Salary Cap: Pittsburgh Penguins Salary Cap Thread: Please Be Nice To Us, JR

[CheckingLineCenter]

hopefully yes. I was worried about the quality of source when in the early goings ZAR was called a defensive whiz. Which I think goes on cheesesteaks. Ended up being a good article though.

I also think we can get the best results out of Zucker with him next to Sid.

 

[CascadiaPenguin]

hopefully yes. I was worried about the quality of source when in the early goings ZAR was called a defensive whiz. Which I think goes on cheesesteaks. Ended up being a good article though.

I also think we can get the best results out of Zucker with him next to Sid.

I'm desperate for fun, so I'll post this. Zuck seems like good teammate. Kind of like a mini Horny who can skate like the wind...

 

[Peat]

For sure. I just question why we are enabling it outside of the proper hierarchy with Daley. It should be the assistant coach’s job as you indicated.

And it just makes me second guess the leadership structure even further in terms of our front office.

In reality it probably is much ado about nothing.

I'm kinda starting to think of Daley as a split Assistant Coach/trainee AGM - with the two different roles being good for squeezing the extra assistant coach Rutherford was talking about, and getting some more Front Office eyes, without having to pay for two people (which Rutherford maybe can't do). So maybe Daley is proper hierarchy there? Or maybe I'm just contorting things.

Either way, yeah, probably much ado about nothing.

It'll be interesting to see who the new AGM is (if anyone, but I believe it'll happen). Gotta think it'll be the sort of guy whose resume could allow him to step right in if Rutherford moves upstairs...

 

[Ugene Magic]

That actually isn't true. When the Pens won the 2017 Cup they used the 2 line model. Kessel played with Malkin and the 3rd line had no people better than what Pens have now. In fact we won the Finals without Bonino from what I remember he was out. That 2017 playoffs we won with a back up defensemen and with the two scoring line model. 2017 was all Crosby, Malkin, Guentzel, and Kessel. 5th highest point getter was Kunitz with 11 points. This Pens team is deeper than that team with 6 forwards that would average better than Kunitz did. McCann could make 7 because I could see him easily at that .5+ points a game. Bottom line is Pens did not have that 3 powerful lines like the other two Cups in 2009 and 2016.

I think the Pens could provide enough offense with a McCann-Blueger/Jankowski-Tanev line. McCann is good for 18-20 goals and Jankowski has 14 and 17 goals in his two seasons playing with decent linemates. Tanev can also get you 14-15 goals. That is plenty of offense from a solid defensive line. If Poulin or O'Connor make the team then you might be able to have all 4 lines chipping in a decent amount of goals for the minutes they play.

That simply isn't true all. That team won because it had depth from top to bottom and could survive injuries. This team right now is not a proven entity for anything outside the obvious. That 2017 team was a proven entity full of guys who've been there with some additions due to injuries.

Making assumptions and calling this team deeper is silly. It just isn't true.

 

[Peat]

Luszczyszyn's model in the Athletic has us 7th in his off-season power rankings, in what he calls the Dark Horse tier - outside the major contenders, but above the "will probably make the playoff teams".

edit: 7th by combination of Athletic staff rankings and his model. I think his model alone has us 5th.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Yeah, I never got why some on this board were down with Zucker. Sure, it was definitely a minority opinion, but Zucker is basically exactly what 99% of people here want out of a top-6 winger for Crosby and Malkin. He's pretty similar of a player to Guentzel, who's the best winger (in terms of both ability and fit) not named Hossa that the Penguins have had in the last 15 years.

Zucker's probably about the 4th or 5th best winger the Penguins have had in the Crosby and Malkin era. Below Hossa, Guentzel and probably Kessel (but I could be swayed if you mention how Kessel didn't fit with Sid or Geno), but right on par with Kunitz.

 

[CrosbyMalkin]

That simply isn't true all. That team won because it had depth from top to bottom and could survive injuries. This team right now is not a proven entity for anything outside the obvious. That 2017 team was a proven entity full of guys who've been there with some additions due to injuries.

Making assumptions and calling this team deeper is silly. It just isn't true.

The topic I was responding to said we won all our Cups with the 3 scoring line model and that was not true. That 2017 team won with our weakest group of defenseman not any Pens Cup teams and only 2 scoring lines. The year before Kessel played on the 3rd line but 2017 playoffs Kessel played with Malkin. The Pens won the Cup on big efforts from the top 4 forwards. The next highest forward was Kunitz with 11 playoff points and he also was in the top 6.

