Scandale du Jour
JordanStaal#1Fan
Last few posts:
Continue
No exhibition games last year was a issue for DOC and players with zero experience in the NHL. I think he will be a good LW this year in WB and has the size and can skate to be a good player down the road. Legare got a very good write up from Scott Young and he has slimmed down, gained needed speed and quickness especially his first couple of steps. Really like Poulin and all will benefit form the experience of the AHL as they mature and are learning to play professional hockey.
But that's not what happened last year at all? Like I do not understand how you are drawing that conclusion from the past season at all with BART + GCR.
There's been seasons where Sullivan mixes up the lines more frequently, but that's mostly been in his early tenure here.
There were far too many injuries this last year to describe anything that happened with the lines as 'rigidity'.
I do tell myself correct things all the time, thank you for the permission though.
Or I can look at other games where various other players were injured and see less effective line combinations being used.
Most people can see that Sullivan is the best coach for this team, with the lineup as it's constructed. Perhaps Hextall/Burke will significantly remake the team and we will need a coach more suited to coaching players with GRIT. As it is though, it's Sullivan.
Blueger missed 13 games this season. Tanev missed 24 games this season. ZAR missed 11 games this season. While those players were out, other line combinations were tried. They were not as effective as BART was.
We need to revamp the roster since it’s clearly not working in the postseason. Sully’s system is trash and his refusal to make any changes killed them team. How do you start Jarry in game 6? How do you bit at the very least pull him in that game? Why didn’t he try Zucker with Sid when Jake was a ghost for that entire series?
Who do you think should be the Penguins' coach, if not Sullivan?
We’ve missed out on 2 or 3 years of coaches. This team has responded twice with cup wins when the team makes a change behind the bench.
He might go elsewhere and succeed, who knows? He had a solid roster heading into the playoffs and still couldn’t get it done. He does his little forward pairings and simply does not adjust. Line 1 is set in stone even if it struggles and completely a non factor in the playoffs.
He’s also just so damn lazy with the AHL guys. Until we had the massive amount of injuries, he kept going back to guys that are barely NHL players in Jank, Sceviour, Laff without even trying an AHL players. If this team had remained fully healthy all season, none of the AHL guys would have played a min in the NHL.
I dunno why this conversation is touchy today, but hey, hope the morning goes better, buddies! I did mention that injury caused the lines to change up, that's the whole point of this discussion. My point was that, when he has a healthy Pens team Sullivan does not juggle the lines as frequently as he used to do-- maybe his coaching philosophy changed? That's not a knock against him per se (though I personally prefer more reactive coaches), but it's not my favorite aspect of him behind the bench, nor is it an asset, I think.
Which coaches in the NHL do you think would do better with this roster than Sullivan? Ignore the question, for now, of whether or not they're available.
My assumption for the reason you might think this is the case is that the longer he is here, the more the roster can be molded into what his image for it is. He no longer has to try to find a fit for players who don't fit into his system, because there are fewer and fewer of them.
The reason the lines don't change is that Sullivan is stubborn and once he gets an idea in his head, that's the way it it will be, no matter how wrong it is.
Want proof? Explain for everyone how Jack Johnson earned his regular roster spot here.
I would have went after Gallant or Lambert this summer, possibly even Boudreau. Mike Sullivan and Dan Bylsma were not well known, obvious choices for a head coaching job, so I’m sure there are others as well.
He’s only here because of his contract.
There were numerous voices in the room advocating for Jack Johnson having a regular spot here. You can certainly fault Sullivan as the final decision-maker, but it's not as though he was the only one who thought it was a good idea.
Really, Gallant or Boudreau? Interesting. Which things do you think they'd do differently (that are important to you)?
Yes, I can and I do. "Other voices in the room" doesn't change anything.
Sullivan - as the final decision maker - has shown himself more than capable of making disastrous roster decisions that hurt the team because of his rigid thinking.
I think Boudreau could find a way to make our star players not completely useless in the playoffs. He’s also a decent coach with a mediocre lineup, so when we suffer injuries, I think he could keep us afloat. His style is conducive to our star players. The only thing sully can do at this point is keep the team afloat when injuries hit.
I’m tired of losing to no-neck in the playoffs; give me the guy that has been under him for so many years. The only downside is that the team would be boring to watch.
I think Gallant would have been the best fit overall. Boudreau sometimes sucks defensively, and our d sucks and overpaid. But I like both of their uptempo systems and a new voice has been needed for two years.
The question is why are we keeping Sully? The only positive things I can see is he keeps the team afloat when we have injuries.
It's funny, we play more uptempo when we're injured. It's dumb. We play further up in the zone, we chase pucks hard, we attack the puck-carrier. I'm dead set now that it's all been Sully since 2018. The reason we suck when we're healthy is because Sully genuinely thinks the stack the house and hope for a bounce to counter-punch system is better than our 2016 system and that the "key" to it is having guys healthy.
I think he has it completely ass-backwards because we got lucky in 2017 and he's sniffing his own farts a bit too much.
In the grand scheme of things, of course it doesn't change anything, because the decision was made. If we're going to assign blame for the decision, I think it does matter who was advocating for it. For all we know, Sullivan didn't like Jack Johnson at all, but was persuaded into using Johnson by Rutherford, and deferred to Martin when Martin advocated for Johnson.
That's interesting. I don't agree with your analysis of either of those coaches, but I admit I've really only watched their teams when they play the Penguins and didn't look closely at what the opposition's coach was doing.
Continue