System wise?
What I can't figure out is why we gave the Montreal (and the Islanders) forwards so much time to come over the blue line and setup. We have no confidence in closing the gap.
If your forwards are the wrong side of the puck by a decent distance, gapping up aggressively risks a dman getting beat and creating an odd man situation (or even worse one). The number one priority here isn't preventing a shot, it's preventing a high danger one. Taking away the middle of the ice and waiting for them to make a play/for the cavalry to come is the smarter play there. With a bit of luck, they'll go wide in a poorly executed way and you can pivot and rub them out against the boards. They play it well, they get a shot from a bad angle or a hopeful pass that won't succeed if the stick is in the right position.
And tbh, that method is something this team has done pretty well season. It was even doing it well in the first two games against Montreal.
Roster flaws?
What flaws are you referring to? (not being insulting, honestly asking).
The bottom pairing options were unenticing - Riikola-Ruhwedel as a playoff pairing shouldn't tbe obvious options - and the bottom six was devoid of skill and creativity without seriously weakening the top 6, which tbf was somewhat due to bad luck and injury. Rutherford's done a fine job of repairing the roster after his 18 months of disaster post 2017, but there's still some work to be done. Not to absolve Sully of blame entirely of course, but if this was a cooking competition, someone definitely snuck some bad ingredients into his basket.
Just wanted to say: I wasn't lurking this board when Bylsma was canned, but I remember a lot of the dialogue was "he's such a good coach but this is a bad fit, he'll go somewhere else and do well; gonna be an NHL HC for a long time..."
You know what? Bylsma wasn't all that good and he wasn't a long-tenured NHL coach after being canned here.
Sully was great for us in 2016, helped in 2017 (luck and goaltending helped more but I digress) but hasn't been all that good since. The Penguins haven't been enjoyable to watch since...oh, about May 2017. I guess they were from October through New Year's this year but they had completely fallen apart by the time Forrest Gump came down with the 'Rona. There was a non-zero chance that they were going to crater bad enough to miss the playoffs entirely.
Also, if Sid's not going to tolerate an attempt at a 2-3 year retool that includes trading Geno and/or Tanger, we have to do something drastic and soon. Process of elimination says that's Sully.
Sully has a far bigger track record of success as a coach than Bylsma. More as an assistant coach, more as an AHL coach, and more as an NHL coach. I guess you never know when a dude's going to flame out and be suddenly done, but there's not a lot of reason to think that's Sully. Maybe if I'd been around then I'd have seen a bunch of people with nothing to do with the Penguins organisation talking about Bylsma is the best coach in the NHL, but I don't recall people here talking about being a thing (and people are very happy to bring up 20/20 hindsight).
He is also the perfect fit here except for these weird downswings in confidence and intensity that come from time to time. The first question to any prospective Head Coach is "we are aware the offensive firepower of our stars is our big strength but also that we can't rely on that alone over a playoff, we need real structure - but one that allows our stars to take chances. What's your solution?" The likelihood of said coaches suggesting something pretty like Sully's system is high.
And I think you're underplaying what he's done - 2017 was meant to be impossible to begin with according to many here, and these last few seasons have been constant chaos, and we had a less than 1% chance of missing the playoffs. He's done some dumb things but every coach does.
Sully's not a spoofer. Maybe he's lost the knack to motivating the room at the right time but if he hasn't he's still the best coach available.
That's right, try and think of the last time we had a coach that liked young players.
We've got one. We just played some post-season hockey with a rookie and sophomore as the second pairing. He's had rookies on the top line for both cup wins. When we have good young players, he nearly always plays them, and is usually quick to give them responsibilities.
