Speculation: The Evolution of Dan Bylsma-Too Little Too Late?

[ColePens]

I hate Fleury and hope to see Bylsma fired this off season.

The hate on Bylsma this game is preposterous.

Any other time our power play or penalty kill would go up against a team he would stubbornly use the same line-up no matter what. See last year's regular season and the Flyers series plus Boston series in the playoffs. He actually changed his PP which accounted for us coming back from a 3 -1 deficit.

He played a line-up that mostly consisted of players that we as a forum have been begging for aside from Bortuzzo and Megna. In my estimation Bortuzzo should be in a 7D rotation and if we have to suffer through some Tanner Glass, I'm happy as long as we are winning.

This team has warts, that is clear. It doesn't mean that Malkin and Crosby can't put this team on their backs and run us into the finals. I guess the overaching sentiment is if that happens all those warts aren't examined, but let us at least see. Babcock plays his Clearys, Quenneville his Handzuss. Every coach plays favorites with certain veterans. Lets be happy we won. Plus, we capitalized on our chances which we haven't done for multiple playoff games.

My problem with this board is the minority is speaking for the majority. There are A LOT of great conversations discussing x's and o's, usage of players, schemes, adjustments, etc.

It's so easy to ignore the naysayers who just thrive on negativity. We see people like that every day. The ignore function is the best function on this site!

I think you propose solid arguments, I just wish people would enjoy some of the great discussion instead of worrying about the few negatrons.

 

[IcedCapp]

My problem with this board is the minority is speaking for the majority. There are A LOT of great conversations discussing x's and o's, usage of players, schemes, adjustments, etc.

It's so easy to ignore the naysayers who just thrive on negativity. We see people like that every day. The ignore function is the best function on this site!

I think you propose solid arguments, I just wish people would enjoy some of the great discussion instead of worrying about the few negatrons.

It goes both ways

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

In regards to a thread like this specifically, I also think it's misguided for people to cry "too much negativity all the time about Bylsma's coaching!" when the entire discussion is about whether or not he's actually evolved as a coach.

You can't have a discussion about Bylsma or his evolution by ignoring any areas of his coaching that have not evolved.

 

[Rico Fatastic]

I'm really tired so hopefully this makes sense, but let me try to explain why what you're arguing isn't actually the issue:

1) People thrash Bylsma for never easing a player back into the lineup.

2) People thrash Bylsma on a nightly basis for his usage of Evgeni Malkin.

3) The amount of time Malkin received last night was not out of line with what he'd normally receive.

4) There is nothing to suggest that Malkin's injury/recovery had any impact on Malkin's ice time.

5) There is nothing to suggest that Bylsma's stance on handling players post-injury has changed.

Methinks you are off the mark a bit, sir. Particularly with regards to #3. In the regular season this year, Malkin was second on the team among forwards, playing 20:03 per game. This is almost a minute more than Kunitz, who was third; and almost two minutes less than Crosby (PK time and d-zone faceoffs likely account for most of the difference). In the playoffs since Bylsma took over in 2009, Malkin has either been #1 or #2 behind Crosby in ice time per game every single year (except 2011, of course, when both were injured); and in fact, he averaged over 20 minutes per game each year.

Now I don't know the extent to which overtime might effect his TOI numbers, but the point remains that throughout the regular season this year and the playoffs since Bylsma took over, Malkin has had either the most or second most time on ice among forwards on the team; and last night he was only 4th. Now I'm obviously not a mind-reader, so i can't say for sure that it was because Malkin was coming back from injury. But it's a reasonable assumption to make unless anyone wants to propose an alternate explanation.

 

[Gallatin]

In regards to a thread like this specifically, I also think it's misguided for people to cry "too much negativity all the time about Bylsma's coaching!" when the entire discussion is about whether or not he's actually evolved as a coach.

You can't have a discussion about Bylsma or his evolution by ignoring any areas of his coaching that have not evolved.

I agree Sid, it's all fair game, including the many issues still unaddressed by the staff such as Gladams over Megna/Z, in-game adjustments, their handling of Depres, team-wide discipline issues, the lack of structure in the neutral zone, zone breakouts, and zone entries.

It's a long list and all up for grabs.