The bottom line is McCann, Jankowski, Tanev, Poulin, Blueger, and others can provide as much offense as those forwards 5 through 12 did. In fact I bet our 5, 6, and 7 forwards could out perform what that group did.

 

[Riptide]

Jankowski seems like a ZAR who can actually score when put in situations to do so.

I’d wager he’d have had double digit goals last season if flanking Blueger and Tanev all season.

He's also a natural center at the NHL level.

 

[Riptide]

I think the Pens could provide enough offense with a McCann-Blueger/Jankowski-Tanev line. McCann is good for 18-20 goals and Jankowski has 14 and 17 goals in his two seasons playing with decent linemates. Tanev can also get you 14-15 goals. That is plenty of offense from a solid defensive line. If Poulin or O'Connor make the team then you might be able to have all 4 lines chipping in a decent amount of goals for the minutes they play.

Who on that line is the one making plays and passing the puck? Because that's not really McCann's, Tanev's or Jankowski's specialty. I'm fine with any of those 3 on L3 (along with several other of our bottom 6 guys)... just not really a big fan of them all together on the line. And sadly with Simon leaving, that applies to most of our bottom 6 players.

I'm more then fine having one bottom 6 line that you know isn't going to score a lot of goals. We had that last season in Reese, TB and Tanev, and it was fine. But having two such lines? Not really a fan of that. Maybe the on ice result is better then what it looks like on paper... but I'm not going to hold my breath on that.

 

[Riptide]

No. I mean, if someone has a true issue with how their job is being handled the only person that can resolve it is the manager or the coach.

What does having a 3rd party like Daley who players can “vent to” achieve? Besides creating someone else to bitch to rather than addressing the problems.

1. It gives separation between the person complaining and the person hearing it. Adding in a middle man allows things to be tailored without having the emotion involved.

2. It allows for things to be anonymous if needed, while also allowing Daley to get the full issue of player X's frustrations, while being able to ask questions but not have to defend decisions made.

Really it depends on the players and the coach as to whether it's something that's actually a need or not. But seeing how he's not someone that the players have to use as a middle man between the players and the coach, but only if they choose to do so... what is the harm?

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I'd feel a lot better about our bottom 6 if we could add one of Granlund or Haula on a cheap short-term deal.

The longer they're out there, the greater the possibility of one of them signing a deal like that with somebody. The cap's tight for most teams and there are only so many chairs once the music stops.

 

[Gurglesons]

Who on that line is the one making plays and passing the puck? Because that's not really McCann's, Tanev's or Jankowski's specialty. I'm fine with any of those 3 on L3 (along with several other of our bottom 6 guys)... just not really a big fan of them all together on the line. And sadly with Simon leaving, that applies to most of our bottom 6 players.

I'm more then fine having one bottom 6 line that you know isn't going to score a lot of goals. We had that last season in Reese, TB and Tanev, and it was fine. But having two such lines? Not really a fan of that. Maybe the on ice result is better then what it looks like on paper... but I'm not going to hold my breath on that.

I think a lot of Teddy’s play making was wasted on Tanev and ZAR and the second we put Hornqvist on that line when ZAR went down they looked very good. I think McCann can fit that role.

 

[SEALBound]

I don't like the optics of how it looks with the rumors of players being moved out in the form of Kessel and Cole due to their relationship with the coach tbh. Makes me question if Sullivan's lost the room.

I think it's natural progression of a coach, especially with this team. New guy comes in and doesn't want to rock the boat. "Hey guys, lets work together and win a cup, eh?" They proceed to win and then it turns into "Everyone STFU, I'm in charge, I know what I'm doing so listen to me!". We are primed this season to do a mid-season coaching change and go out with one last bang.

No. I mean, if someone has a true issue with how their job is being handled the only person that can resolve it is the manager or the coach.

What does having a 3rd party like Daley who players can “vent to” achieve? Besides creating someone else to bitch to rather than addressing the problems.

