Assuming he is behind the bench and right now I think we have to assume that.

How long is the next contract? 1 year, right?

Or is it two / three years with a mutual out option?

Does his length of contract matter? It shouldn't, but honestly, I have to wonder if a 1 yr deal has an impact on the attitude in the locker room.

Are major adjustments made to the roster to accommodate Hitch when he may not be here that long? Especially if Armstrong can only get a marginal return on the players being shipped out.

How does that affect the players' "buy in"? Some were already waiting for him to exit during this past season.

It won't last past November/December IMO. This season's gonna be ugly.

ratonmono wrote:It won't last past November/December IMO. This season's gonna be ugly.

If you're anti-Hitchcock and they keep him on board, then a November/December exit is a good thing. Otherwise they enter the playoffs w/ him behind the bench.

Having said that, I'd rather see a change in the offseason, when there's less urgency and more time to interview candidates. It's been 20 years since they've made a coaching change (Berry -> Keenan) in the offseason. Keenen, Q, Kitchen, Murray and Payne all went down mid-season.

insideout wrote:

ratonmono wrote:It won't last past November/December IMO. This season's gonna be ugly.

If you're anti-Hitchcock and they keep him on board, then a November/December exit is a good thing. Otherwise they enter the playoffs w/ him behind the bench.

Having said that, I'd rather see a change in the offseason, when there's less urgency and more time to interview candidates. It's been 20 years since they've made a coaching change (Berry -> Keenan) in the offseason. Keenen, Q, Kitchen, Murray and Payne all went down mid-season.

I just think this team's going to come out very very flat at the beginning if Hitch is back. It's not what I want to see, but I just don't see how bringing this coach back is the right move, regardless of how many players are moved.

ratonmono wrote:

insideout wrote:

ratonmono wrote:It won't last past November/December IMO. This season's gonna be ugly.

If you're anti-Hitchcock and they keep him on board, then a November/December exit is a good thing. Otherwise they enter the playoffs w/ him behind the bench.

Having said that, I'd rather see a change in the offseason, when there's less urgency and more time to interview candidates. It's been 20 years since they've made a coaching change (Berry -> Keenan) in the offseason. Keenen, Q, Kitchen, Murray and Payne all went down mid-season.

I just think this team's going to come out very very flat at the beginning if Hitch is back. It's not what I want to see, but I just don't see how bringing this coach back is the right move, regardless of how many players are moved.

Again, if you're anti-Hitch, then a flat start is the best-case scenario.

insideout wrote:
Again, if you're anti-Hitch, then a flat start is the best-case scenario.

Not if they miss the playoffs entirely after a slow start. I mean yeah we could use another top prospect (who couldn't?) but we wouldn't be bad enough to be top 10 in the draft. The best case scenario is that we just part ways from Hitch this offseason and move a few players around the draft and go into the season with a slightly different look.

ratonmono wrote:

insideout wrote:
Again, if you're anti-Hitch, then a flat start is the best-case scenario.

Not if they miss the playoffs entirely after a slow start. I mean yeah we could use another top prospect (who couldn't?) but we wouldn't be bad enough to be top 10 in the draft. The best case scenario is that we just part ways from Hitch this offseason and move a few players around the draft and go into the season with a slightly different look.

I doubt the organization would let them fall out of playoff contention under Hitch. So here's your choice:
1) Team plays well under Hitch and earns a playoff spot.
2) Team is flat under Hitch, and relies on replacement coach to get them back into a playoff spot. (Say, 5 or 6 points out of the top 8 in Mid November?)

Barring unforeseen extraordinary factors, I'd take #2 in a heartbeat.

Notebly Blue wrote:Assuming he is behind the bench and right now I think we have to assume that.

How long is the next contract? 1 year, right?

Or is it two / three years with a mutual out option?

Does his length of contract matter? It shouldn't, but honestly, I have to wonder if a 1 yr deal has an impact on the attitude in the locker room.

Are major adjustments made to the roster to accommodate Hitch when he may not be here that long? Especially if Armstrong can only get a marginal return on the players being shipped out.

How does that affect the players' "buy in"? Some were already waiting for him to exit during this past season.

I definitely think the way the Blues have handled this whole situation is less than stellar. It is a rather unique situation because you have a coach [Hitch] in limbo who, even if he stays, doesn't want to stay very long. You had a couple of premium coaches out there in McLellan and Babcock to stir the pot, but neither one of them should be considered a serious upgrade over Hitch.

If Hitchcock stays, the assistants (minus Muller) need to go. At least one of the SOB line (Preferably Oshie, then Backes) needs to go. I'm hopeful they will cut ties with Hitch, promote Muller and let him choose his assistants. Bring in Oates to coach the power play unit. Use the week before the draft to shake up the roster.

But they rarely do what I hope they would do. I would have fired Hitch last year a day after Game 6 in Chicago. A year removed, it's not only the coach but also the players. It's time for an overhaul.

So, 1 year and the assistants all stay. I guess the Blues can go for the kick-in-the-crotch trifecta by just sitting tight and not making any big player changes now...

fucking bullshit. what our D was doing in the playoffs was ridiculous. ALL of them are back? same song again.

I can not fucking believe they brought back Shaw and Bennet again. Those two are like fucking herpes.

T.C. wrote:fucking bullshit. what our D was doing in the playoffs was ridiculous. ALL of them are back? same song again.

It's not all the D that are coming back. It's the dough boy coach and his assistants. But I agree it's a stupid move. Hitch should he gone! Give him a free deep dish pizza on the way out!

JesusNEVERexisted wrote:

T.C. wrote:fucking bullshit. what our D was doing in the playoffs was ridiculous. ALL of them are back? same song again.

It's not all the D that are coming back. It's the dough boy coach and his assistants. But I agree it's a stupid move. Hitch should he gone! Give him a free deep dish pizza on the way out!

Fat jokes. Great response.

It's done and I wish all the Blues success. Unlike others I don't cheer for them to fail.

If next season isn't a resounding success though, everyone will be gone.