Kyrou - benched

[netboy65]

I remember the video the Blues put out of Monty’s first practice. He pulled Kyrou aside and told him (paraphrasing) you go be you. Suddenly now that gets him benched?

[Ziggy3]

I know it's popular to hate on Kyrou in this thread, but the first 10 games of the season he was generating more than anyone on the team. Last night he looked terrible no two ways about that but lets pump the breaks and act like a 6-1 loss is on Kyrou. It hasn't been a trend this season regardless of what everyone is proclaiming, the team has been dreadful for majority of the games so far.

The hate on here is just crazy since everyone wants to be the first/most zealous hater to be right, there is no chance that one player has this level of effect on a team. It's just is not possible, a game from the press box is fine but it's hilarious that you all think benching him is somehow going to make the team more effective at playing defense on all defensive parings and forward lines he is not on.

The Blues will score less full stop with Kyrou not being in the lineup, if you are tanking that is fine. If you plan on winning hockey games you need his points, its that simple. Effort/willpower/desire is just irrelevant if the puck is hitting twine and the whole team can't find the back of the net so everyone needs a scapegoat.

Edit: Just to add since everyone says Kyrou is a cancer, imagine how fragile of a room you have when everyone is "upset" that Kyrou isn't laying his body out when he has done nothing but collect points even when the team was struggling over the last 5-6 seasons. I'd argue they are just as guilty at being sulkers as Kyrou for being directly implicated. If Kyrou needs to man up the team should as well, if someone is upset that Kyrou is making 8 million dollars a year then they should start figuring out ways for people to believe they could score 40 goals in a season.

It's a message from the coach, and it's a message to the entire team, that's the purpose. If they happen to win a game with Kyrou in the pressbox, it'll be because the rest of the team took that message to heart and put forth max effort. But no, this team is not better for any real stretch of time with Kyrou out of the lineup.

Is it the right way to go about it? I honestly don't know, I guess we'll see. I was actually very impressed with Kyrou for the first few games of the season; he was skating hard, backchecking, fighting and even winning along the boards. But during this losing stretch he has regressed back to the worst version of himself, and last night was the worst display so far. It's really no surprise - they are in a tailspin and they need to be shocked out of it somehow. He's the prime candidate for a wakeup call, we'll see if he's matured at all...

[seattleblue]

We're just focused on different things. The reason I focus on the player in this situation is the "necessary but not sufficient" aspect. Had the Blues "handled" him better, that may have been necessary to achieve a better outcome, but it would never have been sufficient.

Whereas. Consider the contra - let's say Kyrou was a born competitor, someone who dug in when the going got tough, but the Blues still didn't handle him well. He would at some point shine through with a new coach, or he will go to his next team and show everyone the heart of a champion and prove everyone wrong. The problem is he's proving it out of reaction to being criticized, not because it's inherent in him to be mortified about being in this healthy scratch position. I don't worry for one second that Kyrou's taking anyone else to a Cup. You don't fear guys like this, they aren't going to beat you when that final clock is counting down.

As far as has Armstrong shown himself to have shrewd judgment sticking with this player and building on him and the statements he has made about him ... we agree Armstrong has a ton to be criticized with following up the Cup era with the Kyrou/Krug/Faulk/Newly Extended Buchnevich era. That is a lot of self ownage to overcome.

Whereas I look it as you have an asset and are in positions of power and due to emotion and other variables, you publicly treat that asset poorly which only serves to hurt your organization.

My feelings aside on Kyrou, the Blues have handled him very, very poorly, which to me is the much bigger problem for the organization.

Well, if it meant that they're also going to mishandle other talented players because of something systematic, then it is a bigger problem, but I don't feel persuaded they have mishandled other prospects systematically. Kyrou helped the Blues mishandle him at a minimum. If it's truly evidence of a pattern and rot, we should have seen that throughout the 2010s with Armstrong and we should be seeing it now with Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc. I don't think it happened with Thomas. Is it happening with Broberg? Neighbours? Holloway? these are other first round talents certainly in Kyrou's pedigree range.