If you're actually in HR you should know damn well that sometimes people do just need to "vent". They are mad and want someone to listen or they want a soundboard. Sometimes they aren't looking for solutions or bringing up actual issues...they just want to express frustration. This happens a lot. I bitched to my LPO several times about shit that was bothering me. Just venting and having someone there to go "Yup...that sucks dude..." is sometimes all you need. In my previous job, the marketing guy would come to me and just say "I'm going to vent and just get it all out and you let me know if I'm legit or way out in outer space". Whereas if he went to the person bothering him or I went to the person that was pissing me off, whether they are above me or not, it can cause harm to the relationship and leave you in a worse position. Sometimes it's not what you are hearing but who you are hearing it from. In this case, if Daley has a good rapport with Sully, that could provide to be incredibly valuable to the team. Imagine if someone like Malkin had Daley last year or the year before and launched a tirade about JJ tanking his line. Daley can be like "Hey, Sully, you gotta get JJ off Geno's line" (or something to that effect). Who knows what new communications possibilities this could bring. I like the move.

Say ERod isn't playing over ZAR and thinks he should be. You can't take that to Sid or Sully. But you can take those frustrations to Daley. Daley is smart enough and has enough experience to understand the complaint but can give feedback and a path forward for him without souring the relationships. And yes, I think rightfully or wrongfully, things like that sour coaches views on players.

Luszczyszyn's model in the Athletic has us 7th in his off-season power rankings, in what he calls the Dark Horse tier - outside the major contenders, but above the "will probably make the playoff teams".

edit: 7th by combination of Athletic staff rankings and his model. I think his model alone has us 5th.

5th is probably fair. This is a hot or not team. We don't do well struggling in the middle of the pack. We either suck or rock. Not much in between.

Yeah, I never got why some on this board were down with Zucker. Sure, it was definitely a minority opinion, but Zucker is basically exactly what 99% of people here want out of a top-6 winger for Crosby and Malkin. He's pretty similar of a player to Guentzel, who's the best winger (in terms of both ability and fit) not named Hossa that the Penguins have had in the last 15 years.

Zucker's probably about the 4th or 5th best winger the Penguins have had in the Crosby and Malkin era. Below Hossa, Guentzel and probably Kessel (but I could be swayed if you mention how Kessel didn't fit with Sid or Geno), but right on par with Kunitz.

JR's done nothing but provide the top 6 with everything we've said we need: Speed, skill, youth. And then on the back end - puck moving abilities. He also did this while managing actual dollars for the club. I think by most objective accounts, JR had a great off season. But for people here it's "Well, yes I wanted speed, skill, and youth but not THAT speed, skill, and youth...I wanted a better speed, skill, and youth and I wanted to pay less for it than what JR paid".

 

[Gurglesons]

I think it's natural progression of a coach, especially with this team. New guy comes in and doesn't want to rock the boat. "Hey guys, lets work together and win a cup, eh?" They proceed to win and then it turns into "Everyone STFU, I'm in charge, I know what I'm doing so listen to me!". We are primed this season to do a mid-season coaching change and go out with one last bang.

Yeah, so just fire the coach. I guess they are hoping for a Q like turnaround circa 2013.

If you're actually in HR you should know damn well that sometimes people do just need to "vent". They are mad and want someone to listen or they want a soundboard. Sometimes they aren't looking for solutions or bringing up actual issues...they just want to express frustration. This happens a lot. I bitched to my LPO several times about shit that was bothering me. Just venting and having someone there to go "Yup...that sucks dude..." is sometimes all you need. In my previous job, the marketing guy would come to me and just say "I'm going to vent and just get it all out and you let me know if I'm legit or way out in outer space". Whereas if he went to the person bothering him or I went to the person that was pissing me off, whether they are above me or not, it can cause harm to the relationship and leave you in a worse position. Sometimes it's not what you are hearing but who you are hearing it from. In this case, if Daley has a good rapport with Sully, that could provide to be incredibly valuable to the team. Imagine if someone like Malkin had Daley last year or the year before and launched a tirade about JJ tanking his line. Daley can be like "Hey, Sully, you gotta get JJ off Geno's line" (or something to that effect). Who knows what new communications possibilities this could bring. I like the move.

No. HR isn’t there to vent and any issue with co-workers or job performance that isn’t a violation of policy, state law, or federal law would be directed to speak to the manager. And then I'd go around and bring the issue up to the manager and say deal with it. That's what a manager is paid to do. Manage. Also, if your HR rep is saying "yeah, that sucks." they are probably not very good at their job.

If Sullivan can’t realize his star players shouldn’t be thrown the anchor of JJ. f*** man, pretty obvious what the plan is there. Sullivan is the coach. His job is to coach and manage egos. If he can't do that, why is he the coach?

If employees are consistently needing to "vent" to me. I start questioning either the employee or manager's performance. Because people shouldn't need to "vent". They should speak directly to each other, because that is how solutions are created. Managers should take feedback and provide solutions or provide a reason for why there are no solutions.

