View Single Post
02-13-2013, 12:02 AM
Tender Rip
Learning from Scuds?
Tender Rip's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Shanghai, China
Posts: 12,697
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
You're absolutely right. We're one winger short (two ideally), but we can't ignore the fact that we still don't have that one winger we're all pining for.

Here's my problem with the coaching argument RIP. I have pointed out countless examples of "coaching failures" over the years by elite coaches that the anti-Bylsma brigade would prefer having over him.
Well, while I might be just as critical, that isn't me. It seems to me it is difficult enough for knowledgeable fans of our own team to agree on or even evaluate Bylsma's performance/strengths/short comings. Thus I never (hardly ever at least) drop names on who I'd prefer instead of Dan, because I don't see any other team frequently enough to have a clear idea if and how their coaches would be better for us (except to say that Mike Babcock would rock, but that's too easy).

Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
I put the term in quotes because I'm the type who believes that in hockey in particular, coaches get WAY too much credit for success, and way too much blame for losing.
I can agree with you on that. But there are just too many things that frustrates me with Bylsma and too few things where it seems to me that he should be getting credit for what we accomplish. Doesn't mean I don't think players should be held accountable for non-performance (although Bylsma is the first one not to, or does so in his own particular non youth-friendly way), or that Shero doesn't deserve to be under the microscope for not having keyed in on/solved the key roster issues of this team despite them being evident for years.

Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Seems to me that when I point out Babcock's "failures" in the playoffs, they're cast aside.
Just one comment on this; being interested in Babcock and having greatly appreciated their hockey (also) under his tenure, I have frequently been going to the Wings forum here to read what their fans say about him. There is very, very little criticism of Babcock. Mostly fans believe that he hasn't been given the horses he wanted/team needed in free agency since we beat them in the final, that key players got too old/were injured/didn't perform when the heat was on etc. Or that they got killed by awesome goal tending of course. Personally I don't see much of anything to criticize in Detroit's WAY OF PLAYING, except of course this year they suddenly have a special teams problem because Lidstrom isn't there and Holland didn't get anything resembling a replacement. Basically, Detroit this year haven't got a very good team.

Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
I could go on and on with this stuff for so long I get a headache just thinking about it. My point being is that I can't stand how after ONE loss, there's a definitive reason as to why. What makes it all the more amusing is that the same people with the anti coaching agenda also openly admit that there's a ton of help needed on the wing.
I've recycled pretty much the same misgivings about Bylsma for more than two years. It isn't about one loss at all, far less one... or two... against New Jersey, which is obviously a strong team.

Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Besides, there's a huge difference between a young coach with a few stubborn technical flaws, and a complete oaf.
Just took a snip from another post.... I think there is much more to it than him having a few stubborn technical flaws.
But even if we were to say that this was it, I don't like being in the prime of the best two players in the world and having a coach who is learning on the job. Less so when I cannot see what lessons he is learning, as the same problems are rearing their heads consistently whether we win or lose. It would be different if I saw that little by little we were improving technically/tactically.... but for the life of me I cannot see how that is so.

The big improvement made so far this season has been that we are much less susceptible to bubbling the puck to forecheckers behind our own net, and 5 on 5 we do much better at insulating our goalie in front of the crease. That has nothing to do with having changed our game, because it hasn't. It is simply a factor of having integrated two 6.4 D-men who have that very needed skill as part of the package they bring. Some of us have been saying that this was a roster need for a long time. I give Bylsma zero credit for this improvement, rather he and Shero should have made it a focus at deadlines ever since we gave up Scuderi and Gill in free agency. Instead we've been getting Leopold or nothing.

Last edited by Tender Rip: 02-13-2013 at 05:51 AM.
Tender Rip is offline   Reply With Quote