- Foundation is relating to fixing the mess that Bylsma left from a hockey perspective. Not perceived level of play of players.^ lets expand on that
During the "foundation" period, Crosby was at his worst. Letang wasn't far behind. Kunitz same. Maatta too. And Perron. Malkin seemed neutral. Same with kessel. The young d-men who knows. The old vets like Cullen and Fehr are static. Same with bonino.
So what's the theory, here? That all those guys who were at their worst were just trying to figure things out, and then they finally did at, coincidentally, the exact same time Johnston got the boot? That's a good story and man that poor coach...the narrative got all flipped around on him.
This wouldn't have anything to do with a coach on a message board overestimating the legacy of him and his peers, I'm sure.
But I'll listen, if you want to explain more why a bunch of veterans took so long to learn basic hockey - and reconcile that not only with their lousy play but also their lousy attitudes.
- The theory is that Bylsma left the team in shambles and you need someone that can come in and return the team to some form of actual hockey based in fundamental principles...which we saw before with the Olczyk -> Therrien switch over. Lest we forget.
- Why would I overestimate one at the cost of another? That doesn't make sense. I'm just calling it like I see it, as always...that doesn't make it right, but that also doesn't mean there is some hidden objective to it either...if we all have the memory of a goldfish, then every day is brand new life...
- Johnston returned the team to "center" - he zeroed the scale. The next guy in line from Bylsma had that unenviable task...not surprising that a few guys didn't want the job...it's a tough task because it's a team full of veteran stars that were permitted to run the asylum in a way that the NHL really doesn't see much anymore...and I know that it's "goals or GTFO" out here for the measuring stick of all things, but as much as people point to the "OMG look at how bad everyone was" - really, we got the best defensive effort out of Sidney Crosby in his entire career, the best out of Evgeni Malkin...Crosby did lead the league in points per game despite playing two minutes less per game...Letang still got Norris votes...Hornqvist had the best season of his career...Fleury had the best season of his career (10 shutouts! for a guy that had 28 in the previous 10 years)...so as much as we want to play the doom and gloom card, someone needed to return us back to real hockey. And it sucks. It's not that fun to sit back and play on your heels and re-learn defensive structure and not fly the zone at the hint of possession and go for playing firewagon, off-the-rush hockey to playing a cycling game...tending bar at strip club and then becoming a librarian...it's a shock to the system...and yeah, clearly Sid was not happy and became happy under Sullivan, that's obvious. Clearly, we've gotten better offensively under Sullivan and he's done a good job, no one is taking that away or even suggesting that he's not...but the smear job hints at a lack of knowledge of the progression of things...
If Sullivan was hired first he would have to deal with the same crap...he also wouldn't have been afforded Daley, Schultz, Hagelin, etc. so it would have been the old Ranger breakout that they had under his watch...which was wrap it around the glass and hope it kicks out to someone good on our team...and who knows, maybe it's Johnston that comes in and an unleashes the 5-goal-per-game potential of the team like he did for Portland or like when he helped Markus Naslund become a superstar...towards the end, the last couple weeks before the firing, the team was obviously starting to open things up offensively more, Johnston was trusting his group got the idea and we started to move the puck in a different manner, different NZ routes, etc. and, naturally, it took Sullivan some time to get this group off the ground himself...we were giving up a ton of goals under Sullivan...but now he's righted the ship and good on him...but the team's return to fundamental play, their in-zone coverage schemes, their return to a strong cycling game, the learned box-out principles of the defense should be attributed - to some degree - to Johnston because we weren't doing it under Bylsma and then started under Johnston...it's not the sexiest stuff, but it's the stuff that makes you not lose...I understand that it's not goals and I also understand that Sullivan brought goals...but, surprisingly, there's more to hockey than just goals...