It is obvious that either..

# 1. The players don't trust Sullivan enough to explain their issues to him. This is a huge problem. Fire Sullivan or put the players in their place.

# 2. Sullivan is hearing the players and the issues and not reacting to them and specifically thinking he knows what is better. This is a huge problem. Fire Sullivan or put the players in their place and accept the consequences.

The third option is we've created a place holder for these conversations and instead of having direct communication we are opening up the floor for a player that was just on the team to be a go between for the actual management team when in reality he's just going to be a tattle tale. Which in reality all HR is when these issues are brought up to us.

Issues with co-workers, managers, work performance, career path, or dissatisfaction with your job are not issues to bring up to HR and any HR professional would tell you that. We aren't managers, we are consultants that advise the company on compliance, not on hurt feelings.

Sid, Geno and Letang are big boys. If the organization doesn't feel they can talk to their coaches this a conversation that needs to be have with all four in the room. Not by putting one of them in another room with a former player and then try to have that player regurgitate it to management. That gives me a huge pause about the organizational structure and accountability in this organization especially with what we've seen in terms of players like Jack Johnson versus players like Phil Kessel, Ian Cole, Daniel Sprong, etc.

 

[Flying Dego]

I'd feel a lot better about our bottom 6 if we could add one of Granlund or Haula on a cheap short-term deal.

The longer they're out there, the greater the possibility of one of them signing a deal like that with somebody. The cap's tight for most teams and there are only so many chairs once the music stops.

Could you imagine a lucid moment where JR gets either of these guys for a 1 yr deal for around 2M...than he dumps ZAR for a late pick.

Oops I slipped off into dream land. Sorry that was a ridiculous idea. No way we could replace ZARs defensive metrics with the 9 bottom 6 players we currently roster.

 

[Flying Dego]

I think a lot of Teddy’s play making was wasted on Tanev and ZAR and the second we put Hornqvist on that line when ZAR went down they looked very good. I think McCann can fit that role.

I like the idea of McCann with Bleuger-Tanev. More skill and speed. Could be a real pain in the ass 3rd line for teams to play against.

 

[Darren McCord]

Yeah, I never got why some on this board were down with Zucker. Sure, it was definitely a minority opinion, but Zucker is basically exactly what 99% of people here want out of a top-6 winger for Crosby and Malkin. He's pretty similar of a player to Guentzel, who's the best winger (in terms of both ability and fit) not named Hossa that the Penguins have had in the last 15 years.

Zucker's probably about the 4th or 5th best winger the Penguins have had in the Crosby and Malkin era. Below Hossa, Guentzel and probably Kessel (but I could be swayed if you mention how Kessel didn't fit with Sid or Geno), but right on par with Kunitz.

Because Kunitz played forever people forget we acquired him when he was 29. He wasn't a young player. It blows my mind looking back in hindsight. Zucker is actually a year younger than Kunitz when we acquired him. He could still have his best years ahead.

Kunitz best years were 31 - 34

 

[Tom Hanks]

The topic I was responding to said we won all our Cups with the 3 scoring line model and that was not true. That 2017 team won with our weakest group of defenseman not any Pens Cup teams and only 2 scoring lines. The year before Kessel played on the 3rd line but 2017 playoffs Kessel played with Malkin. The Pens won the Cup on big efforts from the top 4 forwards. The next highest forward was Kunitz with 11 playoff points and he also was in the top 6.

The bottom line is McCann, Jankowski, Tanev, Poulin, Blueger, and others can provide as much offense as those forwards 5 through 12 did. In fact I bet our 5, 6, and 7 forwards could out perform what that group did.

The 2017 cup style should not be the goal to emulate. We got outshot and out chanced. We had players playing through tough injuries Dumoulin (hands), Hornqvist (broken fingers), Schultz (cracked ribs) and Hagelin (broken fibula).

Our stars had to do the scoring and the rest just had to hang on. Murray and Fleury had save percentages of .937 and .924 respectively.

It was a huge effort from everyone involved and much respect to that cup win through all the adversity but we’ve had 2 sweepings and 2 goals in 8 games from forwards outside the top 6 ATOI. We still have 5 of those forwards from the Montreal series.

 

[SEALBound]

Who on that line is the one making plays and passing the puck? Because that's not really McCann's, Tanev's or Jankowski's specialty. I'm fine with any of those 3 on L3 (along with several other of our bottom 6 guys)... just not really a big fan of them all together on the line. And sadly with Simon leaving, that applies to most of our bottom 6 players.