The problem is that Kyrou isn't a special case in my opinion, off the top of my head Pierre Luc Debois, Patrik Laine, and Johnathan Huberdeau come to mind as some players that have the same question marks with similar expectations (and salaries). Hell you might even be able to toss in David Perron there too before he left STL the first time.

IMO this just happens sometimes, maturation is a process it happens later for some than others. I don't fault the Blues for looking at the data and saying this makes sense and being surprised that the 2-way game is a little slow. I hate scapegoating in team sports though, it will always rub me the wrong way. There are so few players in this league who are literal instant offense without dependency.

I feel like your strongest point is scapegoating in team sports, there is real meat to that one as a general principle so I can understand why that is prompting your argument.

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation including his immediately responsible coaches that something critical is missing with this player, as opposed to the other players. You should also appreciate that for the last now seven consecutive seasons we have been hearing the pro-Kyrou case. It usually goes like, "these stats show how critical he is and you're cutting off your nose to spite your face if you think he is the issue." I completely absorb the argument. I still land where I land on this player, and that's a good faith calculus of all I know about hockey and competition in general.

[theograce]

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation

We have intelligent processors giving a guy first line minutes who hasn’t scored an ES goal in pushing a quarter season.

The intelligent processors see him pouting, staring down goaltenders and being 18th on the team in blocked shots.

[bgwinn01]

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation

We have intelligent processors giving a guy first line minutes who hasn’t scored an ES goal in pushing a quarter season.

The intelligent processors see him pouting, staring down goaltenders and being 18th on the team in blocked shots.

This.

[netboy65]

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation

We have intelligent processors giving a guy first line minutes who hasn’t scored an ES goal in pushing a quarter season.

The intelligent processors see him pouting, staring down goaltenders and being 18th on the team in blocked shots.

This.

Yep. Hard to argue that in any way. Keep 25 in and bench Buch

[Kilokaai]

I know it's popular to hate on Kyrou in this thread, but the first 10 games of the season he was generating more than anyone on the team. Last night he looked terrible no two ways about that but lets pump the breaks and act like a 6-1 loss is on Kyrou. It hasn't been a trend this season regardless of what everyone is proclaiming, the team has been dreadful for majority of the games so far.

The hate on here is just crazy since everyone wants to be the first/most zealous hater to be right, there is no chance that one player has this level of effect on a team. It's just is not possible, a game from the press box is fine but it's hilarious that you all think benching him is somehow going to make the team more effective at playing defense on all defensive parings and forward lines he is not on.

The Blues will score less full stop with Kyrou not being in the lineup, if you are tanking that is fine. If you plan on winning hockey games you need his points, its that simple. Effort/willpower/desire is just irrelevant if the puck is hitting twine and the whole team can't find the back of the net so everyone needs a scapegoat.

Edit: Just to add since everyone says Kyrou is a cancer, imagine how fragile of a room you have when everyone is "upset" that Kyrou isn't laying his body out when he has done nothing but collect points even when the team was struggling over the last 5-6 seasons. I'd argue they are just as guilty at being sulkers as Kyrou for being directly implicated. If Kyrou needs to man up the team should as well, if someone is upset that Kyrou is making 8 million dollars a year then they should start figuring out ways for people to believe they could score 40 goals in a season.

It's a message from the coach, and it's a message to the entire team, that's the purpose. If they happen to win a game with Kyrou in the pressbox, it'll be because the rest of the team took that message to heart and put forth max effort. But no, this team is not better for any real stretch of time with Kyrou out of the lineup.

Is it the right way to go about it? I honestly don't know, I guess we'll see. I was actually very impressed with Kyrou for the first few games of the season; he was skating hard, backchecking, fighting and even winning along the boards. But during this losing stretch he has regressed back to the worst version of himself, and last night was the worst display so far. It's really no surprise - they are in a tailspin and they need to be shocked out of it somehow. He's the prime candidate for a wakeup call, we'll see if he's matured at all...

