The Pens' supposed "playoff embarassment" since '09
View Single Post
09-29-2013, 06:05 AM
Join Date: Aug 2005
Originally Posted by
I actually don't think Quenneville gets canned if they lost last year. They were absolutely dominant during the regular season and they've already won a Cup just 3 years back. Fans did want him gone though, and I wouldn't have been shocked to see it happen. Losing in that fashion after two first round exits would put any coach on the hot seat.
I definitely think Julien gets fired if they don't beat Montreal in 2011, but I doubt if they lost against Toronto and the following year in another disappointing finish that he'd be canned. Winning a Cup and then following it up with good regular season success buys you time, perhaps too much in some cases (certainly you'd argue Bylsma is an example of this).
I think the main point to take away from the close calls those franchises had with losing their coach is just how fine that line can be between winning and losing. Bylsma certainly wouldn't be the first coach to win a championship after people said that he couldn't or severely doubted that he would.
I see both sides of this issue and don't have a strong opinion either way. I don't like the way this team has performed since 09' in the playoffs, period. I also think people look at other teams with a 'grass is always greener' approach and fail to recognize that other fanbases, even the more successful ones, experience many of the same frustrations and share the same negative outlook regarding their coach. Having said all that, we do need to perform better when it matters most, and Bylsma has to be looked at if some of these same issues aren't corrected, and sticking with arguably the biggest culprit in our failure over the last 4 years in MAF surely is no feather in his cap.
Fair points all.
And, I'll grant that luck has a lot to do with it. The Pens got lucky in their opponents in 2009 if you want to be brutally honest about it. Philly, Washington, and Carolina weren't good defensive teams. None of them had the structure and goaltending that Montreal had in 2010 or Boston had last year. And, unlike 2008, it was Malkin healthy and Datsyuk, the one guy who really could deal with him from that Wings squad, unhealthy.
It's why I try to take myself out of the passions of the moment and go back in the time machine. No way, if you'd have told me then what was to come over the next four playoffs, that I wouldn't have asked then 'when was Bylsma fired' (and I was as much on that bandwagon at that time as anyone here).
Yeah, the word for me is DISAPPOINTMENT, and it goes beyond the homerish 'I'm disappointed that the Pens didn't win the cup'.
Originally Posted by
This is where I strongly disagree. There is simply too much parity and randomness to be going around firing top tier coaches because of a couple disappointing playoff performances. You don't seem to grasp that there is an extremely likely chance that you're setting back your team with a move like that.
A couple . . . sure, that's a fun debate. How about four of them, in the fashion that the Pens lost. Again, in June 2009, if I'd have told you what's coming, then would you have cared about the excuses? What's the statute of limitations on this?
BTW, I'm asking for an opinion, because I know there's no set formula.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by KIRK