Prediction Time: Will Dan Bylsma be fired this offseason?

[Jacque Richard]

Fire Murray as well

[dudacek]

Why hasn't anybody brought up the possibility that with a revamped defense and improved bottom 6, this team takes a big step forward next season with Bylsma behind the bench.  

 

If that happens, which IMO is likely, what will all the Bylsma haters have to say?

  

 

I'll say I was wrong despite the tiny voice that tells me what I'm watching is a mirage.

And I will want to read Bylsma's book on how he was able to recultivate faith in a group that has clearly lost it.

 

I'm with Randall. This makes perfect sense.

It only makes sense if Murray sticks with Dan over Pegula's "better judgment."

NHL GMs always get to sacrifice at least one coach.

And contrary to what I read here, plenty of GMs plateau or even regress more than once without getting fired.

 

Scotty Bowman rode Punch's team to 110 points, then went 99, 93, 89, 103, 90, 80 before being fired on the way to a 64-point season.

Darcy took Muckler's team (read Hasek) to 89 and 91 point seasons, then pingponged from 85 to 98 before missing the playoffs for three straight years without getting fired. He then exploded out of lockout, only to miss for four of the next six years before getting canned.

[Guest]

Pi, They'll say that the team is succeeding despite DD because of the great and maturing talent on the roster.

Edited April 4, 2017 by yse325

[WildCard]

They'll say that the team is succeeding despite DD because of the great and maturing talent on the roster.

If they pull an Anaheim and have worse stats but a similar record, I'm going to say exactly this. If they significantly improve their possession stats and even have less points, I'll blame the roster. 

 

If they improve under the hood, I'll credit Dan. Otherwise, yeah, they're winning in spite of him

[Randall Flagg]

Pi, They'll say that the team is succeeding despite DD because of the great and maturing talent on the roster.

What's funny is I can see you skimming your eyes over the posts from the people you refer to answering his question so you could post this to say something different.

[WildCard]

For this to happen our possession stats will need to jump huge amounts. If this does happen, I, a Bylsma hater, will say "Wow, Disco proved me wrong and actually did discard his garbage system, and showed for the first time in his coaching career that he can learn and adapt. Good work."

What's really funny is I missed this and posted the exact same sentiment :lol:

[That Aud Smell]

I voted "no."

 

The injuries. The admitted awfulness of the back end. The relative youth. The apparent (this is my inference) preference for not indulging the millenials by sacking the coach they don't like.

 

Whoever foresaw a story arc where both GM and coach could be sent packing by Thanksgiving (U.S.) -- that was an interesting take.

 

My question, in that event, though: Who on earth would Pegula be turning to at that point?

[pi2000]

People have brought it up, a lot. And I'll say the same thing again, we still wouldn't make it past 2nd round, or more likely the first

 

If we can Byslma, and still don't make the playoffs and can Murray who in turn brings in his own coach, well we're ######. But if we keep Byslma, routinely fail for 3 years, like he did in Pitt, then can them both and start again, well we're ######, but just at a later date and with our player's prime ruined, like he did in Pittsburgh. Get your ###### over with I say

 

Why do you say this?   If they make the playoffs next season, do you expect them to make it to the conf finals otherwise Bylsma should be fired?

 

 

I'll physically eat my sock

 

bookmarked

 

 

Pi, They'll say that the team is succeeding despite DD because of the great and maturing talent on the roster.

 

yep.  It will be annoying to hear about this all summer.   We'll sign player X or trade for player Y to improve the D and everybody will just be like "Woont madder cuz ya kno... BYlsma!"

 

 

If they pull an Anaheim and have worse stats but a similar record, I'm going to say exactly this. If they significantly improve their possession stats and even have less points, I'll blame the roster. 

 

If they improve under the hood, I'll credit Dan. Otherwise, yeah, they're winning in spite of him

 

sure

[WildCard]

Why do you say this?   If they make the playoffs next season, do you expect them to make it to the conf finals otherwise Bylsma should be fired?

 

bookmarked

 

yep.  It will be annoying to hear about this all summer.   We'll sign player X or trade for player Y to improve the D and everybody will just be like "Woont madder cuz ya kno... BYlsma!"

 

sure

1) Cause as I posted before, his Pitt teams were routinely bounced in the 1st round. I don't want to just make it in the playoffs

 

2) go ahead

 

3) at least we'll back it up

[Stoner]

I voted "no."

 

The injuries. The admitted awfulness of the back end. The relative youth. The apparent (this is my inference) preference for not indulging the millenials by sacking the coach they don't like.

 

Whoever foresaw a story arc where both GM and coach could be sent packing by Thanksgiving (U.S.) -- that was an interesting take.

 

My question, in that event, though: Who on earth would Pegula be turning to at that point?

Benson

 

Black

 

Sawyer

 

LaFontaine

 

Battista!

 

Patrick

 

Sydney (sorry for those who didn't hear the news)

 

In a Trumpian move, his adult kids?