I was just surprised in game one by some positive changes the like of which we rarely see with this staff. Maybe they will keep adding more issues to the "addressed" pile. And maybe they won't....

 

[Fordy]

Methinks you are off the mark a bit, sir. Particularly with regards to #3. In the regular season this year, Malkin was second on the team among forwards, playing 20:03 per game. This is almost a minute more than Kunitz, who was third; and almost two minutes less than Crosby (PK time and d-zone faceoffs likely account for most of the difference). In the playoffs since Bylsma took over in 2009, Malkin has either been #1 or #2 behind Crosby in ice time per game every single year (except 2011, of course, when both were injured); and in fact, he averaged over 20 minutes per game each year.

Now I don't know the extent to which overtime might effect his TOI numbers, but the point remains that throughout the regular season this year and the playoffs since Bylsma took over, Malkin has had either the most or second most time on ice among forwards on the team; and last night he was only 4th. Now I'm obviously not a mind-reader, so i can't say for sure that it was because Malkin was coming back from injury. But it's a reasonable assumption to make unless anyone wants to propose an alternate explanation.

the entire first half of this year when ic posted the ice time, malkin was ROUTINELY behind DUPUIS. it was a rarity that he sniffed the second most ice time.

 

[themethod7]

Not only that, but as mentioned last the other night, he only had 10:21 total through 2 periods (less than 10 at even strength) and needed to play over 7 minutes in the 3rd just to get over 17. Penalties over first 2 periods were 3-2 in favor of CBJ so even factoring in special teams, less than 10 minutes of ES TOI over the first two periods of a close playoff games for one of the best players of the world is unacceptable.

 

[alcanalz]

the entire first half of this year when ic posted the ice time, malkin was ROUTINELY behind DUPUIS. it was a rarity that he sniffed the second most ice time.

Time on ice per game:

Pascal Dupuis - 17:41

Evgeni Malkin - 20:03

 

[DegenX]

Methinks you are off the mark a bit, sir. Particularly with regards to #3. In the regular season this year, Malkin was second on the team among forwards, playing 20:03 per game. This is almost a minute more than Kunitz, who was third; and almost two minutes less than Crosby (PK time and d-zone faceoffs likely account for most of the difference). In the playoffs since Bylsma took over in 2009, Malkin has either been #1 or #2 behind Crosby in ice time per game every single year (except 2011, of course, when both were injured); and in fact, he averaged over 20 minutes per game each year.

Now I don't know the extent to which overtime might effect his TOI numbers, but the point remains that throughout the regular season this year and the playoffs since Bylsma took over, Malkin has had either the most or second most time on ice among forwards on the team; and last night he was only 4th. Now I'm obviously not a mind-reader, so i can't say for sure that it was because Malkin was coming back from injury. But it's a reasonable assumption to make unless anyone wants to propose an alternate explanation.

ES TOI/G for the regular season, Geno finished with 15:27, just a hair ahead of Duper who averaged 15:26 (nhl.com/ice/playerstats)

Wednesday's game, his ES TOI was 15:21 (nhl.com/ice/playerstats)

So, no he's not off the mark.

 

[themethod7]

the entire first half of this year when ic posted the ice time, malkin was ROUTINELY behind DUPUIS. it was a rarity that he sniffed the second most ice time.

Time on ice per game:

Pascal Dupuis - 17:41

Evgeni Malkin - 20:03

I think it's probably closer than alcanalz stats look, but maybe not enough for Malkin to be "routinely" behind Dupuis. Grabbed a random 10 game stretch in October and found them pretty much even, with Malkin getting more minutes in 6 out of 10 games, but their averages skewed a bit - Malkin had 2 23+ minute games (Dupuis' highest was 21) while Dupuis had 2 games under 17 minutes (Malkin's lowest was 18):

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
OCT3|19:10| 19:28
OCT5| 18:43 |18:26
OCT8| 19:34 |18:43
OCT11|17:25| 18:59
OCT12| 20:02 |19:05
OCT15| 19:12 |19:02
OCT17|16:07| 20:19
OCT19|21:32| 23:22
OCT21|16:31| 24:52
OCT25|20:23| 22:45

 

[Fordy]

Time on ice per game:

Pascal Dupuis - 17:41

Evgeni Malkin - 20:03

i'm not talking average ice time this year

 

[Rico Fatastic]

ES TOI/G for the regular season, Geno finished with 15:27, just a hair ahead of Duper who averaged 15:26 (nhl.com/ice/playerstats)

Wednesday's game, his ES TOI was 15:21 (nhl.com/ice/playerstats)

So, no he's not off the mark.

