Isn't Martin capable of playing the match-up game? Why doesn't Bylsma use him for that like he's probably using Lavy for that same thing in the Olympics?
News Article: Michael Farber on Dan Bylsma
- Thread starter MtlPenFan
- Start date
Coach Travis
Back2Back!!!
Jag68Sid87
Sullivan gots to go!
Let's not even start with his GM resume. It makes his coaching resume look like Toe Blake's.
Not if Shero is fired, too.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
Every coach has warts, but most of the warts people accuse DB of are prevalent in the potential replacements they pine for. Oh, DB favours vets? Tell me more about how that would improve under HF golden boys like Hitchcock, Julien, and Babcock, who favour vets to death on both their club and national teams. He doesn't adapt? In fact, tactical revisions were exactly why the Pens rebounded after the Game 2 loss against the Bruins last year. Just because the Pens lost doesn't mean they didn't adapt.
Bylsma happens to have a ton of positives, so canning him because of his shortcomings would be a classic case of throwing out the baby with the bathwater. He's a very good coach, which is why he has the Americans humming as the best team in the tournament right now, and is earning rave reviews from his players. A few people here figured DB spelled doom for Team USA, so it's nice to see him proving them wrong.
WhatsaMaatta
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2008
- 4,504
- 0
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
They did rebound. They simply lost.
I'm not sure what people expect in games against the Bruins. Even good games are going to be tight games...systematically we were on point, we simply couldn't finish. I'm not sure how one would coach that.
mpp9
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2010
- 32,616
- 5,074
Part of a coach's job is to kickstart your star players when they're struggling and/or not producing. He thought TK was that spark with Malkin. And nothing was needed for Sid.
Darth Vitale
Dark Matter
Good GOD!
Anybody who lives in Montreal KNOWS this is absolutely not a good plan, idea or anything else.
Good idea or not, it's obviously what Shero had in mind IMO. And he is a conservative, Shero type coach too IMO. Not advocating it so much as saying I'd be floored if it wasn't him, at least in the interim.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
Not trying out Iggy on Sid's line was a mistake. It may not have worked, and Iggy didn't look good no matter what side he played on for us, but it still could've been tried.
That doesn't mean that he didn't adapt, however. It just means he didn't make all the changes people here wanted to see made. That's an important distinction.
mpp9
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2010
- 32,616
- 5,074
He didn't change Sid's line. And thought Geno needed more Tyler Kennedy. The adjustments made to who flanks our best players are pretty important.
I'd say he did a **** job of it.
BrunoPuntzJones
Biscuit Scorer
I may be remembering it wrong, but didn't Iginla play a game or two on Crosby's line?
mpp9
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2010
- 32,616
- 5,074
He did. And then when Dupes/Sid/Iggy had a bad period, they went back to KCD. Despite KMN dominating and looking better than KCD ever did in the postseason.
I'm convinced Shero and Bylsma never sat down and figured out where Iginla would fit in the Penguins' lineup. Shero got him just to say "LULZ I HAZ ALL TEH CAPTAINZ NAO!" and Bylsma only played him that short time with Crosby because the Islanders series was getting away from them.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
mpp9
Registered User
- Dec 5, 2010
- 32,616
- 5,074
On a team whose Cup hopes rest on the performances of two players, I'd say it's among the most important aspects of his job description.
He did them no favors in that series. None. He bears part of the responsibility for that loss. Idiotic play from our highest paid players bearing the most.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
Interesting. Should we get rid of one of our highest paid players whose idiotic play was more responsible for the loss than Bylsma's use of Iggy/Kunitz?
Last edited:
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,746
- 46,762
Considering the ONLY way this team even sniffs the Stanley Cup finals is if Sid and Geno are in God mode carrying the club, then yes, I'd say that making sure those two are going is absolutely crucial to success.
Maybe a coach for a team like Chicago doesn't need to worry so much about Toews and Kane since they have other guys who can carry them if those two are being stifled. But a team like the Penguins, whose entire offense goes as Sid/Geno go, the coach's main job, IMO, is doing everything humanly possible to put those two in a position to succeed. Bylsma did not do that against Boston.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
The phrase "position to succeed" is the vaguest, most useless tripe I've seen on this board, and I wish people would quit parroting KIRK's use of it. Particularly good posters who can think for themselves.