I would agree with this and it is based take for sure, I don't know if it will work either but Kyrou is better than almost any other option when it comes to generating offense. I hope this isn't a true relationship ruiner, I do believe that both sides could be frustrated with one another but at the same time if I was getting that kind of scratch to play hockey I would be hard on myself as well. We will see what happens, I seems weird to me to do this experiment vs. the Sabres though since it isn't exactly a great team either.

[seattleblue]

We're just focused on different things. The reason I focus on the player in this situation is the "necessary but not sufficient" aspect. Had the Blues "handled" him better, that may have been necessary to achieve a better outcome, but it would never have been sufficient.

Whereas. Consider the contra - let's say Kyrou was a born competitor, someone who dug in when the going got tough, but the Blues still didn't handle him well. He would at some point shine through with a new coach, or he will go to his next team and show everyone the heart of a champion and prove everyone wrong. The problem is he's proving it out of reaction to being criticized, not because it's inherent in him to be mortified about being in this healthy scratch position. I don't worry for one second that Kyrou's taking anyone else to a Cup. You don't fear guys like this, they aren't going to beat you when that final clock is counting down.

As far as has Armstrong shown himself to have shrewd judgment sticking with this player and building on him and the statements he has made about him ... we agree Armstrong has a ton to be criticized with following up the Cup era with the Kyrou/Krug/Faulk/Newly Extended Buchnevich era. That is a lot of self ownage to overcome.

Whereas I look it as you have an asset and are in positions of power and due to emotion and other variables, you publicly treat that asset poorly which only serves to hurt your organization.

My feelings aside on Kyrou, the Blues have handled him very, very poorly, which to me is the much bigger problem for the organization.

Well, if it meant that they're also going to mishandle other talented players because of something systematic, then it is a bigger problem, but I don't feel persuaded they have mishandled other prospects systematically. Kyrou helped the Blues mishandle him at a minimum. If it's truly evidence of a pattern and rot, we should have seen that throughout the 2010s with Armstrong and we should be seeing it now with Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc. I don't think it happened with Thomas. Is it happening with Broberg? Neighbours? Holloway? these are other first round talents certainly in Kyrou's pedigree range.

There’s been other examples. Both Perron and Pietrangelo were treated very poorly. Pietrangelo, in particular. Armstrong crossed the line and disrespected one of the best players to ever wear that jersey.

But the point remains. I believe they have systematically reduced 1) the asset and 2) the potential return for that asset, while also picking away at culture.

Armstrong needed to be fired a long time ago. He’s lost control and his decisions, behavior and vision have hurt the organization. Ego … emotion … lots of things got in the way for him.

Oh you're playing dirty invoking my two favorite players lol. If you assume I agree with you on Petro and if you assume I agree I wish my favorite player had gotten some more respect in the back and forth process on his final contract, can you see why I see that as a different issue than how Kyrou was developed? I see Kyrou as a hockey problem. Petro/Perron were business things. If you want to add it all up to an indictment in front of the grand jury for Armstrong in general nobody will stop you. I sort of find the pole you represent on him a useful counterweight to the 'GOAT' people because I think he's a flawed GM who's had ups and downs and does some things very well and has some real blind spots. He's like a lot of talented people. [shirt], he's like me more than I'd want to admit - mistake ridden.

As far as your reply on Buch - that's a separate topic. When I see 89 on the ice I am usually disgusted lately. There was once a time when he was the one holding the [censored] together (22-23), but that is gone and now he drives me crazy. But Buch being a separate topic doesn't impeach my phrasing on Kyrou

[Kilokaai]

We're just focused on different things. The reason I focus on the player in this situation is the "necessary but not sufficient" aspect. Had the Blues "handled" him better, that may have been necessary to achieve a better outcome, but it would never have been sufficient.

