The more i think about it, I hope he stays in Detroit or heads to San Jose. Doesn't seem to be enough of an upgrade over Hitch to me and it seems like this is all about the hype. I'm not going to feel any better about this team getting out of the first round until some of the core is moved, regardless of who the coach is.

I would be fine with a lateral move or even a step back at this point, and Babcock is likely just a lateral move. Still, it will be a very, VERY expensive lateral move. But if bringing in Babcock causes Army to make the roster changes we need to make then it may be worth it. I can't take another year of banging my head against the wall waiting for Hitch to not fail with the same cast of characters. Properly evaluating the roster this offseason and making the changes that are necessary is probably going to be much more important than who we hire as our next coach. This time next year we may be talking about Hextall having made the best coaching hire of the offseason.

I won't be broken up if he leaves.

MissouriMook wrote:I would be fine with a lateral move or even a step back at this point, and Babcock is likely just a lateral move. Still, it will be a very, VERY expensive lateral move. But if bringing in Babcock causes Army to make the roster changes we need to make then it may be worth it. I can't take another year of banging my head against the wall waiting for Hitch to not fail with the same cast of characters. Properly evaluating the roster this offseason and making the changes that are necessary is probably going to be much more important than who we hire as our next coach. This time next year we may be talking about Hextall having made the best coaching hire of the offseason.

No kidding. Has the potential to be another Herb Brooks type decision. I personally think Hitch's system is a bit dated. At it's core, it seems to rely on the Blues outworking their opponent. Outwork enough teams over an 82 game season and you work your way to the top of the hill. But when the playoffs roll around and EVERY TEAM finds another gear, that system doesn't work.

I do not however think Babcock is the answer. As good a coach as he is, and he is very good, I don't see us getting in to a bidding war with TOR, SJS, BUF, etc.

My guess all along has been they'll not resign Hitch and hand the reins to Muller.

I'd love to see Backcock here as the coach, mainly because I believe
some of our pampered players will probably discover that they would be getting an even more intense and demanding coach than Hitch.
I can hear Oshie whining already.

MissouriMook wrote:I would be fine with a lateral move or even a step back at this point, and Babcock is likely just a lateral move. Still, it will be a very, VERY expensive lateral move. But if bringing in Babcock causes Army to make the roster changes we need to make then it may be worth it. I can't take another year of banging my head against the wall waiting for Hitch to not fail with the same cast of characters. Properly evaluating the roster this offseason and making the changes that are necessary is probably going to be much more important than who we hire as our next coach. This time next year we may be talking about Hextall having made the best coaching hire of the offseason.

That was an interesting move by Hextall.....that's not a typical Flyers move so that tells me that he is large and in charge there. It might not work out but at least he's doing things his way and not the way of the old regime. Then again, it could work out very well like you imply above and Hextall looks like a genius.

rbartnik wrote:I won't be broken up if he leaves.

Can you elaborate on what you feel his short comings are and who you'd like to bring to Detroit as a change/upgrade?

Thanks

I would be fine with getting Babcock but I doubt he's worth $5M...and regardless of coach, there are definite needed changes needed on the roster. There are simply way too many players that lack the killer instinct that is absolutely vital to playoff hockey.

I want him. He gets the most out of his players, and this team needs someone who can do that. Another young or 'has been' coach and they'll likely to continue to push them out. This team needs a strong leader and a shift in player leadership.

NHLTIM wrote:The more i think about it, I hope he stays in Detroit or heads to San Jose. Doesn't seem to be enough of an upgrade over Hitch to me and it seems like this is all about the hype. I'm not going to feel any better about this team getting out of the first round until some of the core is moved, regardless of who the coach is.

Completely agree.

SickMittsRomKnee wrote:

MissouriMook wrote:I would be fine with a lateral move or even a step back at this point, and Babcock is likely just a lateral move. Still, it will be a very, VERY expensive lateral move. But if bringing in Babcock causes Army to make the roster changes we need to make then it may be worth it. I can't take another year of banging my head against the wall waiting for Hitch to not fail with the same cast of characters. Properly evaluating the roster this offseason and making the changes that are necessary is probably going to be much more important than who we hire as our next coach. This time next year we may be talking about Hextall having made the best coaching hire of the offseason.

No kidding. Has the potential to be another Herb Brooks type decision. I personally think Hitch's system is a bit dated. At it's core, it seems to rely on the Blues outworking their opponent. Outwork enough teams over an 82 game season and you work your way to the top of the hill. But when the playoffs roll around and EVERY TEAM finds another gear, that system doesn't work.

I do not however think Babcock is the answer. As good a coach as he is, and he is very good, I don't see us getting in to a bidding war with TOR, SJS, BUF, etc.

My guess all along has been they'll not resign Hitch and hand the reins to Muller.

