As well as a Jack Adams award...as well as being the fastest coach in NHL history to 200 wins.
People act like he's some scrub ECHL coach who doesn't have a clue what he's doing.
Speculation: Coaching Search - Part III: Dan Bylsma deal "imminent"
- Thread starter joshjull
- Start date
- Status
As well as a Jack Adams award...as well as being the fastest coach in NHL history to 200 wins.
People act like he's some scrub ECHL coach who doesn't have a clue what he's doing.
Ted Nolan won a Jack Adams
Bylsma won a cup with the team someone else developed and the system someone else implemented.
When I talk about what he's DONE, I am not talking about his team's achievements... I am talking about systems and player development
I don't think he's implemented a system that can be effective in the post season
(I hope he's learned something in his year of unemployment... that seems to be the narrative)
I don't think he's developed talent, not just top talent, but simply developing players in to NHL roles. This also ties back to his system and style, which relies far more heavily on itself (the system - stretch n dump), than it does the talent... which is ironic.
Yea, he won a cup... in Barry Switzer fashion...
But we should move on from all of this.... if he's the coach, I will judge him with a clean slate going forward.
Hopefully he'll be a good coach for you guys but he did some odd things. The weird/funniest/dumbest/oddest thing he did was make Iginla a 3rd line LW - a position he never played before - after he was acquired to be Crosby's 1st line RW.
joshjull
Registered User
Same here. He seems to have spent a lot of time studying his profession during his time out of coaching. It will be interesting to see what he takes from that.
Re: Bylsma
You hire someone for their resume
You keep them based on their performance while they are working under you.
If Bylsma is hired, he should be judged by the teams performance and his contribution to the development of the players.
You hire someone for their resume
You keep them based on their performance while they are working under you.
If Bylsma is hired, he should be judged by the teams performance and his contribution to the development of the players.
Again, I hope he works out for you guys. When he first took over the Pens played the best hockey I'd maybe ever seen them play. Then it just got weird, hard to explain. Here's a quote from Bennett after Pens hired a new coach:
“With Coach Dan, I wish him all the best, but as a young guy, it was a little different,†Bennett said. “You’re definitely held accountable with anyone, to a certain extent, but as an offensive guy, you could make a mistake last year and that could be it for your game.
“To be able to come to the bench and have a positive influence say, ‘Try this next time’ or ‘Do something better’ rather than putting you down or giving you the death stare. It’s good either way, because it keeps you accountable, but I think the positivity will go a log way.â€
“With Coach Dan, I wish him all the best, but as a young guy, it was a little different,†Bennett said. “You’re definitely held accountable with anyone, to a certain extent, but as an offensive guy, you could make a mistake last year and that could be it for your game.
“To be able to come to the bench and have a positive influence say, ‘Try this next time’ or ‘Do something better’ rather than putting you down or giving you the death stare. It’s good either way, because it keeps you accountable, but I think the positivity will go a log way.â€
His coaching records seem to fly in the face of some fans assessments of him. Also people inside hockey seem to hold him in higher regard those fans. I will take his record and the word of those insiders over some arm chair guys who probably know no more than I do.
Der Jaeger
Generational EBUG
CatsforReinhart
Registered User
That is the silliest arguement I have ever heard. I cannot believe people make this statement.
According to Jame any coach who wins the Stanley Cup in their first year, perhaps second it is not actually their win but the previous coach's win. Wow.
What is even more ridiculous about Jame's statement is how he argues when people post coaches doent make much of an impact, and that he mocks them. Now since it suits his argument he puts forth it wasn't Blysma's coaching that won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh but actually Therrien(Who cant seem to win in the playoffs in Montreal). So which way is it?
Der Jaeger
Generational EBUG
OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,501
- 6,971
I'm curious if that had to do with WHERE Pittsburgh was at the time. When he was hired I believe Pittsburgh was in the "win now mode" so I think the leash on players was a little shorter than normal on the young guys as any mistake they may have made could have been the game.