Whereas. Consider the contra - let's say Kyrou was a born competitor, someone who dug in when the going got tough, but the Blues still didn't handle him well. He would at some point shine through with a new coach, or he will go to his next team and show everyone the heart of a champion and prove everyone wrong. The problem is he's proving it out of reaction to being criticized, not because it's inherent in him to be mortified about being in this healthy scratch position. I don't worry for one second that Kyrou's taking anyone else to a Cup. You don't fear guys like this, they aren't going to beat you when that final clock is counting down.

As far as has Armstrong shown himself to have shrewd judgment sticking with this player and building on him and the statements he has made about him ... we agree Armstrong has a ton to be criticized with following up the Cup era with the Kyrou/Krug/Faulk/Newly Extended Buchnevich era. That is a lot of self ownage to overcome.

Whereas I look it as you have an asset and are in positions of power and due to emotion and other variables, you publicly treat that asset poorly which only serves to hurt your organization.

My feelings aside on Kyrou, the Blues have handled him very, very poorly, which to me is the much bigger problem for the organization.

Well, if it meant that they're also going to mishandle other talented players because of something systematic, then it is a bigger problem, but I don't feel persuaded they have mishandled other prospects systematically. Kyrou helped the Blues mishandle him at a minimum. If it's truly evidence of a pattern and rot, we should have seen that throughout the 2010s with Armstrong and we should be seeing it now with Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc. I don't think it happened with Thomas. Is it happening with Broberg? Neighbours? Holloway? these are other first round talents certainly in Kyrou's pedigree range.

The problem is that Kyrou isn't a special case in my opinion, off the top of my head Pierre Luc Debois, Patrik Laine, and Johnathan Huberdeau come to mind as some players that have the same question marks with similar expectations (and salaries). Hell you might even be able to toss in David Perron there too before he left STL the first time.

IMO this just happens sometimes, maturation is a process it happens later for some than others. I don't fault the Blues for looking at the data and saying this makes sense and being surprised that the 2-way game is a little slow. I hate scapegoating in team sports though, it will always rub me the wrong way. There are so few players in this league who are literal instant offense without dependency.

I feel like your strongest point is scapegoating in team sports, there is real meat to that one as a general principle so I can understand why that is prompting your argument.

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation including his immediately responsible coaches that something critical is missing with this player, as opposed to the other players. You should also appreciate that for the last now seven consecutive seasons we have been hearing the pro-Kyrou case. It usually goes like, "these stats show how critical he is and you're cutting off your nose to spite your face if you think he is the issue." I completely absorb the argument. I still land where I land on this player, and that's a good faith calculus of all I know about hockey and competition in general.

My counter to that is you need to score to win games and Kyrou has shown he CAN do that, there are offensive specialists in this league who will never be great two way players. Good teams can afford those players, it's a team game Kyrou was doing as good as anyone in the first 10 games.

It seems disingenuous to say that Kyrou has not made good strides in his two way game the last 100 games or so (basically since Berube left). He will never be the heart and soul guy you want him to be but unless you can finish then none of that matters. It's why players like Neighbours are so vitally important to teams but not everyone is that type of player. This should be acceptable for good teams.

[skilles]

He wants out of STL … STL want him out

What a complete mess. Very much like Tarasenko

I have no idea if he wants out but the fans are definitely ready to see it.

Don't agree on Tarasenko who competed and whose signature was game tying/game leading goals, but that's neither here nor there re: Kyrou IMO. We agree about Buchnevich.

You can tell he wants out and his language reflects it (from reports). Who wouldn’t want out given all of this and his history. You wouldn’t want in either.

it's an offensive concept what the player wants in this situation. he's a cancer. cancer wishes it could operate in a different body? so what

At the end of the day, no matter you or I think, the Blues have failed in their management of him.

Respectfully disagree. This is big boy hockey and at some point, it's on the player.