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Benson

 

Black

 

Sawyer

 

LaFontaine

 

Battista!

 

Patrick

 

Sydney (sorry for those who didn't hear the news)

 

In a Trumpian move, his adult kids?

 

Or worse, he'll go all Jerry Jones on us ... with both teams.

[Stoner]

Or worse, he'll go all Jerry Jones on us ... with both teams.

Interesting. Double down on the meddling and scrap the flat management structure. If he put his name on it, I'd almost respect it, to a degree. Terry Pegula, president of hockey operations.

[Weave]

1) Cause as I posted before, his Pitt teams were routinely bounced in the 1st round. I don't want to just make it in the playoffs p

80 points this year and its 3rd round or hit the bricks next year? That seems unreasonable.

[WildCard]

80 points this year and its 3rd round or hit the bricks next year? That seems unreasonable.

Even be competitive in the 2nd round then.

[Sabres Fan in NS]

Even be competitive in the 2nd round then.

 

Still seems unreasonable, but better.

[TrueBlueGED]

Still seems unreasonable, but better.

Set your expectations higher.

[pi2000]

1) Cause as I posted before, his Pitt teams were routinely bounced in the 1st round. I don't want to just make it in the playoffs

 

2) go ahead

 

3) at least we'll back it up

 

 "Routine" as in two first round exits in 6 playoff appearances? 

 

in order: 

Cup win

Conf Semi's

1st rnd (7 games vs 103 pt TBL team)

1st rnd (6 games vs 103 pt PHI team)

Conf Finals

2nd round

 

That's a 67% chance getting past the first round.... but his system sucks and he's lost the room, right?

[WildCard]

"Routine" as in two first round exits in 6 playoff appearances?

 

in order:

Cup win

Conf Semi's

1st rnd (7 games vs 103 pt TBL team)

1st rnd (6 games vs 103 pt PHI team)

Conf Finals

2nd round

 

That's a 67% chance getting past the first round.... but his system sucks and he's lost the room, right?

Finals

2nd

1

1

3

2

 

So 4/6 times he doesn't make it out of the 2nd round with a vet team. And if you want, I can again link the articles that detail his team's folding under pressure in the playoffs and him losing them

Edited April 4, 2017 by WildCard

[millbank]

He will be fired on Monday .

[pi2000]

He will be fired on Monday .

 

He won't be fired on Monday.

[Weave]

Even be competitive in the 2nd round then.

 

80 points last year to borderline playoff spot this year was reasonable.  80pts to 2nd round giving a team all it can handle now is not.

 

What sucks is we've pissed away another season of our core on the cheap.  Frittering away the best years to accumulate depth because the kids are on entry level deals.  It only gets more difficult from here.

Edited April 4, 2017 by We've

[WildCard]

80 points last year to borderline playoff spot this year was reasonable. 80pts to 2nd round giving a team all it can handle now is not.

 

What sucks is we've pissed away another season of our core on the cheap. Frittering away the best years to accumulate depth because the kids are on entry level deals. It only gets more difficult from here.

I disagree. Going 6 games with a team in the 2nd round is far, far from unreasonable. It only seems like that because we're so used to setting our sites so low. Toronto had the #1 overall pick last year ffs, and they're gonna take 2nd in the division

[TrueBlueGED]

80 points last year to borderline playoff spot this year was reasonable. 80pts to 2nd round giving a team all it can handle now is not.

 

What sucks is we've pissed away another season of our core on the cheap. Frittering away the best years to accumulate depth because the kids are on entry level deals. It only gets more difficult from here.

Should we let Bylsma's second season failure define for us what is reasonable? I'm not lowering the bar of what is acceptable just because our coach is inept.

 

Edit: And FWIW, I think Toronto wins a series this year and, yes, is competitive in round 2. From last place. We need to set our sights higher than the low bar we're used to.

Edited April 4, 2017 by TrueBlueGED

[Weave]

I disagree. Going 6 games with a team in the 2nd round is far, far from unreasonable. It only seems like that because we're so used to setting our sites so low. Toronto had the #1 overall pick last year ffs, and they're gonna take 2nd in the division

 

 

Should we let Bylsma's second season failure define for us what is reasonable? I'm not lowering the bar of what is acceptable just because our coach is inept.

 

Edit: And FWIW, I think Toronto wins a series this year and, yes, is competitive in round 2. From last place. We need to set our sights higher than the low bar we're used to.

 

I'm good with high expectations, but it was this crowd that was saying last offseason that a 15 point improvement and a first round playoff loss was likely too optimistic.  Why is it too optimistic last offseason but not this offseason?  They are in the same damned place.

[R_Dudley]

If Dan gets dumped at the end of this season and the Sabres are still a non-playoff team next season, Murray will get dumped, and the new GM will want to pick his own coach. The coaching carousel will continue.

I suspect DB stays and if next season starts poorly it will be both coach and GM that goes.

No because I agree with this scenario as the most plausible at this point.

 

Argh hockey hell instead of heaven.

 

 

Who woulda thunk.