Blues Trade Proposals 2023-2024

[bleedblue1223]

I mean, where is this current team if Schenn even performs like he did last season? Same poor overall play, but at least with offense. Where would we be if Faulk was healthy all season and performing at his level the past 2 seasons? I know last season the main issue was defense. We were 17th in goals/game and 27th in goals against/game. This season has been the opposite, we are 26th in goals/game and 18th in goals against/game.

 

[Celtic Note]

I mean, where is this current team if Schenn even performs like he did last season? Same poor overall play, but at least with offense. Where would we be if Faulk was healthy all season and performing at his level the past 2 seasons? I know last season the main issue was defense. We were 17th in goals/game and 27th in goals against/game. This season has been the opposite, we are 26th in goals/game and 18th in goals against/game.

Banking on an aging team is a mistake IMO. There is plenty of data that show players decline at the ages of our older veterans.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Banking on an aging team is a mistake IMO. There is plenty of data that show players decline at the ages of our older veterans.

That still doesn't change the fact that this team did compete for a playoff spot this season, we were in that group of bubble playoff teams. Seems like they were what Army thought they were. No doubt he and we can be disappoited in individual performances, but I don't think anyone was surprised by the end result. I just find it weird that people are acting like Army was.

 

[ArenaRat]

Maybe DA stopped taking his ADHD medication and is way off kilter / can no longer recognize good hockey from bad. Maybe he never really knew hockey at all and completely lucked into anything good that's ever happened during his tenure here. Despite this, he's somehow got all of Canada snowed into thinking he has something to offer Team Canada, because they keep turning to him to put their teams together.

It is also possible that DA communicates through the media to his players, adding the weight of fan expectations to push the team to strap in and work harder. Sure, in light of the actual talent level of the roster, this is transparently self-serving, but it goes with selling a vision to keep more casual fans engaged. After all, he's in the business of selling tickets, and that's what I take away from his message.

With increasing parity, who's to say a clearly mediocre team can't catch lightning in a bottle, especially if they get hot goaltending. I, for one, watch the Blues with a glass-half-full mentality when they are clearly bringing the effort. 2019 earned them my patience. And for stretches of this season, we beat several upper echelon teams with one scoring line, an improved power play and good/excellent goalie play. At times, they almost had me believing they could be a disruptor.

His poor choices are well documented here, and no, he hasn't inspired confidence with his recent press conferences. But this seems like a lot of wasted air. He's not getting canned for saying he would've entertained adding at the deadline, and that comment is not clear evidence of malpractice. I'd can my GM if he said he wouldn't listen to anything and everything at a murky point in the journey. Listening doesn't cost anything. If I'm Stillman that comment doesn't raise an eyebrow -- he's just talking, and trying to keep selling his vision. Even when no one else (and even he, perhaps) believes it, he still has to try to sell the idea of being competitive.

So what I hear is a sales message: "we're the St. Louis Blues. We won a cup with depth and relentless effort, and that's what we're trying to reestablish. We have some good pieces, maybe not all of them, but we were on the fringe of making the playoffs where anything can happen. So I was looking for a way to make something happen."

I'm not telling you to buy his message, I'm telling you it's the only message he's got at the moment.

But ultimately he didn't add at the deadline, the cupboard is not empty, and the draft and summer are opportunities to improve the roster and the organizational outlook. DA will still be calling the shots, so I'm more interested in what comes next than fueling outrage.

 

[Celtic Note]

Compete doesn't mean he viewed as a playoff team. He expected us to be a bubble team. And look at all his moves and statements in totality. I can't remember exactly when, could've been after Berube's firing or after their little run, but I remember him saying you have to view the team like you did in July, you can't just change how you view them in the heat of the moment. None of his actions from the summer to the deadline indicated to me that his expectation was a playoff spot. After last season when the rebuild/retool/whatever was discussed, it was never the expectation that we'd only be out of the playoffs for 1 season, just that he didn't want a complete 5+ year rebuild where we tank like the Hawks or Sharks.

He also has been interviewed as saying all you need to do is get into the playoffs to have a chance to win. That was in response to our teams chances/projection this year. So while he may have thought us a bubble team he certainly thought enough of the roster to think we had some degree of ability to compete. Otherwise why make that comment? The only other reason I can think of is he is trying to sell a losing product. He might well have been doing that. But, he also has stated we are not rebuilding. That all suggests to me that he believes this group can still win. On top of that he made mention of possibly add pieces this year. It’s hard to say what that means exactly, but added on top of the other things, it seems to reinforce his belief in the club this year. All that to say, I think he had an inflated expectation of what was achievable by our team this year.