That is not the point though. The way Kyrou plays is on him how it been handled is on management

[theograce]

As far as your reply on Buch - that's a separate topic. When I see 89 on the ice I am usually disgusted lately. There was once a time when he was the one holding the [censored] together (22-23), but that is gone and now he drives me crazy. But Buch being a separate topic doesn't impeach my phrasing on Kyrou

We probably aren’t that different in our views on Kyrou, but I see a bigger problem that has my focus. They gave him the moon. That’s on them. Now they are stuck with it due in large part to their own doing. They played a losing hand and continue to play it.

And singling out one guy in this mess is stupid…there has to be more to it.

[seattleblue]

We're just focused on different things. The reason I focus on the player in this situation is the "necessary but not sufficient" aspect. Had the Blues "handled" him better, that may have been necessary to achieve a better outcome, but it would never have been sufficient.

Whereas. Consider the contra - let's say Kyrou was a born competitor, someone who dug in when the going got tough, but the Blues still didn't handle him well. He would at some point shine through with a new coach, or he will go to his next team and show everyone the heart of a champion and prove everyone wrong. The problem is he's proving it out of reaction to being criticized, not because it's inherent in him to be mortified about being in this healthy scratch position. I don't worry for one second that Kyrou's taking anyone else to a Cup. You don't fear guys like this, they aren't going to beat you when that final clock is counting down.

As far as has Armstrong shown himself to have shrewd judgment sticking with this player and building on him and the statements he has made about him ... we agree Armstrong has a ton to be criticized with following up the Cup era with the Kyrou/Krug/Faulk/Newly Extended Buchnevich era. That is a lot of self ownage to overcome.

Whereas I look it as you have an asset and are in positions of power and due to emotion and other variables, you publicly treat that asset poorly which only serves to hurt your organization.

My feelings aside on Kyrou, the Blues have handled him very, very poorly, which to me is the much bigger problem for the organization.

Well, if it meant that they're also going to mishandle other talented players because of something systematic, then it is a bigger problem, but I don't feel persuaded they have mishandled other prospects systematically. Kyrou helped the Blues mishandle him at a minimum. If it's truly evidence of a pattern and rot, we should have seen that throughout the 2010s with Armstrong and we should be seeing it now with Snuggerud, Dvorsky, etc. I don't think it happened with Thomas. Is it happening with Broberg? Neighbours? Holloway? these are other first round talents certainly in Kyrou's pedigree range.

The problem is that Kyrou isn't a special case in my opinion, off the top of my head Pierre Luc Debois, Patrik Laine, and Johnathan Huberdeau come to mind as some players that have the same question marks with similar expectations (and salaries). Hell you might even be able to toss in David Perron there too before he left STL the first time.

IMO this just happens sometimes, maturation is a process it happens later for some than others. I don't fault the Blues for looking at the data and saying this makes sense and being surprised that the 2-way game is a little slow. I hate scapegoating in team sports though, it will always rub me the wrong way. There are so few players in this league who are literal instant offense without dependency.

I feel like your strongest point is scapegoating in team sports, there is real meat to that one as a general principle so I can understand why that is prompting your argument.

BUT on the flip side, intelligent processors of observation including his immediately responsible coaches that something critical is missing with this player, as opposed to the other players. You should also appreciate that for the last now seven consecutive seasons we have been hearing the pro-Kyrou case. It usually goes like, "these stats show how critical he is and you're cutting off your nose to spite your face if you think he is the issue." I completely absorb the argument. I still land where I land on this player, and that's a good faith calculus of all I know about hockey and competition in general.

My counter to that is you need to score to win games and Kyrou has shown he CAN do that, there are offensive specialists in this league who will never be great two way players. Good teams can afford those players, it's a team game Kyrou was doing as good as anyone in the first 10 games.

It seems disingenuous to say that Kyrou has not made good strides in his two way game the last 100 games or so (basically since Berube left). He will never be the heart and soul guy you want him to be but unless you can finish then none of that matters. It's why players like Neighbours are so vitally important to teams but not everyone is that type of player. This should be acceptable for good teams.

