Dan Bylsma's Last Shot

The Stanley Cup finals started last night with a truly sensational game between Chicago and Boston.  Recency bias and hyperbole make for a bad combination so I’ll resist the urge quantify its greatness.  Suffice to say it was the kind of game that drives many of us to believe that there is nothing better in sports than post season hockey.  For me it had everything; everything except the Pittsburgh Penguins.

That is ironic because yesterday marked the 4 year anniversary of arguably the greatest game in Penguins’ history.  Their gut wrenching game 7 victory in Detroit was perhaps the seminal moment for a franchise that has enjoyed far greater success than it’s credited.

In the aftermath of their elusive third championship the club’s future potential seemed boundless.  A once in a generation assemblage of young stars had matured to full potential, winning a Stanley Cup well before their time.  The general manager was locking in those stars on manageable long-term contracts.  And for the first time in their history, they seemed to have the perfect head coach to steer the ship.  There was every reason to believe that cup celebrations would be the norm for this group.

And yet as the finals kicked off last night the only Penguin discussion we were contemplating was Ray Shero’s emphatic endorsement of Dan Byslma as his coach for next season.  It’s a worthwhile debate, especially since I considered Disco Dan’s continued employment an even money proposition at best when I awoke on Wednesday.

Taken in a vacuum, one can just as easily conclude that Bylsma is or is not responsible for the Pens crash and burn performance against Boston.  His supporters state that he cannot be blamed for the sudden and complete disappearance of the team’s offensive stars.  His detractors state that he must be held accountable for the club’s lackluster play and lack of composure in the first two games of the series; and for getting swept with perhaps the most talented roster in the NHL.  Both arguments are accurate to a point.

I made it clear on Monday that my biggest issue with Bylsma was consistent lack of discipline shown by his team over the entire playoff run.  It manifested last year against Philly. And it manifested on several occasions before the conference finals; most notably with the inexcusable short-handed goal the Pens allowed to Ottawa in the waning seconds of game 3.  But it was never more brutally obvious than in the first two games against the Bruins. 

The Penguins ardently refused to make the smart simple plays necessary to succeed this time of year.  As noted in Monday’s blog, I’ve watched Chicago’s defensemen repeatedly defuse pressure in their own zone with simple bank passes of the boards.  In contrast the Penguins have Kris Letang, the Brett Favre of NHL defensemen, constantly trying to stickhandle through pressure or worse yet, throw blind backhand passes up the middle of the ice.   

At any given moment, the players are responsible for not executing properly.  When the same issue continues unabated for two years it falls primarily on the coach.

Given that, Bylsma should not be evaluated in the vacuum of one series; rather by his overall body of work.  And that is an eminently complex affair, as Bylsma’s track record is emminently complex. 

If it were simply the juxtaposition of regular season success against playoff disappointment it would be an easy call.  It’s not.  Not when the same coach who oversaw four consecutive post season flame outs also lead one of the great championship runs in NHL history.  Not when this year’s loss, as disappointing as it was, occurred in the Eastern Conference Finals.

This situation best parallels Bill Cowher and the Steelers, circa January 2005.  The franchise was at a crossroads after Cowher’s 15-1 team was blown out of Heinz Field by New England in the AFC Championship game.  It marked the 4^th time in 14 years that Cowher’s team lost an AFC title game at home.  And it continued a confounding trend of regular season dominance followed by playoff collapse.  At that time there was fairly compelling, albeit circumstantial evidence that Cowher simply could not lead the Steelers to a championship.

The Steelers stuck it out with Cowher in 2005 and he ultimately delivered.  In so doing they established their franchise as a model of organizational stability.   That is in stark contrast to the Penguins who for most of their history have treated coaches as interchangeable parts.

So I salute the Penguins for once embracing stability over chaos.  I salute them for finally accepting the possibility that the players should be held accountable as much if not more so than the coach.  This is very much a new concept at the New Energy Barn and would seem to indicate a maturation of the organization.  It’s also a testament to the coaching street cred Bylsma earned though winning that championship in 2009.         

I do wonder however if the Penguins are standing not so much behind Bylsma as they are Sidney Crosby (and to a lesser degree Evgeni Malkin).  This is an organization with a track record of terrible coaching decisions made solely to appease their superstars.  How else do you justify firing Scotty Bowman for Eddie Johnston or in any way, shape, or form hiring Ivan Hlinka?  Given that history, and Mario Lemieux’s current ownership percentage, it’s not beyond consideration that Bylsma’s greatest coaching asset is that he keeps Sid the Kid happy.

I’m not saying definitely that is the case, but I cannot rule it out, especially when Bylsma’s extension precedes Malkin’s by just 24 hours.  We learned from the Johnston and Hlinka debacles that hiring coaches solely to placate superstars is a recipe for post season disappointment.  It’s even greater a concern when you factor in that Crosby, as much as anybody in the organization need to step up his post season performance going forward.  That is not going to happen if the head coach is in his pocket.

Regardless, the decision is made and Bylsma is staying, at least for one more year.  I am neither endorsing nor disputing it for all the reasons mentioned above.  I’m not yet convinced that Bylsma is the problem or the solution to this team’s ills.  That said, results speak for themselves and Bylsma’s window is clearly inching towards closure.

I will say this.  The Penguins cannot trot out the same coach, same system, and same players that have endured four consecutive playoff failures.  Most coaches would not survive such a run; especially when the last two were catastrophic in nature.  The team has refused to embrace the most critical components of playoff hockey success in spite of giving continual lip service to doing just that.  This means either that Bylsma is failing to deliver the message or the players are failing to receive it.  By hitching his wagon to the head coach, Shero is essentially stating the latter.

This means Shero absolutely must make personnel changes in the offseason.  He must deploy a better and more committed group of defensive players around 87 and 71.  He must find players who will embrace the need for structured and disciplined hockey, even when playing with superior offensive talent.  And he probably needs to accept that it is financially untenable to keep Letang or Marc-Andre Fleury on the roster at this point.

Even assuming such changes, Bylsma still needs to get the message through to his star players.  The Blackhawks have proved throughout the playoffs that a team with high end talent can be successful in the post season by playing the right way.  Doing it against Boston last night further crystalized the point.  Bylsma has been given one last shot to get that message across.  If he fails, it will likely be his last.