What I also find concerning is that we somehow expected a better performance this year without really improving the club in the off-season, yet we expected different results out of a significant chunk of the bet core that is aging?

 

[bleedblue1223]

He also has been interviewed as saying all you need to do is get into the playoffs to have a chance to win. That was in response to our teams chances/projection this year. So while he may have thought us a bubble team he certainly thought enough of the roster to think we had some degree of ability to compete. Otherwise why make that comment? The only other reason I can think of is he is trying to sell a losing product. He might well have been doing that. But, he also has stated we are not rebuilding. That all suggests to me that he believes this group can still win. On top of that he made mention of possibly add pieces this year. It’s hard to say what that means exactly, but added on top of the other things, it seems to reinforce his belief in the club this year. All that to say, I think he had an inflated expectation of what was achievable by our team this year.

What I also find concerning is that we somehow expected a better performance this year without really improving the club in the off-season, yet we expected different results out of a significant chunk of the bet core that is aging?

Those comments aren't for the hardcore fans like us, that's why the reaction on here is confusing me so much. I'm not sure why we are taking his words so literally. There is 0 chance he believes this team can legitimately contend for a Cup, just because they might sneak into the playoffs. He's reassuring the more casual fans that look at the standings and see that we are close to a playoff spot. I just don't see the link between last season and now and how people are saying Army for sure thought this was a playoff team capable of making a run and his expectations are way out of whack with reality. It's inventing things in your head to get there.

I'm fine with those here that already believe he should've been fired, I disagree, but I see the logic. The decision on Petro, replacing him with a combo of Faulk/Krug and increased role for Parayko when none of them were capable of leading a contending defensive core. Committing to Kyrou to the level that he did. Being hardcore against NMC, but giving out NTC like candy. Scandella's extension. I think there were plenty of moves post 19/20 that were questionable enough to make someone believe he should've already been fired, and it just feels like some of them are treating non activity at the deadline and comments at the interview with Kelly as the final straw for needing to be fired, which is a silly conclusion to make IMO. This part wasn't necessarily directed at you.

 

[Celtic Note]

That still doesn't change the fact that this team did compete for a playoff spot this season, we were in that group of bubble playoff teams. Seems like they were what Army thought they were. No doubt he and we can be disappoited in individual performances, but I don't think anyone was surprised by the end result. I just find it weird that people are acting like Army was.

We are 8 points out of a playoff spot with no games in hand on the last team. We are also sitting on the line for bottom third of the league. I personally wouldn’t call that very competitive. I will however acknowledge that there are probably going to be a pretty varied range of definitions for “competing” and I have higher than average standards.

 

[bleedblue1223]

We are 8 points out of a playoff spot with no games in hand on the last team. We are also sitting on the line for bottom third of the league. I personally wouldn’t call that very competitive. I will however acknowledge that there are probably going to be a pretty varied range of definitions for “competing” and I have higher than average standards.

A few weeks ago, we were literally in a playoff spot. Nashville went on a crazy run and we went cold. Making the playoffs was absolutely in our control at that point.

 

[Celtic Note]

Those comments aren't for the hardcore fans like us, that's why the reaction on here is confusing me so much. I'm not sure why we are taking his words so literally. There is 0 chance he believes this team can legitimately contend for a Cup, just because they might sneak into the playoffs. He's reassuring the more casual fans that look at the standings and see that we are close to a playoff spot. I just don't see the link between last season and now and how people are saying Army for sure thought this was a playoff team capable of making a run and his expectations are way out of whack with reality. It's inventing things in your head to get there.

I'm fine with those here that already believe he should've been fired, I disagree, but I see the logic. The decision on Petro, replacing him with a combo of Faulk/Krug and increased role for Parayko when none of them were capable of leading a contending defensive core. Committing to Kyrou to the level that he did. Being hardcore against NMC, but giving out NTC like candy. Scandella's extension. I think there were plenty of moves post 19/20 that were questionable enough to make someone believe he should've already been fired, and it just feels like some of them are treating non activity at the deadline and comments at the interview with Kelly as the final straw for needing to be fired, which is a silly conclusion to make IMO. This part wasn't necessarily directed at you.

I don’t know if we can say with certainty who his words are for. We can’t for certain know. But, we don’t have much else to go on. So here we are debating the interpretation of minutia.

