Confirmed with Link: Sully extended through 22-23 season

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Ron Cook? Really?

Yes, he published a piece on the same exact day. Same day Madden started going in.

 

[edog37]

If you want to argue "he's laid the foundation", ok have at it

But you cannot use "he's never had a losing season" because that's been debunked with Bylsma

Since Sully has come on as coach, do you feel the team has played better or worse in those 4 seasons?
Do you feel most players have improved or regressed during his tenure?
Do you feel players have bought into his system or scoffed at it?

I've said it before that I think Sully is a good coach. But he's not the fit for this team/players anymore. Every coach has an expiration date and Sully's team smells like spoiled milk

No one has provided any concrete evidence or logic train proving Sullivan isn't the fit. But that isn't the right question being asked anyway. The right question to ask is who gives you the best chance to compete for a Cup. Do you want a guy with a proven track record (& the only coach in the league who has won back to back Cups in the salary cap era) or some unknown quantity? And if you want the unknown quantity, why? Since a lot of guys are on here advocating for Sullivan's removal, go ahead & defend your choice from a hockey perspective.

Now to answer your questions...

In the past 4 seasons, it's no question the team has played better. They won 2 Cups. They haven't gotten below 100 points the entire tenure. Short of winning 4 cups in a row (something that hasn't happened since the 80s Islanders), what realistic expectations do you have for this team? This is why I cringe when fans get on here & blame the coach for not having a dynasty run on par with the Oilers/Islanders/Canadiens models.

The players have played better. What did they do prior to him arriving vs now? Back then, we were faced with the real possibility the Crosby/Malkin era would be defined with one Cup win.

Given the success of the team over the past 4 years, they have clearly bought into the system.

So what went wrong last year? Performance issues. Muzz had a down year. Kessel/Malkin had a combined -44. These are your top line players & that just can't happen. Johnson signing was clearly a miss, but his limitations were well known before arrival. He played better as the year went on, but his ceiling wasn't very high to begin with. Letang had a great regular season & then completely fell apart in the playoffs. Note these are not system issues but performance issues. That's on the players, not the coaching staff.

 

[Beauner]

Yes, he published a piece on the same exact day. Same day Madden started going in.

if you're pointing at Ron Cook to support any argument you're trying to make, other than "Ron Cook should never be taken seriously", then your argument isn't all that great to begin with

 

[Shady Machine]

If we can take anything from this off-season/TDL, it seems to be Sully re-asserting some kind of input or control on what the roster looks like. Danev, Kahun, McCann are all 100% Sully kinds of players.

Agreed and I'm not even saying it was the wrong move. If Sully is your coach moving forward, get him players he wants. I question the Kessel for Galchenyuk trade falling under that mantra other than Sully and Kessel's relationship not meshing and time to move on

 

[Shady Machine]

He has a play style clash with 90% of coaches. They don’t like players that don’t give full effort. Every sport you can say that.

Sure and Galchenyuk hasn't really been a coach's dream either.

 

[edog37]

Being a hardass never works in the long run. There’s no coaching method that works in the long run. The athletes of today are not the ones you think they used to be. Things are really different. My Way or the Highway doesn’t work. Catering to successful players does.

No they are not different. Players will always chaff at authority. Been the same since sports were invented. The only difference is that coaches now don't bag skate teams anymore. And show me a successful metric where catering to players has resulted in dynasty runs. Show me one example. Bylsma catered to players, EJ catered to players. How did that work out?

But let's look at historical examples:

Montreal: Scotty Bowman
NY Islanders: Al Arbour
Edmonton: Glen Sather

None of these guys catered to players, instead they demanded accountability. As our core ages, relying on talent alone isn't going to happen. You need structure & discipline. Sullivan provides both.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

No one has provided any concrete evidence or logic train proving Sullivan isn't the fit. But that isn't the right question being asked anyway. The right question to ask is who gives you the best chance to compete for a Cup. Do you want a guy with a proven track record (& the only coach in the league who has won back to back Cups in the salary cap era) or some unknown quantity? And if you want the unknown quantity, why? Since a lot of guys are on here advocating for Sullivan's removal, go ahead & defend your choice from a hockey perspective.

Now to answer your questions...