I'm more then fine having one bottom 6 line that you know isn't going to score a lot of goals. We had that last season in Reese, TB and Tanev, and it was fine. But having two such lines? Not really a fan of that. Maybe the on ice result is better then what it looks like on paper... but I'm not going to hold my breath on that.

While I don't disagree, I think at some point we just have to depend on 3 bottom-6 NHL players to make it work. We know Tanev is the speedy forechecker, McCann is a shooter, Jank is a jack-of-all-trades from what I see (though not particularly good at anything). I think they can all skate well enough, shoot well enough, and pass well enough to make it work. Not sure if there's going to be "jobs" on these bottom 6 lines.

1. It gives separation between the person complaining and the person hearing it. Adding in a middle man allows things to be tailored without having the emotion involved.

2. It allows for things to be anonymous if needed, while also allowing Daley to get the full issue of player X's frustrations, while being able to ask questions but not have to defend decisions made.

Really it depends on the players and the coach as to whether it's something that's actually a need or not. But seeing how he's not someone that the players have to use as a middle man between the players and the coach, but only if they choose to do so... what is the harm?

My gut tells me there are two goals: 1. Daley is a sounding board between the stars and Sullivan. Malkin can't go vent to Sullivan in productive ways. We know there's a bit of a strained relationship there. Sullivan is the coach...but Malkin is one of the legacy franchise players. He's earned more of a say than a guy like Rust. It's just the way it is. So I assume part of Daley's role will be to act as a medium between star players and the coach. 2. Sometimes young guys need a mentor. There's value in having a sounding board available to vent to or to seek guidance from. I think I would find it hard to go to Sid for "advice". While Sid is a god, I don't think his approach would be all that relatable. It's like asking Hemmingway "how do I poetry better?" or asking Mario "how do I knife through guys like you do?" That's not a knock on Sid though. Sometimes there's comfort in going to a guy like Cullen or Daley to ask questions to.

 

[KrisLetAngry]

I like the idea of McCann with Bleuger-Tanev. More skill and speed. Could be a real pain in the ass 3rd line for teams to play against.

I like this especially since McCann and Tanev get paid the most in the bottom 6. They should be used the most.

 

[Gurglesons]

My gut tells me there are two goals: 1. Daley is a sounding board between the stars and Sullivan. Malkin can't go vent to Sullivan in productive ways. We know there's a bit of a strained relationship there. Sullivan is the coach...but Malkin is one of the legacy franchise players. He's earned more of a say than a guy like Rust. It's just the way it is. So I assume part of Daley's role will be to act as a medium between star players and the coach. 2. Sometimes young guys need a mentor. There's value in having a sounding board available to vent to or to seek guidance from. I think I would find it hard to go to Sid for "advice". While Sid is a god, I don't think his approach would be all that relatable. It's like asking Hemmingway "how do I poetry better?" or asking Mario "how do I knife through guys like you do?" That's not a knock on Sid though. Sometimes there's comfort in going to a guy like Cullen or Daley to ask questions to.

If there is a strained relationship between the forward who just put up one of his best career seasons and is doing everything the staff has asked him in terms of playing a complete game and the coach who just lost two playoff series because he insisted on sticking with his guys, it is pretty obvious where we are.

Which is funny, because this reminds me of the pathetic way we strung Bylsma along when JR came in instead of you know. Just having a conversation with him and firing him.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

Daley's job is basically to be Sullivan's like... human side capable of communicating and working out problems?

Well that's... rather telling.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don't think it's really surprising that a Tortorella disciple ended up a similar personality to Tortorella

Idk, I view hiring Daley for this role to be similar to the Penguins hiring Martin to help Bylsma in 2013. If you have a good coach, you're better off trying to add supporting pieces that help address the flaws of your coach over just firing them. In Bylsma's case, it turned out he wasn't a good coach and was only carried by Crosby and Malkin. In Sullivan's case, I'm more inclined to think he's a legitimately good coach, just with flaws. He's in the same boat as Tortorella, and I imagine Columbus has some supporting pieces with Tortorella to help address some of his flaws.

 

[SEALBound]

Yeah, so just fire the coach. I guess they are hoping for a Q like turnaround circa 2013.