If he has a problem with young guys making mistakes, the Buffalo job should've been passed on by him. We're in a development phase of our organization with a side of "win as much as you can". He's going to see a lot of mistakes from this team. There will be growing pains.
He has witnessed first hand how the best player in the game prepares. If he can bring that over and instill that work ethic into our core and they grow from that, then anything else after that will be extra.
That is the silliest arguement I have ever heard. I cannot believe people make this statement.
According to Jame any coach who wins the Stanley Cup in their first year, perhaps second it is not actually their win but the previous coach's win. Wow.
What is even more ridiculous about Jame's statement is how he argues when people post coaches doent make much of an impact, and that he mocks them. Now since it suits his argument he puts forth it wasn't Blysma's coaching that won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh but actually Therrien(Who cant seem to win in the playoffs in Montreal). So which way is it?
That's not really what he's saying. Bylsma came in with what, 20-30 games left in the year? It's well documented that he didn't make major system changes that year and stuck with what Therrien had in place.
That is the silliest arguement I have ever heard. I cannot believe people make this statement.
According to Jame any coach who wins the Stanley Cup in their first year, perhaps second it is not actually their win but the previous coach's win. Wow.
What is even more ridiculous about Jame's statement is how he argues when people post coaches doent make much of an impact, and that he mocks them. Now since it suits his argument he puts forth it wasn't Blysma's coaching that won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh but actually Therrien(Who cant seem to win in the playoffs in Montreal). So which way is it?
uh... he took over mid season. it's kind of a big difference.
I think Therien has done a great job in Montreal.
CatsforReinhart
Registered User
So winning a Stanley cup and having a 252-117-32 record doesn't matter because it was Therrien who got that for him?
I don't get that arguement. Also Blysma had Malkin and Crosby so it is easy to win the cup. Interesting they have one Stanley Cup together and that is with Blysma.
When Therrien got fired Pittsburgh was 2 games above .500. 27-25-5 with Crosby and Malkin. Blysma took over and the team went 18-3-4 and won the cup.
I see people say that was Therrien who won the cup. I can see the argument getting Therrien out of the locker room inspired Pittsburgh to play harder arguement.
Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong?
cheesedanish87
Registered User
Pens fan here.
I'm one of the few pens fans that really liked DB, i think you guys got a great coach.
The youth argument against him is BS IMO, the one really good young player the pens had was Maatta, DB had no problem playing him big minutes.
Another knock on him was the playoffs, you could of had Scotty Bowman behind the bench and they wouldn't of been able to win with the goal tending MAF gave the pens.
And if you think the system was to blame for MAF meltdown i'd suggest looking at Tomas Vokoun stats in the playoffs after MAF got benched.
I really wouldn't be surprised if you guys are competing for a playoff spot next year, pens never had a deep team up front, and we always had a ton of injuries, DB won a lot of hockey games with little talent in the lineup because of the injuries every year.
I'm one of the few pens fans that really liked DB, i think you guys got a great coach.
The youth argument against him is BS IMO, the one really good young player the pens had was Maatta, DB had no problem playing him big minutes.
Another knock on him was the playoffs, you could of had Scotty Bowman behind the bench and they wouldn't of been able to win with the goal tending MAF gave the pens.
And if you think the system was to blame for MAF meltdown i'd suggest looking at Tomas Vokoun stats in the playoffs after MAF got benched.
I really wouldn't be surprised if you guys are competing for a playoff spot next year, pens never had a deep team up front, and we always had a ton of injuries, DB won a lot of hockey games with little talent in the lineup because of the injuries every year.
CatsforReinhart
Registered User
uh... he took over mid season. it's kind of a big difference.
I think Therien has done a great job in Montreal.
27-25-5
18-3-4
Blysma
Therrien
Which goes with which?
If anything he took a team going nowhere and won the cup. Even more impressive.
That wondeful system you give Therrien credit for was barely over .500
Blysma took someone elses failing system and won the cup with it.