Judging by Iggy's play for us on either wing, he wasn't putting either of our centers in a position to succeed. Could he have been given more of a chance with Sid to see if he could kindle something? Sure, that would've been great, and DB should've been more flexible. But none of the actual performance we got from Iggy suggested he'd help anyone out, because he was slow, didn't battle, and looked confused and disengaged no matter what line or wing he was on.
As for Chicago, I don't think that example serves any purpose other than to try to absolve a "grass-is-greener" coach of the deadly sin DB's accused of, nor do I think the argument stands up.
Last edited:
Sidney the Kidney
One last time
- Jun 29, 2009
- 55,746
- 46,762
I'll be honest, I've probably skimmed a lot of Kirk's posts, particularly when he's on a rampage of 20 posts in a row.
So my use of that phrase, I guess, is just my own "useless tripe".
I'm not just referring to his use of Iggy, though. That's one option, yes, but my issue was Bylsma did NOTHING to change up Sid's line. Whether it was Iggy, whether it was stacking Malkin with Sid, whether it was using Bennett, Jokinen, Morrow, whoever. The fact Bylsma did absolutely nothing to change the KCD line even though it couldn't do a thing against Boston was my biggest issue with that.
Also, I quoted your question in a general sense, because I believe that coaching the Penguins roster and coaching another team's roster does involve the coach ... catering ... more to Crosby and Malkin, and making sure they're going. I think getting them going is a lot more important for the Penguins to succeed than it is for Chicago to get Kane and Toews going, simply because our success hinges more on their play than Chicago's does on their duo's.
Dipsy Doodle
Rent A Barn
- May 28, 2006
- 76,571
- 21,110
I'll be honest, I've probably skimmed a lot of Kirk's posts, particularly when he's on a rampage of 20 posts in a row.
So my use of that phrase, I guess, is just my own "useless tripe".
I'll let it slide, haha.
I think DB saw Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis as a line that had a long time to develop chemistry, and had been working well together all year (whatever Dupes' limitations). As we have found out it can be very difficult to play with Crosby, and throwing talents together hoping for them to gel instantly just doesn't work. Because of Sid's injury, trial runs were out of the question.
DB took too long to deviate from the line, but he was right to give it a long rope. It's not as simple as being put in a "position to succeed" by changing around the complementary parts.
Jag68Sid87
Sullivan gots to go!
Who the hell wants Hitchcock, Julien or Babcock? I sure don't. We need an offensive-minded coach who knows what to do with our main assets, not someone who looks at the roster upside down in terms of importance.
Also, he hasn't won &^%$ yet, and the Americans haven't faced any adversity. As we all know, the first sign of adversity and Bylsma's teams fold like a tent. Let's see what happens.
It's the system that doesn't work against several teams in the playoffs. Aye, there's the rub.
Getting the most out of Crosby and Malkin? How can it not be on this team? Seriously?
No, because unlike you most people believe our best players are more valuable than our idiot coach. You're a one-man army on this one.
Kunitz-Crosby-Dupuis simply cannot be defended. Oh you try your best to do just that, but it's a complete waste of time.
Dupuis is one of the worst top-six winger options in the history of the NHL. His skill set is the opposite of what most people look for in a scoring winger.
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in the Flood
Playing the correct players in the correct spots if pretty much rule number 1 for a coach.
You can have the best system in the world, but if you play the wrong players in the wrong spots it isn't gonna work.
BTW, I continue to love the, "it might not have worked so it's ok it wasn't tried" argument!
Tender Rip
Wears long pants
Michael Farber is probably the Èminence Gris of North American hockey writing, not to say among those for sports in general. As such, the article is helped along greatly by its composition and the very fact that the man can write... which is a rarity among hockey scribes.
That said, the article doesn't really say much. It paints Bylsma as a dedicated individual who works hard and is driven towards becoming better. But if you write a profile on most people in high performance jobs, you will be able to paint a similar image of them.
Nor does the US going through the initial stages of an Olympic tournament in style tell us much - last time around it was Ron Wilson and, well.... you know. It is a good team this time also, and unlike on the Pens there are no dodgy areas for matching what Bylsma's wants. This is not to downplay the accomplishment of having them perform well right off the bat; it is something in his favor as we have also seen with his ability to have players come up from the minors and fit roles almost irrespective of talent level.