No. HR isn’t there to vent and any issue with co-workers or job performance that isn’t a violation of policy, state law, or federal law would be directed to speak to the manager. And then I'd go around and bring the issue up to the manager and say deal with it. That's what a manager is paid to do. Manage.

If Sullivan can’t realize his star players shouldn’t be thrown the anchor of JJ. f*** man, pretty obvious what the plan is there. Sullivan is the coach. His job is to coach and manage egos. If he can't do that, why is he the coach?

If employees are consistently needing to "vent" to me. I start questioning either the employee or manager's performance. Because people shouldn't need to "vent". They should speak directly to each other, because that is how solutions are created. Managers should take feedback and provide solutions or provide a reason for why there are no solutions.

It is obvious that either..

# 1. The players don't trust Sullivan enough to explain their issues to him. This is a huge problem. Fire Sullivan or put the players in their place.

# 2. Sullivan is hearing the players and the issues and not reacting to them and specifically thinking he knows what is better. This is a huge problem. Fire Sullivan or put the players in their place and accept the consequences.

The third option is we've created a place holder for these conversations and instead of having direct communication we are opening up the floor for a player that was just on the team to be a go between for the actual management team when in reality he's just going to be a tattle tale. Which in reality all HR is when these issues are brought up to us.

Issues with co-workers, managers, work performance, career path, or dissatisfaction with your job are not issues to bring up to HR and any HR professional would tell you that. We aren't managers, we are consultants that advise the company on compliance, not on hurt feelings.

Sid, Geno and Letang are big boys. If the organization doesn't feel they can talk to their coaches this a conversation that needs to be have with all four in the room. Not by putting one of them in another room with a former player and then try to have that player regurgitate it to management. That gives me a huge pause about the organizational structure and accountability in this organization especially with what we've seen in terms of players like Jack Johnson versus players like Phil Kessel, Ian Cole, Daniel Spring, etc.

1. I never said it was HR's job to be the person someone vented to. I just can't fathom a HR person who isn't aware that people need that and that sometimes it can't be their manager. If you don't think that doesn't happen, that's some next level detachment from reality because it 100% does. The world isn't as black and white as "you have a problem? Go to your manager. Oh your problem is with your manager? Go to your manager (or well I guess your manager needs to be fired)". That line of thinking tends to be why people don't like HR regardless of their actual "role" or purpose in a company.

2. You should know that there are differences in "vents". I have employees who hate to do timely expense reports and one that does a crap job on analytical reports that go to clients and serve as my company records. I am on them A LOT. They know it needs to be done. They've been trained. I think, for the most part, they understand why I get on them. Doesn't stop them from bitching about it to each other. Doesn't mean what I'm doing is wrong. Doesn't mean I'm a bad owner/manager because 99% of the time, there is no issue. So you have to take the context of the vent into consideration to determine if there is actually an issue or if the person is just mad about something. There is indeed a difference. I used to vent to my wife about regulatory inspectors or auditors if something went wrong. They were there to do their job. I was mad at them but there wasn't an issue that suggests that my job was being done wrong, nor was theirs's. In any workplace or on any team, there's going to be friction. Some friction is healthy and expected. If there's no pushing either way, someone (or both parties) are not doing their job. And just because there is friction, doesn't mean one side isn't doing their job.

What if the entire bottom 6 was bitching at Sullivan that Malkin should be a 4th line wing? Does Sullivan's dismissal of this complaint or vent indicate that there is an objective issue? Like I said, there needs to be context to the venting and complaints. Having a middle man like Daley to bounce things off of is valuable in maintaining those relationships or even bettering them. I don't seem him as an arbitrator in a legal battle. He's filling a role that perhaps we don't have.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I don't think it's really surprising that a Tortorella disciple ended up a similar personality to Tortorella

Idk, I view hiring Daley for this role to be similar to the Penguins hiring Martin to help Bylsma in 2013. If you have a good coach, you're better off trying to add supporting pieces that help address the flaws of your coach over just firing them. In Bylsma's case, it turned out he wasn't a good coach and was only carried by Crosby and Malkin. In Sullivan's case, I'm more inclined to think he's a legitimately good coach, just with flaws. He's in the same boat as Tortorella, and I imagine Columbus has some supporting pieces with Tortorella to help address some of his flaws.

I get your point but Torts hasn't won anything in many years, now. And while more casual fans seem to love his asinine outbursts and sparring with the media it's more a distraction than anything even if he has a great mind for the game. When it comes to personalities like that... rather just move on. Though your point about him (Sully) coming from that same stock is a very good one.