Playoff Analysis and Future Thoughts

[ChicagoBlues]

Ref Rooney is ok. That looked nasty.

 

[ScratchCatFever]

triple down. one good season doesnt undo his record for me. unless Army wows me again this offseason, Im inclined to believe last year was a fluke,

For all his flaws and the gaffe signings (which every GM has and makes) I'd wager there are 24 other teams in the league who would love to have him running the show for their team. I'm not sure how offer sheets to two guys who almost immediately became part of the long term core qualifies as a "fluke". That's almost to suggest he pulled a couple names from a hat and they both just happened to be really good hockey players.

 

[Xerloris]

So you're doubling down on being wrong. Ballsy.

Armstrong isn't perfect but I can't see how anyone is still on the fire Army train. Pretty hard to justify that opinion anymore.

Incredible right? One of the most widely regarded best Gm's in the game and people still think you can just fire him and get better.

triple down. one good season doesnt undo his record for me. unless Army wows me again this offseason, Im inclined to believe last year was a fluke,

At what point do you stop thinking they're flukes? At some point you have to admit maybe the dude actually knows what the f*** he's doing.

 

[Reality Czech]

triple down. one good season doesnt undo his record for me. unless Army wows me again this offseason, Im inclined to believe last year was a fluke,

The Blues have 33 more wins than any other Western Conference team since Armstrong became GM. That's a lot more than one good season.

Most NHL Wins Since 2010 | StatMuse

Since 2009-10, the Boston Bruins have the most wins by a team, with 715 wins.

www.statmuse.com

 

[Pizza!Pizza!]

Incredible right? One of the most widely regarded best Gm's in the game and people still think you can just fire him and get better.


At what point do you stop thinking they're flukes? At some point you have to admit maybe the dude actually knows what the f*** he's doing.

he's been GM for 15 years and only had 2 good offseasons. I'll stop thinking it's a fluke if he does an equally good job this offseason, thus establishing him learning from his wealth of experience and mistakes and putting a string of wins together.

even the worst teams in NHL history still won double digit numbers of games during their seasons. there are worse GMs than Armstrong but one good season of moves doesnt make him suddenly amazing given his overall body of work no more than winning some games makes the 2024 Chicago Blackhawks a good team.

recency bias is unreal on this board.

 

[SirPaste]

he's been GM for 15 years and only had 2 good offseasons. I'll stop thinking it's a fluke if he does an equally good job this offseason, thus establishing him learning from his wealth of experience and mistakes and putting a string of wins together.

even the worst teams in NHL history still won double digit numbers of games during their seasons. there are worse GMs than Armstrong but one good season of moves doesnt make him suddenly amazing given his overall body of work no more than winning some games makes the 2024 Chicago Blackhawks a good team.

recency bias is unreal on this board.

This guy has lost the plot and lost all his credibility when he said Army should have been fired the summer after winning the cup.

 

[Reality Czech]

he's been GM for 15 years and only had 2 good offseasons. I'll stop thinking it's a fluke if he does an equally good job this offseason, thus establishing him learning from his wealth of experience and mistakes and putting a string of wins together.

even the worst teams in NHL history still won double digit numbers of games during their seasons. there are worse GMs than Armstrong but one good season of moves doesnt make him suddenly amazing given his overall body of work no more than winning some games makes the 2024 Chicago Blackhawks a good team.

recency bias is unreal on this board.

Thanks for the laugh. Quit while you're behind. Did you miss the post about having the most wins in the conference over the last 15 years?

The fact that he's done it in a mid sized market which isn't a high profile UFA destination makes his accomplishment even more impressive. Also with few high draft picks. I think you'll find your opinion is in the extreme minority. There isn't a single insider or analyst that would claim Armstrong has merely got "lucky" lol. But you do you.

 

[Xerloris]

The Blues have 33 more wins than any other Western Conference team since Armstrong became GM. That's a lot more than one good season.

Most NHL Wins Since 2010 | StatMuse

Since 2009-10, the Boston Bruins have the most wins by a team, with 715 wins.

www.statmuse.com

barely making the playoffs was a fluke but winning the cup isn't mentioned as a fluke? Weird right?

 

[BrokenFace]

Any GM who's had comparable or more success than Army over the last decade plus did so because they either drafted a future HoFer or 2 in the top 5 or inherited at least one. I don't see any GMs accomplishing what he did without that critical asset. If you think we would have been better off tanking to get those top 5 picks, tell me which year would have been best to tank and which GM would have identified that year correctly and drafted the right guys rather than a bust. Sometime before the cup win would have cost us the cup, and we contended for a few years after that. When that window closed in 22-23, Army immediately got us 2 extra 1st runners rounders. I wish we would have sucked more and got a better pick in 23-24, but that's not a fireable offense and the goalies were playing too well to tank much anyway. Then he followed that up with the offer sheet summer.