Who said anything about even strength? The goalposts appear to be moving all of a sudden.

Not only that, but as mentioned last the other night, he only had 10:21 total through 2 periods (less than 10 at even strength) and needed to play over 7 minutes in the 3rd just to get over 17. Penalties over first 2 periods were 3-2 in favor of CBJ so even factoring in special teams, less than 10 minutes of ES TOI over the first two periods of a close playoff games for one of the best players of the world is unacceptable.

My original point stands. We whine when Bylsma plays a guy too much his first game back from injury; we whine when he doesn't play a guy enough his first game back from injury. If we hit game 4 or 5 and Malkin is still 4th in ice time among forwards, then you'll all have a legitimate gripe. But until then, we can perhaps keep the double standards to a minimum, eh?

 

[IcedCapp]

Who said anything about even strength? The goalposts appear to be moving all of a sudden.


My original point stands. We whine when Bylsma plays a guy too much his first game back from injury; we whine when he doesn't play a guy enough his first game back from injury. If we hit game 4 or 5 and Malkin is still 4th in ice time among forwards, then you'll all have a legitimate gripe. But until then, we can perhaps keep the double standards to a minimum, eh?

What goal posts are being moved so I can try to remedy the situation?

Malkin's ES time was essentially the same as it had been all year, suggesting that his total TOI fluctuates based on the number of PP opportunities (and how long each of those PP opportunities) the Penguins have.

I do not believe there's anything to suggest that Malkin's time was lower based on injury rehab.

It was only 2 minutes less than Sidney Crosby, which is compares favorably to the regular season difference between the two players.

 

[alcanalz]

i'm not talking average ice time this year

I know but it's hard to take a random sample, like themethod7 was kind enough to provide, as a huge deal (while Malkin still is one the ice more than Dupuis), particularly when the games are at the beginning of a season for a contending team in an Olympic year.

Malkin's always been on the ice more than Dupuis, usually by a couple minutes at least.

It's been one game and Geno's first game back from injury and now he's coming in to the playoffs. No need to jump down DB's throat for everything.

 

[Fordy]

I think it's probably closer than alcanalz stats look, but maybe not enough for Malkin to be "routinely" behind Dupuis. Grabbed a random 10 game stretch in October and found them pretty much even, with Malkin getting more minutes in 6 out of 10 games, but their averages skewed a bit - Malkin had 2 23+ minute games (Dupuis' highest was 21) while Dupuis had 2 games under 17 minutes (Malkin's lowest was 18):

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
OCT3|19:10| 19:28
OCT5| 18:43 |18:26
OCT8| 19:34 |18:43
OCT11|17:25| 18:59
OCT12| 20:02 |19:05
OCT15| 19:12 |19:02
OCT17|16:07| 20:19
OCT19|21:32| 23:22
OCT21|16:31| 24:52
OCT25|20:23| 22:45

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
Oct 28| 20:45 |18:22
Oct 30| 21:30 |20:18
Nov 1| 19:09 |19:00
Nov 3|18:22| 20:50
Nov 6|dupuis|injury
Nov 9|17:32| 21:06
Nov 13|17:54| 22:01
Nov 15| 17:38 |17:44
Nov 16|17:41| 19:18
Nov 18|17:03| 21:22
Nov 20| 20:53 |18:49
Nov 22| 19:58 |16:46

let's move the goalposts for real. i do not think dupuis and malkin should be trading the second spot in ice time. i'm sure this looks different at ES too, and not in a good way

 

[Sideline]

I know but it's hard to take a random sample, like themethod7 was kind enough to provide, as a huge deal (while Malkin still is one the ice more than Dupuis), particularly when the games are at the beginning of a season for a contending team in an Olympic year.

Malkin's always been on the ice more than Dupuis, usually by a couple minutes at least.