Personally, I am not calling for his head. But the leash is short. This off-season will be critical to our future success and any false move by Army could/should spell the end of his tenure. My greater concern if that happens is who is his replacement? Having a guy like Chirelli in our front office frankly scares me.

A few weeks ago, we were literally in a playoff spot. Nashville went on a crazy run and we went cold. Making the playoffs was absolutely in our control at that point.

I think current location in the standings is more a show of our true colors and than our heater (while fun to watch) was more an adrenaline boost from a coaching change. We are now on course to land right about where we were last season barring another heater.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I'd say we are a slightly below mediocre team that is being propped up by a handful of players, otherwise we would be a bottom 5 team battling for the #1 pick. I'd also say I have way more faith in Army rebuilding our group than another GM. Do we want to be an Ottawa, Buffalo, Columbus, or a team like that, that can never seem to get out of the bottom, despite having what appears to be a great deal of talent.

For me, Army has about 2 years to see how both our current top prospects develop and what Army does with the current roster. If guys like Snuggerud and Dvorsky are truly homeruns, then that's points back in Army's column for staying. If we acquire quality stop gaps this summer or even next to make it so it's not just the few current players carrying the load, then points in Army's column. If on the other side, he moves current players to accumulate future assets, then it's points in his column.

What I don't want to see and this is where I'd change my postion on his future here is if current top prospects stagnate and don't develop, and some sort of a combo of not moving pieces for more assets or we acquire stop gaps in the Hayes mold that we can't really immediately flip for assets or aren't good enough to improve the team.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And I'll add on top of that, summer of 2026 is going to be big for this team, that's when Saad, Hayes, and Leddy all have their contracts expire. Krug, Faulk, and Binnington will also have just 1 year left on their deals. If there is a summer where we shift from whatever mode we are in now to pushing in the direction of contender, it will be that summer. That's the prime opportunity to start making big roster moves and we'll have a better idea of what we have in our current group of prospects.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

I mean, where is this current team if Schenn even performs like he did last season? Same poor overall play, but at least with offense. Where would we be if Faulk was healthy all season and performing at his level the past 2 seasons? I know last season the main issue was defense. We were 17th in goals/game and 27th in goals against/game. This season has been the opposite, we are 26th in goals/game and 18th in goals against/game.

This is the "if everything goes perfectly" scenario. Which, had everything gone perfectly, we're ... 7th in the West? We're not 18 points on up in the standings, right on the heels of Dallas / Colorado / Winnipeg. And, we're looking at drafting in the high teens, low 20s or lower in the first round.

By the same token, where would be be if Binnington wasn't playing like he was? Parayko's back was an issue? Thomas had taken a step back? Buchnevich had only played 45 games or so? Probably a hell of a lot worse, closer to the league basement.

Now He’s saying there was thoughts of adding at the deadline.

That is a comment that's flying way under the radar. I get that everyone can have different ideas of what "I thought about adding to this team" really meant, but ... really? This team, living and dying on one line and Binnington, he was going to add to it? Because it won 5 in a row, the last 4 of those 1-goal games, the last 3 in OT? That was a sign of sustainable success? That would be like looking at us winning 3 in a row right before the trade deadline in 2021 and saying "the team has been inconsistent, really struggled at times, doesn't look like it's going to do much of anything, looks ripe for a playoff sweep, but ... they won 3 games in a row - you know what, that convinces me, that changes everything, this team can do something in the playoffs."

I'm just surprised (OK, not really) more people aren't looking at that and about it.

 

[bleedblue1223]

This is the "if everything goes perfectly" scenario. Which, had everything gone perfectly, we're ... 7th in the West? We're not 18 points on up in the standings, right on the heels of Dallas / Colorado / Winnipeg. And, we're looking at drafting in the high teens, low 20s or lower in the first round.

By the same token, where would be be if Binnington wasn't playing like he was? Parayko's back was an issue? Thomas had taken a step back? Buchnevich had only played 45 games or so? Probably a hell of a lot worse, closer to the league basement.

If everything goes perfectly scenario? If everything was perfect, Kyrou doesn't have 17 points in his first 28 games, and scores at a 70 point pace for the entire season. Hayes scores at the rate he did in Philly providing 2nd line scoring. A true best case scenario, we'd be safely in the WC1 slot in a year where whatever people are here are pretending to be the case, we weren't expected to make the playoffs, and which was never Army's expectations.

By the same token? Yes, if the handful of players allowing us to exceed our underlying metrics actually played like shit, then yes, we'd be at the very bottom. Don't see what the point is here.