What about the non scoresheet play that destroyed the Blues last night and is certainly why he is benched today? How does that ever make its way into that argument? I am skeptical of your argument because I have seen its variant so many times.

It's disingenuous to overlook that I stated pretty clearly my bona fides for seeing improvement in him, which are bona fides. If you can find where I said he has not made good strides in his two way game in the last 100 games or so, I would accept you calling it disingenuous. I am saying the core from which that springs is missing an element that cannot be taught.

[seattleblue]

As far as your reply on Buch - that's a separate topic. When I see 89 on the ice I am usually disgusted lately. There was once a time when he was the one holding the [censored] together (22-23), but that is gone and now he drives me crazy. But Buch being a separate topic doesn't impeach my phrasing on Kyrou

We probably aren’t that different in our views on Kyrou, but I see a bigger problem that has my focus. They gave him the moon. That’s on them. Now they are stuck with it due in large part to their own doing. They played a losing hand and continue to play it.

And singling out one guy in this mess is stupid…there has to be more to it.

Well, if there were two threads that popped up today because each were benched tonight, you'd get no argument from me!

Kyrou cannot make the kind of fantastic 200' play he made in the Dallas game every few games, and shrink in some games. I hope it's 89's turn next, they have many more problems than 25. But you still have to be able to talk about 25 without the whole topic being invalid because of other problems

[juan good eye]

For years I said that Doug Armstrong was exceptionally overrated at hockey assessment for trusting the character of this player to be the foundation for anything. I had some miserable battles with fellow fans. Then Kyrou started coming around. I acknowledged it and adapted to it, I literally placed money on Kyrou to reach 63 points this year, maybe he will. But he is a trick.

I can't begin to express how disgusted I was with his effort last night, which was pathetic and the game turned on it when he failed to clear the zone in that incredible long shift when he had the chance. I know that in that moment Montgomery had to hate this player, and was correct.

What this player is, is the player born to be defeated by the other person who chooses to aim higher for himself. That's it. He is a born L.

I apologize to Harry for defending this guy. I can't wait to see the Kyrou Era end. I posted about trading him before his NTC a lot because I did deeply worry he couldn't be trusted. I wish the Blackhawks had nothing but Kyrous, that's the biggest indictment.

+100000000000000000000

Army positives: generally a good deal maker, tough negotiator, and knows how to keep finding ways to improve (that’s how they won the Cup after all).

Army negatives: hard headed AF and his player talent/character evaluation is average at best which is probably why it took so long to win a Cup after he inherited a bunch of talent when he took over and also why so much talent has gone missing since for nada, also the awful contracts…

JK will never hoist the Cup as a top 6 player.

Buch peaked years ago and that was obvious based on his age and past performance.

As Blues fans we suffered through a vague multi-year reset only to still be saddled with two dumb[ash] long-term contracts that were easily avoidable and still zero superstars anywhere in the system (hope and pray I’m wrong on the latter).

And seattle don’t apologize to the apologists. Cryou needs to go three years ago.

[theograce]

What about the non scoresheet play that destroyed the Blues last night

they sound completely effed if that destroyed them.

Watch Binningtons effort/read on the Ovie goal that Ovie called a muffin after the game.

Buchnevich can’t score. He pouts. He doesn’t sacrifice. Tell me why he’s continually playing next to Thomas again.

[seattleblue]

What about the non scoresheet play that destroyed the Blues last night

they sound completely effed if that destroyed them.

Watch Binningtons effort/read on the Ovie goal that Ovie called a muffin after the game.

Buchnevich can’t score. He pouts. He doesn’t sacrifice. Tell me why he’s continually playing next to Thomas again.

Kyrou's failed effort came immediately after an utter hero effort by Sunny, still trying to block every shot desperately. That was a nightmare shift and it's a moment that you have to show you're capable of pushing through if what's been weighing on you, supposedly, is the crushing defeat of last season in the last crucible moment.

Again you're not getting pushback from me on Buchnevich