But this ability, which is an extension of his ability to make players feel part of the project I suppose, team spirit and all, does not do anything about what we might consider his warts... well, what I consider his warts certainly. All of that makes no difference in a 7 game series where he is called upon to prepare for particular opponents rather than just focus on #getting to our game, change on the fly, adjust for opposition and dictate match-ups. I've been disgusted with Bylsma on those counts ever since we won the cup.
He is uncommonly introspective? Well, ultimately I don't doubt that Bylsma is very dedicated to seeking out knowledge and considering whether new approaches of any kind can make him improve.
But as to what we can observe, I just don't see that the questions he is asking himself following spells of such introspection is leading to any actual change on the areas where I think him sub-par.
And as for our foundation, never mind adjustments or match ups, I am not particularly impressed with any part of our structure of play (decent defensive schemes, but minutes are not doled out according to performances or suitability to roles - pretty much the opposite of what we see with Bylsma's Olympic D-group), less so about the total lack of response or accountability when favored vets dumps on the porch, repeatedly. To me - when push comes to shove, we are exactly what our stars make us.
Managing a roster with stars the likes of ours is not easy, and I do credit Bylsma for being great at creating an atmosphere where apathy does not take hold and where people seem driven to excel.
However, if that atmosphere is also defined by us being incapable of managing our emotions under pressure or overcoming challenges in the crux, you have to question the value or solidity of it.
Players go to bat for him, and that is important. Players like being Penguins. That is important too. But clearly you can also find successful coaches that players go to bat for not as much because of personal affinity, but because they want to win and because performing is necessary to securing their role on the hockey team.
Oh, and on Babcock: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140130/SPORTS0103/301300041
While I have no doubt Bylsma is more likeable to players, as an owner I would still go with Babcock every day of the week. Well, at least until after the Canada-US game which has caused me to leave what could have turned into quite a party early .
That said, the article doesn't really say much. It paints Bylsma as a dedicated individual who works hard and is driven towards becoming better. But if you write a profile on most people in high performance jobs, you will be able to paint a similar image of them.
Nor does the US going through the initial stages of an Olympic tournament in style tell us much - last time around it was Ron Wilson and, well.... you know. It is a good team this time also, and unlike on the Pens there are no dodgy areas for matching what Bylsma's wants. This is not to downplay the accomplishment of having them perform well right off the bat; it is something in his favor as we have also seen with his ability to have players come up from the minors and fit roles almost irrespective of talent level.
But this ability, which is an extension of his ability to make players feel part of the project I suppose, team spirit and all, does not do anything about what we might consider his warts... well, what I consider his warts certainly. All of that makes no difference in a 7 game series where he is called upon to prepare for particular opponents rather than just focus on #getting to our game, change on the fly, adjust for opposition and dictate match-ups. I've been disgusted with Bylsma on those counts ever since we won the cup.
He is uncommonly introspective? Well, ultimately I don't doubt that Bylsma is very dedicated to seeking out knowledge and considering whether new approaches of any kind can make him improve.
But as to what we can observe, I just don't see that the questions he is asking himself following spells of such introspection is leading to any actual change on the areas where I think him sub-par.
And as for our foundation, never mind adjustments or match ups, I am not particularly impressed with any part of our structure of play (decent defensive schemes, but minutes are not doled out according to performances or suitability to roles - pretty much the opposite of what we see with Bylsma's Olympic D-group), less so about the total lack of response or accountability when favored vets dumps on the porch, repeatedly. To me - when push comes to shove, we are exactly what our stars make us.
Managing a roster with stars the likes of ours is not easy, and I do credit Bylsma for being great at creating an atmosphere where apathy does not take hold and where people seem driven to excel.
However, if that atmosphere is also defined by us being incapable of managing our emotions under pressure or overcoming challenges in the crux, you have to question the value or solidity of it.
Players go to bat for him, and that is important. Players like being Penguins. That is important too. But clearly you can also find successful coaches that players go to bat for not as much because of personal affinity, but because they want to win and because performing is necessary to securing their role on the hockey team.
Oh, and on Babcock: http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20140130/SPORTS0103/301300041
While I have no doubt Bylsma is more likeable to players, as an owner I would still go with Babcock every day of the week. Well, at least until after the Canada-US game which has caused me to leave what could have turned into quite a party early
.
