Like it or not, the St. Louis Blues have along history of underperforming. Their fans have almost as long of a history of always thinking the grass is greener on the other side. That simply isn’t always the case.
There’s always something with certain sects of the fanbase. The goaltending has long been to blame. Then there was the lack of a goal scorer. Then coaches are to blame. Then GM’s for either making trades or not. This season has been a microcosm of just about all of those issues for different people at different times.
I’ve seen people complain that other teams are making bold moves to improve clubs and playoff positions when Nashville picked up Ryan Johansen or the Kings picked up Vincent Lecavalier. Those players have flourished in their new homes, but Chris Stewart played very well following his trade to St. Louis and then petered out. Not every trade automatically transforms a team into a Cup favorite.
Then, there is always the very vocal sect that blames everything on the coach – and to a certain extent the general manager. Now, don’t get me wrong. Ken Hitchcock deserves blame to an extent. There have been rumblings of holding the offensive creativity in check and he’s had public blowups that were almost immediately followed by player departures with Jaroslav Halak and TJ Oshie.
However, fans need to understand that there is only so much a coach can actually do. Yes, he sets the lines, but every team in the league switches lines when players aren’t producing to the boss’ liking. Perhaps Hitch rotates too much, but it’s difficult to keep lines together when players are constantly coming in and out of the lineup and then certain combinations don’t produce.
There is also a large belief that coaches have a magic wand or certain phrases that magically get players amped up and ready to go every single game. Utter nonsense. The United States is one of the largest countries in the world and the travel takes its toll. Also, an 82 game schedule is always going to have ups and downs even when a team has good health, which the Blues have not had.
We’ve all played sports at various levels, for varying types of coaches. I have played many sports, including hockey, but have played soccer for over 20 years. I’ve had good and bad coaches, but in that time I never had a coach who really and truly affected my performance one way or the other.
A coach can yell and scream until they’re blue in the face, gameplan until the cows come home or give every motivational speech ever written and it might not always work. Games can still be lost given those circumstances. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the next guy will be better.
More from Editorials
- St. Louis Blues Need Kasperi Kapanen To Be On Best Behavior
- Hayes’ Debut And Other Bold Predictions for the St. Louis Blues
- St. Louis Blues Captaincy Is Suddenly A Huge Problem For 2023-24
- St. Louis Blues National Games Cause More Problems Than They’re Worth
- St. Louis Blues Brayden Schenn Has To Be An Impact Player In 2023-24
Coaches run their course sometimes and perhaps Hitchcock has. However, it’s not necessarily due to anything he lacks but rather because it is simply easier to replace a coach than an entire team. If he is replaced at the end of the season, so be it. The nonsense of doing it now is somewhat comical though.
There are examples of it working, most notably with the New Jersey Devils. However, most times it is a panic move or a power move by a general manager. It has more chance of blowing up in your face than spurring the team on.
Fans are passionate about the Blues and want what’s best for the team. With that in mind, I thank whatever powers that be that fans are not in charge of these decisions. Trades don’t automatically make a team better. Changing coaches doesn’t automatically change the entire dynamic of a team.
The Blues had lots of incredibly talented teams in the early 90’s. Yet, then-general manager Ron Caron refused to go through any deadline without making a trade and often disrupted team chemistry more than any change of lines. The Blues have had dozens of talented coaches as well. The most notable were Scotty Bowman and Joel Quenville. The team thought they could do better than Bowman and a dispute led to his departure. Then, most fans were on board with letting coach Q go by the end of his reign.
Both coaches went on to lead some of the most historically successful championship teams in league history. That’s not to say they would have done the same in St. Louis for sure, but change doesn’t always equal positive change. Once you reach a certain point, there is no guarantee that you will simply take the next step forward.
Despite what many believe or choose to think, Hitchcock is second only to Quenville in terms of winning percentage in the last four seasons. Doug Armstrong hasn’t made the flashiest of deals, but nobody the team has given up on has gone on to far greater heights since their departure.
Everyone is more than entitled to their opinion and the post-game reaction of fans will never change because the fanbase is always changing. However, I still belive the management team in place knows what they are doing. I don’t think a coaching change will alter this team. Nothing short of a Lou Brock-esque trade, which doesn’t happen in today’s NHL, will alter this team in the way so many believe.
Scorers don’t just fall into your lap. Cup winning coaches don’t just forget how to forge a game winning strategy. It’s up to the 20 players in uniform every night to get it together and get it done, which was discussed in Jamie Mannigel’s article. The grass isn’t always greener on the other side. It’s time to make due with their own yard and fix it up as good as it can be made.