Army had an expectation that we could compete for a spot as a bubble playoff team. We met that expectation. It's disappointing that as a team, we did improve the high-level defensive measure of goals against, only to see our goals scored numbers drop like a rock.

 

[bleedblue1223]

And holy shit people, lets envision a scenario where we traded what Vegas gave up for Hanifin, but Hanifin signed an extension here. If we traded a 2026 1st, a 3rd, and a roster throw in, and Hanifin extended, would people be after Army's head because he decided to add at the deadline when we had no hope of winning the Cup this season? I don't understand why people are taking his comment from that interview to mean we were somehow going to trade some significant future for a rental.

For those here that believe the HF verified Boston insider, one of our interests was ultra lowballing DeBrusk.

 

[bleedblue1223]

I just don't understand what feels like a sudden and abrupt negativity shift, and just because we were inactive at the deadline. I know we have a split opinion on our future and Army, but feels like this board had a bipolar moment.

I still see plenty of reason to have a general positive outlook on our future.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

For those who want Armstrong fired - is there any indication that the team ownership is not happy with him? I don't get any sense that his job is in jeopardy. The long rants on this forum seem like 'old guy yelling at the clouds'. I don't think there is any basis in reality for expecting him to be fired.

It was just a few months ago that we thought Toronto was going to try to poach him. Maybe he'll take another job elsewhere, but I suspect Armstrong will retire as Blues GM. If he became available, it would be a short time before another team happily snatched him up.

He has work to do with this rebuilding process. In think the biggest frustration as a close observer is that you just don't know what he's planning or what conversations he's had with other GMs. We're at the stage where the team is accumulating some nice assets, but no 'generational talent' type of assets. We've seen that a Cup can be won without a generational talent, so fan espoused plans to 'tank' for a top 2-3 pick are just about as fanciful as the firing rants. Its hard to be as bad as the teams on the bottom. And TRYING to be bad is just dumb.

You can be bad because you're trying to maximize your assets, trade vets, develop young players. But you shouldn't curate your roster with the goal to lose hockey games. Show me a GM who has done that, and I'll show you a team that isn't on the path to a Cup.

But of course Armstrong isn't going to spell out the full plan to the public. That would be idiotic. He's even more close-lipped than the majority of front office leaders. We had no idea he was shopping EJ until it happened. The ROR trade came out of nowhere. Bouwmeester, we didn't know that was coming. Did anyone expect Lehtera for Schenn? Every time he's acquired a key piece to complete the roster for the last contending period, we were left speculating with little clue what was really happening. Its just the way it is.

 

[Ted Hoffman]

If everything goes perfectly scenario? If everything was perfect, Kyrou doesn't have 17 points in his first 28 games, and scores at a 70 point pace for the entire season. Hayes scores at the rate he did in Philly providing 2nd line scoring. A true best case scenario, we'd be safely in the WC1 slot in a year where whatever people are here are pretending to be the case, we weren't expected to make the playoffs, and which was never Army's expectations.

Right, when you start saying "well what if" and you start outlining the positive things, you have to acknowledge

By the same token? Yes, if the handful of players allowing us to exceed our underlying metrics actually played like shit, then yes, we'd be at the very bottom. Don't see what the point is here.

You can't just look at one side of the coin and play from that side. Blues fans do this way too often.

Need an example? Bring up past drafts, mention how we could have picked _________ and how things could have been so much better if we did. People never do the opposite: imagine if we hadn't picked ______ or if someone ahead of us had picked _______, imagine how much worse things could have been.

Army had an expectation that we could compete for a spot as a bubble playoff team. We met that expectation. It's disappointing that as a team, we did improve the high-level defensive measure of goals against, only to see our goals scored numbers drop like a rock.

We're competing for a spot as a bubble playoff team because 1 line, 2 defensemen and 1 goalie are carrying this team and most of the rest of the team is going to fall off yet in the future. That is not a good way to go plan on building a playoff team.

 

[bleedblue1223]

Right, when you start saying "well what if" and you start outlining the positive things, you have to acknowledge

You can't just look at one side of the coin and play from that side. Blues fans do this way too often.

Need an example? Bring up past drafts, mention how we could have picked _________ and how things could have been so much better if we did. People never do the opposite: imagine if we hadn't picked ______ or if someone ahead of us had picked _______, imagine how much worse things could have been.


We're competing for a spot as a bubble playoff team because 1 line, 2 defensemen and 1 goalie are carrying this team and most of the rest of the team is going to fall off yet in the future. That is not a good way to go plan on building a playoff team.

