What's surprising to me is you didn't think enough to compare this team to last season when we were apparently coached by god himself.
Last season we were 24th worst in 5v5 goals ahead of only NJ, Buffalo, Arizona, Carolina, and Edmonton. We're actually better this season. But it's terrible when it's 21st in the league with Blashill but nothing to worry about when we're 24th worst with Babcock. How about judging by the same standards? Too much to ask perhaps?
The very fact that Smith, Kindl, and Jurco need to be "revitalized" was because they weren't exactly thriving under Babcock. Now you think because Blashill can't turn them into winners that speaks to Blashill being bad.
Just to get this straight:
half a season with Blashill where Kindl/Smith/Jurco aren't good = Blashill sucks.
2+ seasons with Babcock where Kindl/Smith/Jurco aren't good = Babcock is way better than Blashill and we made a mistake letting him leave.
Good logic.
Meanwhile "every player has regressed." Tatar is on pace for 51 points which is pretty damn close to the 56 he had last season. Gus is on pace for 44 while he's in one of his worst slumps. He goes on a little run and he's right back to the 54 points he put up last season. Abby is on pace for 26 goals which is 3 more than last season and 43 points which is 1 less than last season.
So I'm not sure where you're getting this "everyone has regressed" business. Perhaps you mean our THREE OLDEST PLAYERS WHO ARE ALL PAST 35? Maybe that has more to do with their age than Blashill? Nah. Must be Trashill.
I mean, those are the actual numbers for the things you complained about. If you are bellyaching so much this season about the poor play of Kindl and Smith and Jurco, and you're upset about our 5v5 scoring, and you're upset about the "regression" of our players, why weren't you crying last season? It's pretty clear you have no factual basis for your complaints, just your biases.
I never referred to Babcock as "God himself". He is a very good coach and being the coach that Blashill replaced it seems logical to make the comparison. The top teams in the league all have strong veteran coaches. Chicago/Q, LA/Suter, Dallas/Ruff, Washington/Trotz. Coincidence? I don't think so.
Last season we finished 10th in goals scored. PP goals count the same as 5 v 5 goals. You are cherry picking. How about judging by the same standards?
The notion that Babcock was holding back Smith, Jurco, and Kindl was floated here constantly last season along with the "fresh voice" and "He knows our players" arguments. These ideas have proven to be ridiculous as I often stated last season.
I get the "everyone has regressed business" as you put it from actually watching hockey. This team visits the offensive zone, is one and done, and then gets hemmed in its' own zone. They score 2.47 GPG and they get 28.4 SPG. Last year they were at 2.82 and 29.6 respectively.
They give up 30.7 SAPG vs 28.3 last season
These are
actual numbers. Regression in every area.
They get less shots and give up more. They score less and get scored upon more. That is regression as a team despite improved goaltending.
3 players being 9 months older does not explain it away. I would argue that Kronner's season in particular has been adversely affected by Blashill's system and the horrible PP more so than being a few months older.
For example Steve Yzerman was 37 when he won the cup in 02. He dominated the playoffs and was the best player on a stacked roster even playing on one leg. Players aren't automatically washed up because they are over 12 years old. Defenseman typically play longer than forwards.
Do you not realize this is 100% just an opinion? An opinion of a person who enjoys dragging Blashill through the mud more than anyone.
Quotes can be interpreted 1000 different ways. You're just choosing to interpret it in the worst light possible. I doubt any of the players are, because I doubt they have a vendetta against him like you do.
Pretentious attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed.
By definition the posting of that quote is pretentious. Possibly less so in a room full of dreaming kids but very much so in a room of men who have accomplished much more than Blashill.
In itself is this quote the end all/be all? Of course not. Does it indicate a certain thoughtless nature? Absolutely. I don't have a vendetta nor is one required. I want the team to be successful. I don't wish to watch the final years of Hank/Pav/Kronner squandered by ineptitude. It isn't vendetta it is that I was never under the illusion that Blashill's fresh voice was going to improve the team in any way. Nothing has proven otherwise.
Blashill is better with defensive lines
He took Ericsson off the first pair. You know where we would be if Ericsson was on the first pair in some of those games? Outside of the playoffs. So yay trashill
Yet with superior goalie play we give up more goals and score less. Better? I don't think so.
I think the biggest issue is that most of us, myself included, over hyped Blashill and thought that it would be an automatic fix when he took over.
This. I never bought in to that and have been repeatedly flamed for suggesting Blashill is a downgrade. People sat around ripping everything Babcock did and now want to be apologists for Blashill.