The guy isn't infallible. He never figured out goalie until Binner took care of it for him, but if you think he's not a good GM then please tell me how many GMs are better. I've still yet to hear anyone who wants Army fired point to another GM they want hired instead. That's telling to me and I think it's because no GM in the last decade looks good if Army deserves to be fired. You would have to convince yourself that some GM with no experience would be better than a guy who got us a cup.

If you think Army isn't good enough with a team in "win now" mode, how do you explain all the wins in his tenure including the cup? If you think he isn't good at re-building/tooling, how do you explain the current state of the team with all the 26 and under players, along with a solid prospect pool? If you are judging Army by his mistakes and missed opportunities, then what GM is mistake-free enough for you? If Army is so bad we would be better off with him being fired, then what GM can you point to who's objectively an upgrade?

 

[Xerloris]

even the worst teams in NHL history still won double digit numbers of games during their seasons. there are worse GMs than Armstrong but one good season of moves doesnt make him suddenly amazing given his overall body of work no more than winning some games makes the 2024 Chicago Blackhawks a good team.

Being a GM is not only about off season moves. It's about in season moves, not making moves when everyone is screaming for change and having the balls to hold wins you a cup, the ability to not let players and agents manipulate you into giving douche bags contracts that ruin your franchise, we're a team and market where the biggest FA center wont even have a meeting with us and just says no but somehow you find another guy and a 3rd guy to play center and we win the cup. I always thought you were a smarter fan than this but I guess I was mistaken.

 

[ItsOnlytheRiver]

This whole GM discussion is based on poor logic to begin with. You can’t evaluate a GM as if you are playing EA Hockey on PlayStation. The Blues being a small market team with a history of unstable ownership is a factor here. I also acknowledge it is difficult to evaluate from this perspective as we don’t know what involvement current ownership has or what sort of opex constraints they have.

All that said, I would bet they do have some requirements with how hockey ops goes about their business. It seems obvious that they are not interested in going through a rebuild or risking losing the culture or fan base that has been built. They don’t seem to want to pay top dollar for talent and instead build a team with depth.

I could go on for a while about my theory as to why the Blues do what they do, but this is to say that I think anyone’s evaluation of DA is going to be different from ownerships. I bet he has been executing their needs to near perfection. Not to mention the value of stable front office with leadership and org chart that has been in place for a long time and has now picked and trained a successor. These are important things that can’t be understated, especially for a small market team. A consistent hockey ops department gives you a consistent product on the ice which gives you consistent support and money stream.

I would keep Doug around myself for no other reason than he is competent and clearly a top 10 GM. He isn’t perfect. He probably isn’t the best. But you are most likely going to end up worse trying to replace him.

I will note that if you want him to tank and build a team around HOF top 5 picks, you should find another franchise to cheer for. Replacing the GM isn’t going to change that strategy, in my opinion.

 

[Pizza!Pizza!]

This guy has lost the plot and lost all his credibility when he said Army should have been fired the summer after winning the cup.

I wanted him fired before and during 2019 and didnt agree with most of his post 2019 moves until last summer. I think the Blues could/would have won multiple Cups or at least had more Finals appearances if they had been better managed.

Thanks for the laugh. Quit while you're behind. Did you miss the post about having the most wins in the conference over the last 15 years?

The fact that he's done it in a mid sized market which isn't a high profile UFA destination makes his accomplishment even more impressive. Also with few high draft picks. I think you'll find your opinion is in the extreme minority. There isn't a single insider or analyst that would claim Armstrong has merely got "lucky" lol. But you do you.

To your first point, no I didnt miss that post. Regular season wins are only relevant for making the playoffs. the goal is to make a consistent contender that occasionally wins, not an annual early out. or non-playoff team.

your second point is valid, but as I stated previously I already agree that most current GMs are worse than him, which is why I dont normally whine about him needing to go. but OP of this thread made the false assumption that everyone is 'off the fire Army train' and thats not true. They won a Cup 6 years and he offer sheeted 2 guys last summer that played pretty well - cool, awesome, weighing that against 15 years of mediocrity and under performing doesnt move the needle for me where im going to fanboy over him like the rest of this board. If he makes some good tweaks again this offseason and wows me I will gladly eat crow, but given his track record I would expect him to lose some assets and replace them with worse assets and probably sign a couple of bad contracts. We'll find out.

Any GM who's had comparable or more success than Army over the last decade plus did so because they either drafted a future HoFer or 2 in the top 5 or inherited at least one. I don't see any GMs accomplishing what he did without that critical asset. If you think we would have been better off tanking to get those top 5 picks, tell me which year would have been best to tank and which GM would have identified that year correctly and drafted the right guys rather than a bust. Sometime before the cup win would have cost us the cup, and we contended for a few years after that. When that window closed in 22-23, Army immediately got us 2 extra 1st runners rounders. I wish we would have sucked more and got a better pick in 23-24, but that's not a fireable offense and the goalies were playing too well to tank much anyway. Then he followed that up with the offer sheet summer.

