Mike Sullivan

[mikey]

Hard to say exactly. Clearly the GM and coach didn't see eye to eye on some things (Sprong)...so yeah, there's more than a 1% chance of MJ wanting Scuderi in the lineup. And rightfully so, he was good for him the previous season and helped make Ian Cole look competent - no easy task. There's also more than 1% chance that MJ didn't know that getting Trevor Daley for Rob Scuderi was a choice he had...he made great use of more than a few of this type of d-men in Portland for sure...

[FistOfCaufield]

just curious...

is there maybe a 1% chance that it was FHCMJ who wanted scuderi in the lineup instead of a loosey goosey PMD...and getting daley was a direct response to getting a coach that wanted someone like him?

Very possible, of course without direct knowledge of conversations between coach and GM we just don't know. I think it would be fair to say "We don't know" as opposed to "HE WAS AN IDIOT OMG LOL GO DOWN WITH THAT SHIP".

As usual - I'm guessing the truth lies in the middle that Johnston has forgotten more hockey than all of us combined on this message board will ever know, and was trying to do something that while may have been beneficial in the long run, just was not going to work in the time frame needed and was not going to get the buy in from the talent on the team until it was too late. - and it was 100% the right move to can him and go in another direction both coach wise and in terms of team identity by bringing in a certain kind of player that could play the fast paced game we see before us.

[meow]

This thread. Good stuff

[columbia]

Agreed. Not understanding that they're now a better team is pretty bizarre.

[mikey]

Has one person even hinted at that, much less said it?

[columbia]

Did anyone say anything about more goals, before you threw down that herring?

[mikey]

Come on, man...you're smarter than that...

[columbia]

I guess I'm skeptical of the skepticism. Right or wrong, I'm the most optmidtic I've been in years. A dude at helm who uses their strengths, clearly inspires them and actually has some structure. And realizes that he isn't their older brother (i.e. disco Dan situation), but their coach.

[mikey]

As further evidenced in this thread, I don't think anyone is unhappy are they? Me (and others) defending Johnston doesn't imply dissatisfaction with Sullivan. I'm just defending the long-term process and progression, as I tend to do...I was highly skeptical of the move and the timing of said move when it was made...it has turned out to be the right decision, augmented with roster moves to that effect...chicken or egg can be argued there, certainly...but I don't think you're going to find many unhappy campers WRT Sullivan's tenure, particularly since that comeback against Detroit around NYE...

[columbia]

[meow]

Now you two hug

[FistOfCaufield]

All this being said I'd love to know exactly how the conversations between coach and GM goes as it pertains to players and how the on ice specifics regarding strategy.

It's obvious the moves made after canning Johnston have really given this team an identity and that the on ice strategy seems to do everything possible to take advantage of the physical skills of the players.

Obviously both sides, HC and GM have to work as a team, but when it comes down to how the team plays on the ice - does the HC say "I need guys like this" and the GM goes out and gets that.. or does that call come down from above as in "Hey Sully - We got a lot of fast guys now, figure out how to take advantage of it.

Another question - Sully having experience with some of the younger players in the system - has that helped the team in identifying guys that can be brought up and put into positions to succeed, is this something both Rutherford and Johnston may have missed not being around WB as often?

Agreement with all - the team is 10x more exciting to watch and the move was the right one to make.

[Tico Rick]

Though wildly different, Bylsma and Johnston had one thing in common - supreme confidence in their superior coaching intellect. This led Bylsma to develop a theoretically-beautiful-but-hard-to-execute system, and Johnston to stubbornly stress defense. In neither case did these coaches take the talent they had to work with into consideration. Do you really want Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin playing a defense-first game? One of the great things about Sullivan is that he quickly identified the strengths of the team, and has implemented a system that plays to these strengths. This already marks him as a superior coach to either of the other two.

[Craig]

Well the thing that i did like about johnson's system was that it worked to cover up the team's weaknesses. He was having them focus too much on that, but its an oversimplification to just say that he didnt have the team playing to its strength.

[Tico Rick]

It's hard to argue otherwise, given the paltry production of Sid, Malkin and Letang under Johnston.

[Tico Rick]

And here's another reason why Sullivan is superior to Bylsma. According to Jason Mackey, instead of mustache boy, Sullivan has this:

The cost for losing a shootout in practice under Sullivan? You serve drinks. Which I learned after watching Hagelin dish out Gatorade — and take orders — this morning. Quite funny.

[MR25]

I will say, this whole slow start, going down by a few goals thing has got to stop.

I appreciate the resiliency, but I'm not sure that it'll be fruitful in the playoffs.

[Gaucho]

Certainly not against the Rangers.

[count2infinity]

https://twitter.com/BombulieTrib/status ... 6292989952

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

I will say, this whole slow start, going down by a few goals thing has got to stop.

I appreciate the resiliency, but I'm not sure that it'll be fruitful in the playoffs.

I can't look it up now, but I feel like most of the first goals against recently have been on the PP


not that it excuses anything (we shouldn't be taking penalties that early anyway) but I don't think it's a sustainable trend for our opponents.