I guess I could refer you to the post where I say we are a slightly below mediocre team where if it wasn't for those handful of players, we'd be near the bottom and competing for the top pick. Posted that around 9:43 this morning.

Sort of like, if we didn't have Armstrong and had a President and GM like JD and Jarmo, we'd be much worse off like Columbus? What ifs can go all over the place in this discussion. Fact is, this team played it self into a playoff spot around the trade deadline, and was a bubble playoff team. That's the expectation that Army had for them.

Yes, as a bubble playoff team, were were significantly flawed, like every other bubble playoff team. Thanks for describing what a bubble playoff team is. As for plan to build a playoff team, I mean, you have to start somewhere, and starting with a group that can carry the load is better than having a collection of decent players, but no one that can carry the load. Improving the 2nd line and 2nd pair will go a long way for this group. Having guys like Dvorsky and Snuggerud meet their expectations sooner than later could be another boom.

 

[bleedblue1223]

But of course Armstrong isn't going to spell out the full plan to the public. That would be idiotic. He's even more close-lipped than the majority of front office leaders. We had no idea he was shopping EJ until it happened. The ROR trade came out of nowhere. Bouwmeester, we didn't know that was coming. Did anyone expect Lehtera for Schenn? Every time he's acquired a key piece to complete the roster for the last contending period, we were left speculating with little clue what was really happening. Its just the way it is.

I think Bouwmeester we did sort of see coming, I seem to remember that it was known it was either going to be us or Detroit and Detroit wasn't willing to trade a 1st for him. ROR is sort of both, we knew we were in discussions, and as fans we viewed the signings of Perron and Bozak as disappointing because it meant that the deal was off, but in actuality, it told Buffalo that the deal was on since those were replacements for Sobotka and Berglund. EJ, Schenn, and Buchnevich were definitely out of the blue though, maybe some others that I can't think of.

 

[Mike Liut]

Thankfully the NHL doesn’t have any juggernaut teams in this salary cap era. This team is only a few moves and a few of our prospects panning out to be a contender again. This will will look much different in 2-3 years. Things can change fast

 

[Ted Hoffman]

For those who want Armstrong fired - is there any indication that the team ownership is not happy with him? I don't get any sense that his job is in jeopardy.

Overall, I don't think his job is in jeopardy - but I think that requires two views on the question.

This needs to be said up front: much like Pietrangelo's contract negotiations, where everyone has their own views on what happened and why and who was to blame, what's going on with Armstrong is going to be the same way: everyone is going to have their own views on what's going on and why, and everyone is going to pick their favorite statements that fit the conclusions they want to draw, read whatever they want into things that have happened, and run accordingly. And yes, I'm doing that here as well. I can't say my view is right, neither can anyone else. I'll lay out my thoughts as clearly as I can, and everyone can do what they want with them.

When it comes to Tom Stillman, I think there's zero risk of Doug Armstrong losing his job. Zero. I agree with what @PocketNines has said: I don't sense that Stillman will ever get to the point that he questions Armstrong's work, ever gets to the point of "this isn't working, it's time for a change." I think Stillman has undying faith in Armstrong and even if things were to go badly, Stillman would still leave Armstrong in charge because of 2019 and let Armstrong dictate any leave on his own terms. Given the positions and power he has, there's no reason for Armstrong to leave and go anywhere else for less and face more media scrutiny [because he has little to none here] which is why I think with respect to Stillman, Armstrong has a lifetime job here if he wants it.

At most, I think Stillman may have asked a couple not-quite-weak, but still not really forceful questions on occasion but writ large he's stood back and let Armstrong do what he wants to do. Stillman has consistently shown great deference to Armstrong, consistently given him the green light to make any moves he wishes without ever stepping in, and as long as Stillman can call the shots Armstrong has nothing to fear.

When it comes to other parts of ownership: I think there are individuals for who 2019 doesn't carry neverending weight, who've let it be known we're running out of patience and excuses, we won't hesitate to pull the plug. I think that was demonstrated in the Berube press conference: Armstrong's demeanor was markedly different from past press conferences. He didn't looked composed and rested like he did even when he fired Yeo. He looked like a guy who'd been forced to stay up much of the night, had about 3 hours sleep at most, and just came out of a meeting where he got his ass chewed out. His tone wasn't nearly as confident. There wasn't finger-pointing at the players, statements about holding other people accountable. He struggled to answer even simple questions like why did Berube have to go now? His comment that "I could be fired tomorrow" and "I could be out of a job tomorrow" is something he'd never said before, nothing he'd ever alluded to before. I don't think that got dropped in randomly. His talk about not being afraid to buy out players was a first, because he's always been adamant about not buying out players and trying to be responsible with ownership's money. Again, I don't think that got dropped in randomly.

