Dan Bylsma's post-sweep commentary has been laughable. Essentially he thinks that he didn't get to put the right 5 guys out on the power play too often. This statement stands in contradiction to statements made by: Dan Bylsma. Nothing about his structure failing to avoid being down 0-3 in the past 2 seasons to good teams. There is sufficient evidence that the team that went to the 08 Finals and the 09 Championship team were a result of Michel Therrien's structure. Dan didn't come in late in 2009 and change the system. Now, 4 years later, Dan's personnel, tactics, and in-game performance speak for themselves.
I have a question: what do you think the last 4 post-2009 Stanley Cup playoff series would have looked like if the Penguins had Mike Babcock as their coach? Joel Quenneville? Tom Renney? Would you feel, as I do, that the Penguins were at a strategic disadvantage in every playoff series since 2008? Like Mike Babcock, do you think Bylsma will be able to take a much younger roster and succeed in the playoffs next season? I don't, and he won't. We could very well waste a season's worth of development.
Finally, all the players love Dan. Dan doesn't get angry. Dan is all good with being called "Dan". Dan doesn't make the players trap or take abuse in front of the net. Of course the players love Dan.
Once again, a new identity of Penguin is necessary on the ice and on the bench.
Edit: Rob Rossi suggesting that the Penguins may explore trading James Neal to retain 71, 58, and 29 for any reason has relieved me of my appetite.
No comments:
Post a Comment