It's been one game and Geno's first game back from injury and now he's coming in to the playoffs. No need to jump down DB's throat for everything.

I'd be more inclined to buy this line of reasoning if Sid had been up around 22 or 23 minutes. The game was never at the point where it made sense to rest Sid, but he didn't even crack 20 minutes. Bylsma is a poor bench manager.

 

[alcanalz]

I'd be more inclined to buy this line of reasoning if Sid had been up around 22 or 23 minutes. The game was never at the point where it made sense to rest Sid, but he didn't even crack 20 minutes. Bylsma is a poor bench manager.

Well you'll see what you want to see then. Enough reasons to be angry with DB instead of nitpicking over a minute or two (of the teams that didn't go to OT, Sid and Neal are 1+2 in ES ToI, by the way).

 

[Sideline]

Well you'll see what you want to see then. Enough reasons to be angry with DB instead of nitpicking over a minute or two (of the teams that didn't go to OT, Sid and Neal are 1+2 in ES ToI, by the way).

And the games that didn't go to overtime were blowouts. So you'd expect guys to be rested in those games.

 

[DegenX]

Who said anything about even strength? The goalposts appear to be moving all of a sudden.


My original point stands. We whine when Bylsma plays a guy too much his first game back from injury; we whine when he doesn't play a guy enough his first game back from injury. If we hit game 4 or 5 and Malkin is still 4th in ice time among forwards, then you'll all have a legitimate gripe. But until then, we can perhaps keep the double standards to a minimum, eh?

Why would you be looking at total time on ice for two players when one doesn't PK and the other does? That's why pretty much every conversation we have about ice time has been about even strength ... my bad, I thought that it was just understood at this point.

 

[Rico Fatastic]

What goal posts are being moved so I can try to remedy the situation?

Malkin's ES time was essentially the same as it had been all year, suggesting that his total TOI fluctuates based on the number of PP opportunities (and how long each of those PP opportunities) the Penguins have.

I do not believe there's anything to suggest that Malkin's time was lower based on injury rehab.

It was only 2 minutes less than Sidney Crosby, which is compares favorably to the regular season difference between the two players.

That's one explanation. But it doesn't address why Malkin was 4th in ice time (both overall and at even strength) on Wednesday but was 2nd in both categories during the regular season.

let's move the goalposts for real. i do not think dupuis and malkin should be trading the second spot in ice time. i'm sure this looks different at ES too, and not in a good way

Hey, remember when Pascal Dupuis was playing? He sure did get an awful lot of icetime, huh? But he's not playing right now, is he? So his ice time's not really terribly relevant, is it? If we're trying to say Bylsma has his favorites and he gives them way too much ice time, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees. The issue at hand is whether or not Bylsma doesn't give Malkin enough ice time on account of him not grinding *****es down into fine enough of a powder. And while that may be very well be true, a single game is by no means a large enough sample size to say whether it was because of inadequate grinding or because it was his first game back from injury.

Why would you be looking at total time on ice for two players when one doesn't PK and the other does? That's why pretty much every conversation we have about ice time has been about even strength ... my bad, I thought that it was just understood at this point.

Because what I'm arguing has nothing to do with how much ice time Pascal Dupuis was getting 5 months ago. Total time on ice is the issue when it comes to giving a player some rest in a game. Pascal Dupuis got way too much ice time when he was playing. But that issue is completely independent of the question of why Malkin played 17 and a half minutes on Wednesday. The idea that Malkin didn't play much because Bylsma doesn't like him or whatever fits the "Bylsma is an idiot" narrative, so people are assuming that's the case. But rest following an injury is a perfectly valid explanation too, whether people want to admit it or not. And if we wait two or three games before rushing to judgement, we might actually be able to say one way or another with a halfway reasonable degree of certainty.

 

[DegenX]

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
Oct 28| 20:45 |18:22
Oct 30| 21:30 |20:18
Nov 1| 19:09 |19:00
Nov 3|18:22| 20:50
Nov 6|dupuis|injury
Nov 9|17:32| 21:06
Nov 13|17:54| 22:01
Nov 15| 17:38 |17:44
Nov 16|17:41| 19:18
Nov 18|17:03| 21:22
Nov 20| 20:53 |18:49
Nov 22| 19:58 |16:46

let's move the goalposts for real. i do not think dupuis and malkin should be trading the second spot in ice time. i'm sure this looks different at ES too, and not in a good way

Just for giggles, here's the ES breakdown for the month of October between Geno and Duper ...