The guy isn't infallible. He never figured out goalie until Binner took care of it for him, but if you think he's not a good GM then please tell me how many GMs are better. I've still yet to hear anyone who wants Army fired point to another GM they want hired instead. That's telling to me and I think it's because no GM in the last decade looks good if Army deserves to be fired. You would have to convince yourself that some GM with no experience would be better than a guy who got us a cup.

If you think Army isn't good enough with a team in "win now" more, how do you explain all the wins in his tenure including the cup? If the think he isn't good at re-building/tooling, how do you explain the current state of the team with all the 26 and under players, along with a solid prospect pool? If you are judging Army by his mistakes and missed opportunities, then what GM is mistake-free enough for you? If Army is so bad we would be better off with him being fired, then what GM can you point to who's objectively an upgrade?

of all the replies to my posts yours is the best and most reasonable take.

For the record i have never and will never support a team I like 'tanking'. the only scenario where that would be remotely acceptable is if its the last week of season and you're already at the bottom and theres a shallow draft pool so you sandbag one or two games to ensure you get some generational talent. I dont consider people that root against their team for an entire season just get a better draft position to be "fans". its the main reason why I stopped posting on the Red Wings board. too many losers there wanting the team to be worse just so we get better magic beans at the end of the year.

but yea, Armstrong did a great job at building a solid competitive core in st louis, but I also hold the position that his inability to access coaching talent and figure out goaltending (your second point) is what consistently held the team back and prevented a potential dynasty. Look at Dale Tallon for example - he had a short tenure as the Hawks GM and built the core foundation that won 3 Cups and then did the same thing for Florida who is still in the middle of their window. Had either of those teams retained him for longer would they have been more or less successful? we'll never know. In the case of the Blues I would argue the could/should have had more playoff successful if someone else had come in for the finishing touches after Armstrong built the foundation. His one Cup is the perfect example of that. If Jake Allen or Mike Yeo had been less terrible, he wouldnt have made the changes when he did and that team wouldnt have even made the playoffs.

 

[Reality Czech]

I wanted him fired before and during 2019 and didnt agree with most of his post 2019 moves until last summer. I think the Blues could/would have won multiple Cups or at least had more Finals appearances if they had been better managed.



To your first point, no I didnt miss that post. Regular season wins are only relevant for making the playoffs. the goal is to make a consistent contender that occasionally wins, not an annual early out. or non-playoff team.

your second point is valid, but as I stated previously I already agree that most current GMs are worse than him, which is why I dont normally whine about him needing to go. but OP of this thread made the false assumption that everyone is 'off the fire Army train' and thats not true. They won a Cup 6 years and he offer sheeted 2 guys last summer that played pretty well - cool, awesome, weighing that against 15 years of mediocrity and under performing doesnt move the needle for me where im going to fanboy over him like the rest of this board. If he makes some good tweaks again this offseason and wows me I will gladly eat crow, but given his track record I would expect him to lose some assets and replace them with worse assets and probably sign a couple of bad contracts. We'll find out.


of all the replies to my posts yours is the best and most reasonable take.

For the record i have never and will never support a team I like 'tanking'. the only scenario where that would be remotely acceptable is if its the last week of season and you're already at the bottom and theres a shallow draft pool so you sandbag one or two games to ensure you get some generational talent. I dont consider people that root against their team for an entire season just get a better draft position to be "fans". its the main reason why I stopped posting on the Red Wings board. too many losers there wanting the team to be worse just so we get better magic beans at the end of the year.

but yea, Armstrong did a great job at building a solid competitive core in st louis, but I also hold the position that his inability to access coaching talent and figure out goaltending (your second point) is what consistently held the team back and prevented a potential dynasty. Look at Dale Tallon for example - he had a short tenure as the Hawks GM and built the core foundation that won 3 Cups and then did the same thing for Florida who is still in the middle of their window. Had either of those teams retained him for longer would they have been more or less successful? we'll never know. In the case of the Blues I would argue the could/should have had more playoff successful if someone else had come in for the finishing touches after Armstrong built the foundation. His one Cup is the perfect example of that. If Jake Allen or Mike Yeo had been less terrible, he wouldnt have made the changes when he did and that team wouldnt have even made the playoffs.

So unless a GM wins 2+ Cups in 15 years, you consider him a failure. Got it. So that means that 97% of GMs suck in your mind. If you wanna criticize individual moves sure, but any objective person should be able to see he's done more good than bad over his tenure.

I don't think anyone will be holding their breath for your assessment of Army's off-season and if it meets your criteria enough to satisfy you.