Or wait 27-25-5 is playing possum and Therrien had them right where he wanted?
EichHart
Registered User
It's funny how that works Montreal wants the coach that implemented the system that won pittsburgh their Stanley cup more than anything right now. Go look at their forums. It's the cyclical nature of the business I guess. Pardon the pun.
OkimLom
Registered User
- May 3, 2010
- 15,501
- 6,971
That is the silliest arguement I have ever heard. I cannot believe people make this statement.
According to Jame any coach who wins the Stanley Cup in their first year, perhaps second it is not actually their win but the previous coach's win. Wow.
What is even more ridiculous about Jame's statement is how he argues when people post coaches doent make much of an impact, and that he mocks them. Now since it suits his argument he puts forth it wasn't Blysma's coaching that won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh but actually Therrien(Who cant seem to win in the playoffs in Montreal). So which way is it?
It's not an argument though. It's a fact. He DID take over a team from someone else, and stuck to Therrien's system. He had the team for 4 months, in the midst of a contending season. It would be foolish of the coach to implement a brand new system. They needed a new voice in the lockerroom and their record after he took over showed it 25 games 18-3-4.
I guess if you want to see what his worth his, you can look at the 2010-2011 season, when he lost Malkin and Crosby for large portions of the season, as his highest pinnacle head coaching success. If I remember correctly they also lost Staal as well for a stretch.
That is the silliest arguement I have ever heard. I cannot believe people make this statement.
According to Jame any coach who wins the Stanley Cup in their first year, perhaps second it is not actually their win but the previous coach's win. Wow.
What is even more ridiculous about Jame's statement is how he argues when people post coaches doent make much of an impact, and that he mocks them. Now since it suits his argument he puts forth it wasn't Blysma's coaching that won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh but actually Therrien(Who cant seem to win in the playoffs in Montreal). So which way is it?
That is exactly what happened. Bylsma was a late season replacement. He made basically no systematic changes.
The following season he added waaay more set plays, changed the d-zone coverage, and started towards his useless breakout of all stretch all the time.
I would argue that we don't know how Bylsma develops young players. His tenure in Pittsburgh was during a time when they were competing for a Cup every year and a lot of prospects/picks were moved for vets. Pittsburgh's prospect pool has been bad for years because of this. I thought Beau Bennett was a terrible pick the day they made it so I don't view him as a talented young player who was wasted. This will be a new experience for Bylsma, building a young core into a contender. If Murray believes he is the guy, then I'm on board. A lot of people in hockey like the fit more then some fans so we shall see how it all works out.
I think Pegula really likes the idea of Bylsma being the face of U.S.A. Hockey behind the bench, Eichel being the future face of U.S. Hockey and the Harbor Centre being the potential hub for U.S. Hockey in the future.
I think Pegula really likes the idea of Bylsma being the face of U.S.A. Hockey behind the bench, Eichel being the future face of U.S. Hockey and the Harbor Centre being the potential hub for U.S. Hockey in the future.
Therien laid the foundation for that cup in both development and system. Yes.
With Therien's team. Yes.
Yes, coaches wear out their welcome. A fresh voice can absolutely jump start things. Also worth noting the injuries the Pens were facing, and how all those guys returned right after Therien was fired (*Joshjull).
Nobody said that. But if you think framing the argument that way makes your position look more informed...
You should also see the injury component noted earlier
You should also see the system that stayed in place
you're welcome
Crazy Tasty
Registered User
So DB's system causes injuries to the best players on the team?!?!? That's just great....
CatsforReinhart
Registered User
Am I living in a bizarro world?
Pittsburgh would of missed the playoffs with the record Pittsburgh had when Therrien got fired.
So what is more impressive
Winning a stanley cup with someone else's failing system
Winning a stanley cup with your own system
According to JAme even though Pittsburgh would of missed the playoffs it was acutally Therrien and his record that would of missed the playoffs that won that cup.
I am thinking I am the one that should be doing the face palming.
- Status