In the past 4 seasons, it's no question the team has played better. They won 2 Cups. They haven't gotten below 100 points the entire tenure. Short of winning 4 cups in a row (something that hasn't happened since the 80s Islanders), what realistic expectations do you have for this team? This is why I cringe when fans get on here & blame the coach for not having a dynasty run on par with the Oilers/Islanders/Canadiens models.

The players have played better. What did they do prior to him arriving vs now? Back then, we were faced with the real possibility the Crosby/Malkin era would be defined with one Cup win.

Given the success of the team over the past 4 years, they have clearly bought into the system.

So what went wrong last year? Performance issues. Muzz had a down year. Kessel/Malkin had a combined -44. These are your top line players & that just can't happen. Johnson signing was clearly a miss, but his limitations were well known before arrival. He played better as the year went on, but his ceiling wasn't very high to begin with. Letang had a great regular season & then completely fell apart in the playoffs. Note these are not system issues but performance issues. That's on the players, not the coaching staff.

If you would have said that Mike Sullivan was going to lead us to back to back cups the day he was hired, then you're a liar
If you would have said Dan Bylsma is going to beat the mighty Detroit Red Wings 4 months later, you're also a liar
Point is, Sully was a retread coach at that moment. Dan Bylsma's claim to fame was writing a few books

Successful coaches can come from anywhere. The only true miss you can say under Mario's tenure was Johnston, so it's not like this franchise doesn't know how to pick the right horse
But this franchise fails to know when the horse needs to be put out to pasture. They should have canned Bylsma after the Philly debacle, he lasted 1 more year
Johnston should've been fired in the offseason, again the signs were brutally obvious

Now we have people finally figuring out Sully has lost the room. Would not surprise me if 1 year from today we have a new coach

 

[HandshakeLine]

Agreed and I'm not even saying it was the wrong move. If Sully is your coach moving forward, get him players he wants. I question the Kessel for Galchenyuk trade falling under that mantra other than Sully and Kessel's relationship not meshing and time to move on

There's a lot of questions about Galchenyuk, but from all accounts, "doing what the coaches want without complaint" isn't one of them. I don't think Sully will necessarily like Sasha, but it won't be because Galchenyuk isn't willing to try to play his game.

 

[BHD]

If you would have said that Mike Sullivan was going to lead us to back to back cups the day he was hired, then you're a liar
If you would have said Dan Bylsma is going to beat the mighty Detroit Red Wings 4 months later, you're also a liar
Point is, Sully was a retread coach at that moment. Dan Bylsma's claim to fame was writing a few books

Successful coaches can come from anywhere. The only true miss you can say under Mario's tenure was Johnston, so it's not like this franchise doesn't know how to pick the right horse
But this franchise fails to know when the horse needs to be put out to pasture. They should have canned Bylsma after the Philly debacle, he lasted 1 more year
Johnston should've been fired in the offseason, again the signs were brutally obvious

Now we have people finally figuring out Sully has lost the room. Would not surprise me if 1 year from today we have a new coach

I don't see him lasting longer than Year 2 of the contract. Either the losing (i.e., underachieving in the postseason) will lead both sides to 'mutually' part ways by Year 2 or Year 3, or the players will prompt a change before then.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

No they are not different. Players will always chaff at authority. Been the same since sports were invented. The only difference is that coaches now don't bag skate teams anymore. And show me a successful metric where catering to players has resulted in dynasty runs. Show me one example. Bylsma catered to players, EJ catered to players. How did that work out?

But let's look at historical examples:

Montreal: Scotty Bowman
NY Islanders: Al Arbour
Edmonton: Glen Sather

None of these guys catered to players, instead they demanded accountability. As our core ages, relying on talent alone isn't going to happen. You need structure & discipline. Sullivan provides both.

All of these examples are over 30 years old. Things aren't what they were 30+ years ago. I've already told you this. Scotty Bowman coached a capless Red Wings for eight years and didn't have a dynasty. Now the cap means they won't exist. Things aren't what they were. You need to adapt.

 

[ZeroPucksGiven]

I don't see him lasting longer than Year 2 of the contract. Either the losing (i.e., underachieving in the postseason) will lead both sides to 'mutually' part ways by Year 2 or Year 3, or the players will prompt a change before then.

