last couple years, but in both the LA ('13) and Chi ('14) series when we got up 2-0 on them, it was due to us taking our game to them, and the Kings and 'hawks trying to play it back to us. But when we got on their ice, and Sutter and Q had last change AND time to adjust their game plan, Hitch had no answer...not even later on when we met up on Blues home ice for game 5 and he regained last change (Hitch himself consistently talks about how important 'last change' is.

THAT is why I've been saying for the last 2 years that Hitch will do great in Reg. seasons against average and below average teams, but struggles vs elite teams with good coaching and in the playoffs when teams have a chance to adjust. We are just too predictable and don't have the ability to adapt. THAT, IMHO, falls squarely on the coaching and/or the GM. Because either the coaches are not good enough to adapt their strategy, OR the GM is not good enough to select players who can adapt if the coaches are instructing them.

TLDR: Either we have dumb players or we have dumb coaches.
"Do Only Good Everyday"

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

18
barnburner wrote:It applies to the players, because they play the game.
Joel Quenneville was fired here and Colorado. Suddenly he became a much better coach when he was handed much better players in Chicago.
Yes. The Blues moved on from Quenneville because "He couldn't win The Big One". He won a LOT of "Big Ones" once he got teams with 3-5 difference makers. He never had more than 2 with The Blues.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

19
Robb_K wrote:
barnburner wrote:It applies to the players, because they play the game.
Joel Quenneville was fired here and Colorado. Suddenly he became a much better coach when he was handed much better players in Chicago.
Yes. The Blues moved on from Quenneville because "He couldn't win The Big One". He won a LOT of "Big Ones" once he got teams with 3-5 difference makers. He never had more than 2 with The Blues.
And, we are probably looking at another example in Barry Trotz. Even tho he was widely considered one of the best coaches in the game, Trotz was fired because he couldn't get to the finals or win the Cup with Nashville. Now,with a much more talented roster in Washington, he may well reach new heights this season.
Was Scotty Bowman dumb in St. Louis, and a genius in Detroit, or did he just finally have the players to make full use of his talented mind?

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

20
Sorry, but I have to LOL at this silliness.

In four post-seasons so far, Hitch got us to the semi-finals...Once. In 2012 past a weak SJ team during a season we caught many by surprise AND we had a lot of veteran leadership who'd won the SC before.

-- In six post-seasons with the Blues, coach Q got us to the semi-finals 3 times AND to the Conf Finals once.

Q's post-season series record w/ the Blues: 5 series wins, 6 losses

Hich's post-season series record w/ the Blues: 1 series win, 4 losses (2 of which came after being up 2-0)

And just for shits and giggles, Q's record w/ the Avs: 2 series wins, 2 losses (only made playoffs 2 of 3 seasons)

To try and compare Hitch to Q as a head coach is insulting IMO.

Hitch career playoffs record:

With Blues: 1-4

With CBJ: 0-1

With PHI: 3 Series wins (made ECF in '03-04) 3 series losses

With Dallas: 10 series wins (Won SC and Won WC) 4 losses (DNQ for playoffs final season)

Hitch Overall: 14 wins 12 losses.

Since leaving Dallas: 4 wins 8 losses

Q overall: 22 Wins 11 Losses

Hitch is a very good regular season coach, no questions. But outside of catching fire his first years in Dallas, when the game was played different, there was no salary cap, etc. he has shown he CANNOT win in the post-season.

Put Hitch in Chicago with DA and same coaching staff...they won't win another SC or make it past 2nd round again.

EDIT: 2 things. One, I don't think it is unrealistic to expect these Hitch coached Blues teams to win a series or two. IF we struggled during the regular season and barely made it in, such as AM's '08-09 team that got swept by the 'nucks, I think the majority of the fan base would be happy. BUT, we have won our Division twice and placed 2nd the other two seasons. So, again, proof is in the results: Hitch = great reg. season coach, but is a failure in the post-season.
"Do Only Good Everyday"

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

21
barnburner wrote:
Robb_K wrote:
barnburner wrote:It applies to the players, because they play the game.
Joel Quenneville was fired here and Colorado. Suddenly he became a much better coach when he was handed much better players in Chicago.
Yes. The Blues moved on from Quenneville because "He couldn't win The Big One". He won a LOT of "Big Ones" once he got teams with 3-5 difference makers. He never had more than 2 with The Blues.


And, we are probably looking at another example in Barry Trotz. Even tho he was widely considered one of the best coaches in the game, Trotz was fired because he couldn't get to the finals or win the Cup with Nashville. Now,with a much more talented roster in Washington, he may well reach new heights this season.
Was Scotty Bowman dumb in St. Louis, and a genius in Detroit, or did he just finally have the players to make full use of his talented mind?
BB, you and Robb have pretty well summed it up IMO. Once talent realizes the importance of the contest the effort will come and the results will be good. Those teams with a deeper talent pool than the Blues, and a firm commitment, are going to win most of the time. The Blues just don't have enough top level talent to get them to the lofty levels in the playoffs. At best we have one elite player, and at the moment he is struggling either mentally, physically, or the center of too much attention by the opponents. The rest of the talent on the team is tier 2 stuff and just can't put the team on their back to carry through.

The LAs, Chicagos, Capitals, etc. have the talent advantage and when that talent decides to play, we're toast.

Now perhaps a different coach can get a few more games out of these guys, and maybe even to the SC semis, but I'm not so sure. Eventually, dedicated talent overcomes dedicated effort.

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

22
OK, for BB, Rob, and Iceman:

4 questions:

1. IF we do not have 'top-tier' talent, then how do we consistently either Win or finish 2nd in what has been called the last several years "the toughest Division in the NHL'?

2. How do we go from being so good in the regular season with this group of players and coaching staff to sucking wind in the playoffs?

3. Do you honestly think Hitch in one the same coaching playing field as Q (see my previous extra-long post that disputes that notion)?

4. IF our talent isn't good enough to win, yet we are maxed out to the NHL Salary Cap, then isn't that also the responsibility of both Hitch, DA and staff for making those personnel choices?

Not looking to argue, just trying to see your POV on those issues, the issues why I place the blame for the Blues faltering on the coaching and GM/staff more so than the players at this point in time after several years of the same result. (FWIW, I was never in the 'fire Hitch' camp until late last season when it became apparent that we struggle vs well coached teams).
"Do Only Good Everyday"

Re: You Gotta Earn It!

23
IF we fizzle out again (not conceding we will, I'm back on the optimism train because I'm a masochist), I'm sure there will be plenty of blame to go around and next season will have plenty of new faces both behind and on the bench.
...but whatever, the Blues won the Cup!!!!!