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
10.3| 17:48 | 17:48
10.5|17:09|15:43
10.8|18:40|15:51
10.11|16:19|15:57
10.12|15:57|12:40
10.15|18:06|16:04
10.17| 11:35 |14:14
10.19|19:21|18:17
10.21| 13:03 |14:22
10.25|19:27|14:53
10.26|16:46|15:13
10.18|17:02|15:24
10.30|20:56|17:34

One game where they were even, and only two where Geno had more ES TOI.

 

[Fordy]

That's one explanation. But it doesn't address why Malkin was 4th in ice time (both overall and at even strength) on Wednesday but was 2nd in both categories during the regular season.


Hey, remember when Pascal Dupuis was playing? He sure did get an awful lot of icetime, huh? But he's not playing right now, is he? So his ice time's not really terribly relevant, is it? If we're trying to say Bylsma has his favorites and he gives them way too much ice time, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who disagrees. The issue at hand is whether or not Bylsma doesn't give Malkin enough ice time on account of him not grinding *****es down into fine enough of a powder. And while that may be very well be true, a single game is by no means a large enough sample size to say whether it was because of inadequate grinding or because it was his first game back from injury.


Because what I'm arguing has nothing to do with how much ice time Pascal Dupuis was getting 5 months ago. Total time on ice is the issue when it comes to giving a player some rest in a game. Pascal Dupuis got way too much ice time when he was playing. But that issue is completely independent of the question of why Malkin played 17 and a half minutes on Wednesday. The idea that Malkin didn't play much because Bylsma doesn't like him or whatever fits the "Bylsma is an idiot" narrative, so people are assuming that's the case. But rest following an injury is a perfectly valid explanation too, whether people want to admit it or not. And if we wait two or three games before rushing to judgement, we might actually be able to say one way or another with a halfway reasonable degree of certainty.

jesus christ i wasn't the one that brought it up.

 

[Fordy]

Just for giggles, here's the ES breakdown for the month of October between Geno and Duper ...

Date|Dupuis|Malkin
10.3| 17:48 | 17:48
10.5|17:09|15:43
10.8|18:40|15:51
10.11|16:19|15:57
10.12|15:57|12:40
10.15|18:06|16:04
10.17| 11:35 |14:14
10.19|19:21|18:17
10.21| 13:03 |14:22
10.25|19:27|14:53
10.26|16:46|15:13
10.18|17:02|15:24
10.30|20:56|17:34

One game where they were even, and only two where Geno had more ES TOI.

there we go

 

[Rico Fatastic]

jesus christ i wasn't the one that brought it up.

Yes, but you did make the grievous mistake of having the first post I happened to come to when looking for someone to quote about the Dupuis nonsense. And for the record, I'm actually putting forth a conscious effort to not be a condescending, sarcastic ass about this, but that is evidently not my strong suit. Maybe it's because I'm so irritated that you people are making me have to defend Dan Bylsma.

 

[DegenX]

Because what I'm arguing has nothing to do with how much ice time Pascal Dupuis was getting 5 months ago. Total time on ice is the issue when it comes to giving a player some rest in a game. Pascal Dupuis got way too much ice time when he was playing. But that issue is completely independent of the question of why Malkin played 17 and a half minutes on Wednesday. The idea that Malkin didn't play much because Bylsma doesn't like him or whatever fits the "Bylsma is an idiot" narrative, so people are assuming that's the case. But rest following an injury is a perfectly valid explanation too, whether people want to admit it or not. And if we wait two or three games before rushing to judgement, we might actually be able to say one way or another with a halfway reasonable degree of certainty.

OK, then disregard the information regarding Duper's ice time and just focus on Malkin's.

You can't look at total time on ice, because the Pens do not get the same number of power plays every game. Nor do all PP's go for the full time awarded.

When you looks at Geno's ES TOI, the amount of time he played on Wednesday is in line with his average for the season. So, there is every indication that he was not, in fact, being rested, but was in fact being given his usual amount of ES TOI.