And there's another 2-3 years (or the end) of Sid/Geno's primes wasted by poor coaching/strategy

 

[Andy99]

Yes, he published a piece on the same exact day. Same day Madden started going in.

Seriously people...anybody quoting Ron Cook for anything hockey related—except for an article on columnists who are clueless about hockey—needs to stop ASAP...

he has zero connections and knows less than nothing about hockey

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

I don't see him lasting longer than Year 2 of the contract. Either the losing (i.e., underachieving in the postseason) will lead both sides to 'mutually' part ways by Year 2 or Year 3, or the players will prompt a change before then.

He's run out of players to run out of town so I'm going with the latter.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Seriously people...anybody quoting Ron Cook for anything hockey related—except for an article on columnists who are clueless about hockey—needs to stop ASAP...

he has zero connections and knows less than nothing about hockey

I'm merely stating the fact that the same day Tocchet was named head coach he wrote and article about the Penguins trading Kessel, the same day Madden and others started to beat that drum. That's not a coincidence.

 

[BHD]

And there's another 2-3 years (or the end) of Sid/Geno's primes wasted by poor coaching/strategy

I don't think people give him enough credit as a strategist. However, it doesn't matter if the players tune him out/he runs them out of town. Managing people is part of coaching, That is one area (and I'm arm chairing this) where Sullivan might need to adjust.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

if you're pointing at Ron Cook to support any argument you're trying to make, other than "Ron Cook should never be taken seriously", then your argument isn't all that great to begin with

I'm pointing to it as one of the examples of the "Trade Kessel" drum beginning to beat as soon as Tocchet was out the door. He was far from alone.

 

[froods]

I'm pointing to it as one of the examples of the "Trade Kessel" drum beginning to beat as soon as Tocchet was out the door. He was far from alone.

And my point is that 2 other coaches in 2 other organizations have had the same problems with Phil. It is not a Sullivan /Kessel issue. It is a Kessel/Head Coach issue.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

And my point is that 2 other coaches in 2 other organizations have had the same problems with Phil. It is not a Sullivan /Kessel issue. It is a Kessel/Head Coach issue.

I've never disagreed, but it seemed that Sullivan has had his number from the start and he's forced him out needlessly without any real effort to try to communicate or get to know Phil to have some sort of connection that would improve things. As have other coaches. It's because Phil is fine with who he is and how he performs and doesn't feel the need to do much different. It's worked for him to the tune of two Cups and a silver medal. His way is fine. Let talent be talent. The control freak coaches are the problem.

As others have said, and rightly pointed out, he's a fine coach. But he lacks severely in personal communication. He's run three players out of town because he didn't like them and didn't want to/didn't know how to communicate with them.

Dupuis pointed this problem out. Tocchet on a podcast pointed this problem out. It's a Sullivan problem. It's not unique to him but right now we're dealing with Sullivan.

 

[BHD]

He's run three players out of town because he didn't like them and didn't want to/didn't know how to communicate with them.

Kessel, Cole, and who else? Im blanking.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Kessel, Cole, and who else? Im blanking.

Sprong. You could argue Reaves as well.

 

[Ogrezilla]

I don't see him lasting longer than Year 2 of the contract. Either the losing (i.e., underachieving in the postseason) will lead both sides to 'mutually' part ways by Year 2 or Year 3, or the players will prompt a change before then.

Or maybe we win?

 

[Ogrezilla]

Sprong. You could argue Reaves as well.

He ran Sprong out of town by using our worst wing as if he was our worst wing. Oh boy are we reaching at this point

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

He ran Sprong out of town by using our worst wing as if he was our worst wing. Oh boy are we reaching at this point.

Rutherford said he'd be getting a lot of playing time last year. Sullivan didn't give him a lot of playing time. He forced Rutherford's hand. It worked out, I'm not saying otherwise. But Sullivan absolutely forced him out. He forced Rutherford's hand with Reaves as well.

 

[Ogrezilla]

Rutherford said he'd be getting a lot of playing time last year. Sullivan didn't give him a lot of playing time. He forced Rutherford's hand. It worked out, I'm not saying otherwise. But Sullivan absolutely forced him out. He forced Rutherford's hand with Reaves as well.

Because he sucked.

 

[Mario_is_BACK!!]

Or maybe we win?

It's very easy to have sincere and honest doubts about this based on what happened last year and what's happened this off season.