+1 That sums it up pretty well.

SickMittsRomKnee wrote:

MissouriMook wrote:I would be fine with a lateral move or even a step back at this point, and Babcock is likely just a lateral move. Still, it will be a very, VERY expensive lateral move. But if bringing in Babcock causes Army to make the roster changes we need to make then it may be worth it. I can't take another year of banging my head against the wall waiting for Hitch to not fail with the same cast of characters. Properly evaluating the roster this offseason and making the changes that are necessary is probably going to be much more important than who we hire as our next coach. This time next year we may be talking about Hextall having made the best coaching hire of the offseason.

No kidding. Has the potential to be another Herb Brooks type decision. I personally think Hitch's system is a bit dated. At it's core, it seems to rely on the Blues outworking their opponent. Outwork enough teams over an 82 game season and you work your way to the top of the hill. But when the playoffs roll around and EVERY TEAM finds another gear, that system doesn't work.

I do not however think Babcock is the answer. As good a coach as he is, and he is very good, I don't see us getting in to a bidding war with TOR, SJS, BUF, etc.

My guess all along has been they'll not resign Hitch and hand the reins to Muller.

Hitch's system in a nutshell is: check the opponent everywhere on the ice, create turnovers, quickly transition to the attack while the opponent is off-balance, capitalize on the scoring chances you just created. If you watch other teams closely you'll see that most good teams (especially the ones still playing) do basically the same thing. Every coach has his own tweeks and wrinkles, but the basics are the same. From watching the playoffs, the one big difference between the Blues and the other teams is that the other guys put forth the effort while the Blues didn't. The Blues played "their" game ONCE in the playoffs and looked dominant while winning; the other games, not so much.

warpig2003 wrote:I want him. He gets the most out of his players, and this team needs someone who can do that. Another young or 'has been' coach and they'll likely to continue to push them out. This team needs a strong leader and a shift in player leadership.

The last three years, I think he's gotten exactly as much out of the Red Wings has Hitch has out of the Blues. i just don't see him as a real upgrade. He's getting a lot of mileage out of that one Stanley cup win. His playoff pedigree shows a round one or round two loss almost every year.

Kirk Muller is going to be the next coach.

wizard pork sword wrote:

rbartnik wrote:I won't be broken up if he leaves.

Can you elaborate on what you feel his short comings are and who you'd like to bring to Detroit as a change/upgrade?

Thanks

I just think it's time for a change. I'm not impressed with a long playoff streak that ends in the first or second round every year. The team has gone nowhere since '09 and I'm not really looking forward to more of the same.

I'm coming around on the idea of promoting their AHL guy, Jeff Blashill. Been there three years and they've been highly competitive every year. Bring him up, let him bring some of the kids with him, and try something different. It might be worse and it might not, but it won't be more of the same, and more of the same is not good enough.

For me personally, firing Hitch and replacing him with Muller is the worst thing that can happen. If the Blues decide to move on from Hitch, they need to move on from the entire coaching staff and the game plan of this coaching staff.
I like the thought of giving Hitch one more year and then moving on if need be. I'm sure Army has his eye on the Dave Tippett situation but then again, if Hitch is retained and we have another first round exit in 2015-16, Army won't be here to hire Tippett.

I'd welcome Babcock, but it's the players who are going to make a difference in the end. I just think we have too many guys on the team who can't or won't play to the level required in the playoffs.

Babcock hasn't gotten the Wings any farther than Hitch in recent years so I don't think he'll be a miracle worker with this team, although I do think he's a great coach. Some of the core guys just need to go.

bluebloodkc wrote:Hitch's system in a nutshell is: check the opponent everywhere on the ice, create turnovers, quickly transition to the attack while the opponent is off-balance, capitalize on the scoring chances you just created. If you watch other teams closely you'll see that most good teams (especially the ones still playing) do basically the same thing. Every coach has his own tweeks and wrinkles, but the basics are the same. From watching the playoffs, the one big difference between the Blues and the other teams is that the other guys put forth the effort while the Blues didn't. The Blues played "their" game ONCE in the playoffs and looked dominant while winning; the other games, not so much.

Part of the problem with teams "catching on" or "catching up" with Hitch's system is that it seem to be so dependent on the forwards and defense working together as a five man unit. That's lethal when it works to perfection, but when the defense is slow to join the rush it can slow down said rush and give the opposition time to catch up. And when the forwards are late getting back to their zone to help the defense, the whole system breaks down and we have seen all too many of those lapses turn into odd man breaks and golden scoring opportunities against.

