letsgoalpens wrote:Mikey, I enjoy your posts and usually agree with you but what you wrote here sounds like somebody who is trying to convince themself that this move is okay. If your GM needs to stabilize your coach because he has lost control by giving him another contract then something is wrong.
Thank you. And this was my expected outcome, more or less. It's not so much about stabilizing the coach, it's about organizational stabilization. The team is emotionally fragile (looking around at this message board, it seems it is contagious...), and like I said about the loose threads, you don't want this whole thing to come unraveled. The mid-1950's Red Wings are a good example of this under Jack Adams. I won't go on a long history lesson here, but the patchwork lacked a lot of backing. It was a lot of greenbacks, not a lot of gold. And the patchworked snowballed upon itself and the holes widened, the team became more and more discontent and honestly, the franchise didn't really recover for decades...(Detroit Dead Things). Gordie Howe played in the NHL from 1946-1971 and then again in 1979-80. He won four Cups, all between 1950 and 1955. Once Adams began to tinker, the Wings became unstable, the earth under their feet crumbled and then everyone fell into the center of the earth when so-called, anti-estabilishment ragamuffin Ted Lindsay was moved to Chicago.
Extreme example? Totally. But when you have a lot of star power and maybe don't have that strong core leadership (Gordie, like Sid, was more of a lead by example type...he was actually quite soft-spoken, still is, God bless him), too much boat rocking or even the sight of choppy seas ahead can cause widespread panic. Now, that's not to say that making a coaching move is impossible...not at all. It's ok to let go of a coach. Coaches are hired to be fired. But the organization clearly wasn't ready to move on from Bylsma, and honestly, he did some really good things during the regular season. The extension is just snipping a loose thread before its caught on a nail. It's symbolic, but its significance is not at all empty.
I'll re-state that I believe he's on a short leash heading into the 2013-14 season.
letsgoalpens wrote:If you are keeping players (like a Morrow) and potentially overpaying them or using them in a role they are not fit for in order to insulate the coaching staff something is wrong.
Well, that's unfair to create a negative out of neutral situation. "Potentially overpaying them" is making chicken salad out of chicken feathers. Well, not really, but I like saying that. Anyway...Ray Shero hasn't really been caught overpaying anyone, so I trust his decision making 100% as he has not lead us wrong to any significant degree over the course of his tenure.
I'm not sure that Morrow was stuffed into a role that he was unfit for either...please do elaborate. I thought he played pretty well in the playoffs and I wouldn't mind if he was brought back.
letsgoalpens wrote:I completely agree it is difficult to coach a team with as much talent as the penguins have (in terms of personality) but when the same things keep happeneing (defensive breakdowns, emotional meltdowns, general carelessness with the puck, etc...) the coach needs to be looked at. All of those things can be attributed to players playing for a coach who will not sit them or hold them accountable.
I don't disagree. And I also don't doubt that the coaching situation was "looked at", do you believe that it was not considered? I don't have my finger on the pulse of the coaching candidates out there, I know some better than others, but is there a coach out there that would be a definite upgrade on Bylsma for this team
? People can throw out grass-is-always-greener names like John Tortorella and Dave Tippett, but are they really a fit? Tortorella's six goalie system on a team that has a limited amount of hockey sense and is quite injury prone probably doesn't fit our team, right? I mean, do you really expect 87 and 71 to go out there and look like Ryan Callahan? I think that's unrealistic, personally.
Dave Tippett's system relies more on NZ defense and there's an active role for a puck-playing goaltender in his greatest successes (Turco, Mike Smith)...we don't have that and it's very important to his system. We'd really have to change the angle of this roster. And we risk alienating 71 and 58 and call me what you will, but I don't want either of them to leave. Teams don't win without a #1 PMD...can't do it. Look at every dynasty, look at every great center's season: Beliveau's seasons don't happen without Harvey, Abel's don't happen without Kelly, Esposito's don't happen without Orr, Trottier's don't happen without Potvin, Gretzky's don't happen without Coffey, neither do Lemieux's, etc. etc. Not to say that the wheels would fall off of Gretzky if Coffey wasn't there, but he doesn't hit 200 points...ever. Not once, without Coffey. Underrated importance.
letsgoalpens wrote:If the idea of giving Bylsma a contract extension to give him a vote of confidence and set the tone for the players to follow or get out seems to contradict the idea of also giving him a short leash. You can't be all in on a coach while also being ready to oust him.
Key distinction: extension is tangible, short leash is hearsay. Most coaches are on some sort of leash of moderate or shorter length (see: Michel Therrien signs extension with Pittsburgh, gets canned).
letsgoalpens wrote:I am in favor of Bylsma being canned. I have been lulled by the regular season success but four years in a row losing to teams you should beat has simply been too much and I expect this year coming up to be the fifth year. The book is out on how to beat the Bylsma system. Defensive improvement during the regular season means nothing to me because it does not translate to the playoffs. As soon as the coaches on the other team neutralize the bylsma system the team panics because there is no alternative or backup plan. Instead, they all start to press and get out of position. Before you know it your team has just lost two games on home ice with the second game being a 6-1 blowout. In 365 days I would fully expect us to be in the same position but I would hope management has the foresight to make a different decision than they made today. Since 1993 there has not been a team primed to win a cup in Pittsburgh like this one has. They only had to come out of a pretty weak EC and had to beat the Blackhawks. Another missed opportunity (as was the case in 2010). I am honeslty dumbfounded the front office is choosing to keep a coach who was only able to succeed in the post season for one season five years ago. I expect more from Mario and Shero, I only wish they expected more from themselves and their coaching staff.
I agree that adjustments would have been nice against Boston. The rest of that is emotional preferences that I'm in no position to disagree with really, you're entitled to your thoughts and opinions as they are not at all unreasonable.