On the 1-to-5 scale of how hot his seat is, I'd say Armstrong is probably a 2 at the moment. I think going to ownership and saying "I'm firing another head coach, I want you to pay him to do nothing for a year and a half" after having done that with Yeo [and firing Hitchcock despite the "coach-in-waiting" proclamation] raised calls for accountability from Armstrong, especially given how he'd repeatedly pointed the finger of blame at the players ... who were the very players he'd brought in. Coming in a 2nd season where the team was languishing, pointing toward not making the playoffs, with a roster that's kind of stuck in transition with no clear path to immediate competitveness at or near the top of the conference, which again was all Armstrong's making, I think wiped out some goodwill that existed and I think pointed questions got asked behind the scenes. I don't think this team has to be in the playoffs in 24-25, but I think it has to make serious progress from where it is currently and if next year turns out like this year and the year prior, that 2 is going to turn into a 4 or 5 very quickly.

 

[MissouriMook]

For those who want Armstrong fired - is there any indication that the team ownership is not happy with him? I don't get any sense that his job is in jeopardy. The long rants on this forum seem like 'old guy yelling at the clouds'. I don't think there is any basis in reality for expecting him to be fired.

It was just a few months ago that we thought Toronto was going to try to poach him. Maybe he'll take another job elsewhere, but I suspect Armstrong will retire as Blues GM. If he became available, it would be a short time before another team happily snatched him up.

He has work to do with this rebuilding process. In think the biggest frustration as a close observer is that you just don't know what he's planning or what conversations he's had with other GMs. We're at the stage where the team is accumulating some nice assets, but no 'generational talent' type of assets. We've seen that a Cup can be won without a generational talent, so fan espoused plans to 'tank' for a top 2-3 pick are just about as fanciful as the firing rants. Its hard to be as bad as the teams on the bottom. And TRYING to be bad is just dumb.

You can be bad because you're trying to maximize your assets, trade vets, develop young players. But you shouldn't curate your roster with the goal to lose hockey games. Show me a GM who has done that, and I'll show you a team that isn't on the path to a Cup.

But of course Armstrong isn't going to spell out the full plan to the public. That would be idiotic. He's even more close-lipped than the majority of front office leaders. We had no idea he was shopping EJ until it happened. The ROR trade came out of nowhere. Bouwmeester, we didn't know that was coming. Did anyone expect Lehtera for Schenn? Every time he's acquired a key piece to complete the roster for the last contending period, we were left speculating with little clue what was really happening. Its just the way it is.

The calls for Army’s head are never accompanied by any reasonable suggestion of an alternative. Because there really isn’t one. He is widely regarded as one of the best in the league. Just like all of the other top GMs, he’s had his share of bad deals. EVERY GM has those on their resume. Every. One. You just have to let them yell at the clouds.

 

[ArenaRat]

Two things can be true. I don't think it was wrong to hire Yeo, nor do I think it was wrong to fire him. Same can be said of Berube.

And players are people, not machines. You can identify and acquire the exact right player, but he doesn't always gel. Or doesn't gel right away. Was he still the right player?

 

[bleedblue1223]

I do think it's fair to say that the next coaching decision is going to be massive, and I'm not sure if Army's job is completely dependent on it, but much more than the others. The other coaches were about bring the current group of players that were already at contender status to the next level to get over the hump. This coaching change will be about developing the next core, but also a stylistic and philosophy moving forward.

 

[Stupendous Yappi]

I concede that it can be a two edged sword to have an owner who gives his GM carte blanche. But I can’t think of too many “involved” owners who start meddling in personnel decisions who don’t hurt their organizations.

It’s good that Stillman lets his hockey people be the hockey people. It’s ironic, but if I needed someone to choose Armstrong’s replacement, the opinion I’d want most is who Armstrong thinks would be a good GM. Is he quietly grooming a replacement? There are a couple candidates in the organization.

I do think it's fair to say that the next coaching decision is going to be massive, and I'm not sure if Army's job is completely dependent on it, but much more than the others. The other coaches were about bring the current group of players that were already at contender status to the next level to get over the hump. This coaching change will be about developing the next core, but also a stylistic and philosophy moving forward.

I may be remembering wrong, but not counting Bannister, is Davis Payne the last Blues coach who hadn’t been a head coach elsewhere first?