I'd be happy with Babcock as I believe he's enough of an upgrade on Hitch to make a difference. But I'm also of the mind that a change for change's sake is fine at this point for our team. Everything about the Blues right now seems stale. Until we see some changes to the core players along with a change behind the bench it's going to be real hard to muster much enthusiasm for the Blues.

ratonmono wrote:I'd be happy with Babcock as I believe he's enough of an upgrade on Hitch to make a difference. But I'm also of the mind that a change for change's sake is fine at this point for our team. Everything about the Blues right now seems stale. Until we see some changes to the core players along with a change behind the bench it's going to be real hard to muster much enthusiasm for the Blues.

I agree with you Rantonmono.Blues have gotten real STALE. Babcock or a new coach and trade 1 core player.Shake it up a little,I be fine with that.But Same Coach and same players.It will be real tough to get excited about upcoming Blues Season. Jermey Roenick said on a NBC telecast last year..That he respected Hitch as a Coach but Hitch style of coaching is tough to put up with day in and Day out behind the bench when he play for him.

oldbattler wrote:

ratonmono wrote:I'd be happy with Babcock as I believe he's enough of an upgrade on Hitch to make a difference. But I'm also of the mind that a change for change's sake is fine at this point for our team. Everything about the Blues right now seems stale. Until we see some changes to the core players along with a change behind the bench it's going to be real hard to muster much enthusiasm for the Blues.

I agree with you Rantonmono.Blues have gotten real STALE. Babcock or a new coach and trade 1 core player.Shake it up a little,I be fine with that.But Same Coach and same players.It will be real tough to get excited about upcoming Blues Season. Jermey Roenick said on a NBC telecast last year..That he respected Hitch as a Coach but Hitch style of coaching is tough to put up with day in and Day out behind the bench when he play for him.

Agreed and it's not about Hitch's coaching abilities. I respect his abilities as a coach more than I respect many of these players abilities to play hockey. But sometimes you just gotta move on and get a different look on the ice and a different voice on the bench. It really is mind boggling to me that they would consider bringing Hitch back and keeping the veteran core in tact.

I don't care if it is Babcock, but I'd like to see Hitch and all of the old-guard coaches canned. I don't consider Muller as part of that group as he hasn't even been with the team for a year. The coaching problems go farther than just Hitchcock, and whatever coach replaces Hitch (if that happens) will hopefully have the ear of Army, and can get some key personnel changes on the ice.

The only problem with Muller is that he could already have established a rapport with some of the players, and in turn he will be less likely to evaluate them purely based on performance.

With a brand new head coach, you have someone who can come in and literally not give a shit about who you are or what you've said or done in the past. Everybody has to prove themselves again.

ratonmono wrote:

oldbattler wrote:

ratonmono wrote:I'd be happy with Babcock as I believe he's enough of an upgrade on Hitch to make a difference. But I'm also of the mind that a change for change's sake is fine at this point for our team. Everything about the Blues right now seems stale. Until we see some changes to the core players along with a change behind the bench it's going to be real hard to muster much enthusiasm for the Blues.

I agree with you Rantonmono.Blues have gotten real STALE. Babcock or a new coach and trade 1 core player.Shake it up a little,I be fine with that.But Same Coach and same players.It will be real tough to get excited about upcoming Blues Season. Jermey Roenick said on a NBC telecast last year..That he respected Hitch as a Coach but Hitch style of coaching is tough to put up with day in and Day out behind the bench when he play for him.

Agreed and it's not about Hitch's coaching abilities. I respect his abilities as a coach more than I respect many of these players abilities to play hockey. But sometimes you just gotta move on and get a different look on the ice and a different voice on the bench. It really is mind boggling to me that they would consider bringing Hitch back and keeping the veteran core in tact.

That's how I feel. I have a lot of respect for Hitch but I think it's time for something new. They need to clean house and get rid of the entire coaching staff. and move some of the core players.

I haven't been impressed by Muller.

Blues are going to take a step back next season because I think the Western Conference is going to be even more competitive. There just needs to be a new message and mindset for this team because they won't win anything as things are right now.

Whomever the next coach is, I want to see some emotion from him during the game...especially when the zebras are hosing us. I also want the next coach to be emotional with his players ala Quenneville ...not just standing there and complaining that "we're not playing the right way" I think Quenneville's guys are scared of losing and facing him afterwards...thus the extra gear.

It isn't so much about Babcock with me. I want Hitch and Shaw gone. Time to move on and change the team's perspective. Also DA is going to be on the hot seat, if not already because this roster on paper should be a contender. If I was him, then I wouldn't put my job security in the hands of this group of players and coaches anymore. Clearly something isn't working, and I think the best changes would be bringing in a couple new coaches and moving some players of value.

Now I think Babcock is the best coach in the NHL. IMO. I look at that Detroit roster, and he has done well just to make the playoffs. The past few years Babcock got the most out of Detroit with the aging Datsyuk and Zetterberg while losing Hossa ('09) and Lidstrom ('12).