Let's Go Blues

Well?

Keep.

Fire, and frankly it's not a debate. He failed on nearly every decision he made this year. The Miller trade alone is enough reason for a change, and it was way, WAY worse than that. If Army is here next year, Stillman falls into yet another long line of owners who don't really know what it takes to win.

I think he made moves with good intentions, but they have all been poor decisions.

I'm really surprised at wanting to fire Army. The way I see it is that we are better now than before he got here. The Miller trade didn't work out, but I don't blame him for making it. I'm happy he took a chance.

Please name one move Army made this year that actually worked. I can't come up with one.

I don't blame him for the Miller trade. Its the Perron trade that killed us. Not that he was a Brett Hull type scorer, but he could score. I also understand you had to move some salary. But you would of done better to get a damn draft pick. should of traded Berglund instead.

Nyghtewynd wrote:Please name one move Army made this year that actually worked. I can't come up with one.

I'm not judging him on this year alone. This was not a good year for him.

I also don't blame him for the Perron trade. We needed to dump salary and Perron didn't really fit here. I don't think people are being fair with him about that one either. Perron was the whipping boy here. When the trade was made, most people liked it.

What I'd like to see him (or whoever is our GM if he's gone) do is let Miller go, let Roy go (obviously lol), and go after an elite score like Vanek.

Frankly I'm kind of baffled this is even a question, in that I don't see how you fire the guy.

We (the fans) b*tched about inconsistent goaltending, and IMO, I don't think there's a serious debate that Halak was not the guy he'd thought he'd be. So we acquired the best goaltender available at the deadline. This is a NEGATIVE? Miller ended up being inconsistent but overall I thought he played pretty well.

Perron traded "killed" us? Um, the guy was a 2nd line 20 goal scorer. It's not like we dealt Steven Stamkos for a bag of pucks. Give me a break.

Looking at his body of work I don't know how you fire the guy. If ownership decides that after two years of this playoff nonsense that changes need to happen for their own sake then fine but don't fire him because he's done a poor job because he hasn't. What exactly did you want him to do this year? He's assembled a core that carried us to the most regular season wins in franchise history.

WaukeeBlues wrote:Frankly I'm kind of baffled this is even a question, in that I don't see how you fire the guy.

We (the fans) b*tched about inconsistent goaltending, and IMO, I don't think there's a serious debate that Halak was not the guy he'd thought he'd be. So we acquired the best goaltender available at the deadline. This is a NEGATIVE? Miller ended up being inconsistent but overall I thought he played pretty well.

Perron traded "killed" us? Um, the guy was a 2nd line 20 goal scorer. It's not like we dealt Steven Stamkos for a bag of pucks. Give me a break.

Looking at his body of work I don't know how you fire the guy. If ownership decides that after two years of this playoff nonsense that changes need to happen for their own sake then fine but don't fire him because he's done a poor job because he hasn't. What exactly did you want him to do this year? He's assembled a core that carried us to the most regular season wins in franchise history.

Agreed on everything you said.

Everyone on here wanted Perron gone. EVERYONE. Everyone said he didn't fit Hitch's system, he loafed, took bad penalties. 'Addition by subtraction' was a phrase that I remember seeing a lot. Now people are saying it's a bad trade? Make up your minds. Did you want Perron to stay or not?

The Miller trade didn't work out, no. But look at the guys Army was able to resign for under what they'd fetch on the free agent market: Steen, Petro, Bouw.

So for all of those saying we should fire him....answer this: who do you hire that is better?

It's one thing for people to demand a firing, but they never say who would be better.

How will we remember the Ryan Miller area?

WaukeeBlues wrote: He's assembled a core that carried us to the most regular season wins in franchise history.

Not calling out Army, or your post, but this to me is sort of like the playoff appearance streak we had for 20+ years. Every year it seems to be used by the marketing dept. to sell season tickets, but after so long it needs to stop being used as a selling point. The last time we won the President's Trophy we immediately flamed out yet I recall that being the reason to buy tickets for the next season.

No answers on my part. Just frustration that the team always seems to be propped up by their regular season accomplishments.

KPFBlue wrote:How will we remember the Ryan Miller area?

About like the Steve Ott era.

tjk002 wrote:I don't blame him for the Miller trade. Its the Perron trade that killed us. Not that he was a Brett Hull type scorer, but he could score. I also understand you had to move some salary. But you would of done better to get a damn draft pick. should of traded Berglund instead.

It was actually trading Perron and Stewart away and getting back no offense in return. Takes you from 8 forwards with 20 potential to 6. Blues biggest problem the past two years against LA was lack of scoring and instead of adding scoring, we subtracted. Hard to excuse that.

Here's something else to stir the pot. Say Army doesn't trade for Miller and keeps Halak and the result is the same. Would you all be wanting to fire him because he didn't make a move?

And if a frog had wings, he wouldn't whomp his butt every time he jumped. /ozark

The what ifs are pointless. Let's stick with reality. Army failed big-time this year. And, BTW, we haven't even started to talk about the minors being about three guys deep, AND no first-round pick this year. The window ain't as open as a lot of people think it is.

Nyghtewynd wrote:And if a frog had wings, he wouldn't whomp his butt every time he jumped. /ozark

The what ifs are pointless.

My point is, regardless of what he would have done, there's a segment of you that would have never been happy. I'm not calling you our personally. But does anyone remember where this team was 5-6 years ago? We're in the Stanley Cup discussion. Back then we just wanted to be part of the playoff conversation. Army is a huge part of that.

I don't think Army should go. I think Hitch MAYBE should go, if someone really enticing becomes available after the dust settles. I do think that Army should be given the directive to get an offensive chip, not a guy like Vanek but a guy like Ovechkin. I know I'll be called insane for even suggesting that, but realistically this team needs a scorer and what better way to get one than by trading for a guy who's only 28 years old and can practically score at will while also being systematically blamed for everything wrong in Washington by the Capitals fans?

Shattenkirk + Berglund + someone or two or three from Chicago can secure Ovechkin. The rest of the money can come from not re-signing Miller. Cole can slide into the top 6 defense, Berglund is gone anyway and I think it's safe to assume his spot will be filled by either Jaskin or Rattie on the cheap. Elliott + Allen can be the 1-2 tandem for a while so they won't be breaking the bank on goaltending if Ells takes a discount to stay in the note.

Nyghtewynd wrote:And if a frog had wings, he wouldn't whomp his butt every time he jumped. /ozark

The what ifs are pointless. Let's stick with reality. Army failed big-time this year. And, BTW, we haven't even started to talk about the minors being about three guys deep, AND no first-round pick this year. The window ain't as open as a lot of people think it is.

The minors is more than what you see in Chicago. Let's not lose sight of the fact that there are a handful of guys who haven't been signed yet still playing in juniors and potential factors in the future. Kurker, Vanelli, Gardiner, Binnington, Schmaltz...

dmiles2186 wrote:Here's something else to stir the pot. Say Army doesn't trade for Miller and keeps Halak and the result is the same. Would you all be wanting to fire him because he didn't make a move?

I was against the trade from before it happened. I did say at the time, regardless of what he did, unless the Blues went deep in the playoffs, he would be second guessed. The problem is Army fixed two areas that weren't problems and spent alot doing it. If he hadn't made the trade and things played out the same, we'd be wondering what if? Course maybe things wouldn't have worked out the same. Maybe Stewart would have out scored Ott and Halak might have stolen a game down the stretch and got us a match up with the wild?

In any case, we'd still have Carrier and next year's #1 pick