Is it Time for the Penguins to Move on From Mike Sullivan?

The ax fell swift and sure yesterday. Less than 24 hours after the Penguins immensely dissatisfying season came to an abrupt and untimely end, GM Ron Hextall and president of hockey ops Brian Burke were relieved of their duties.

Did the ax head cut deep enough?

There’s another significant figure in the Pens’ demise who seems to have almost entirely escaped scrutiny.

The “Teflon Don” has nothing on coach Mike Sullivan.

Although he stopped short of giving the 55-year-old skipper a vote of confidence, FSG exec David Beeston made it clear that ownership holds Sullivan in high regard.

“…we think Mike Sullivan is one of the best coaches in the NHL,” Beeston said. “He was extended last season, and then once we bring in a new hockey operations leader, he or she will be responsible for evaluating the coaching staff. And we think Mike is terrific.”

Beeston went on to say that Sullivan will serve as part of the transition team in the short-run.

Is this a mistake? More to the point, is it time for the Pens to part ways with their long-time coach?

There’s a compelling argument to say that it is.

Before I expand, I need to express that this is not intended to be a character assassination. Sullivan has many fine qualities both as a man and coach. Intelligence, thoughtfulness, forthrightness and passion among them. But I feel like he’s deified in these parts, as if he can do no wrong. That just isn’t so.

To my eye, this season’s black-and-gold squad was one of the most poorly coached teams I’ve ever seen. Indeed, our issues were both myriad and endemic.

Metronomic breakdowns aside, the only consistent thing about this team was inconsistency. Resembling a sine way on an oscilloscope, the Pens alternated in Jekyll-and-Hyde fashion between hot streaks and cold snaps, including three extended losing streaks of four games or more.

Every team experiences ups and downs over the course of an 82-game grind. But ours were extreme.

Our horribly erratic play manifested not only from game to game, but often period to period. During an early season loss to the Oilers on October 24, we piled up a 19-9 advantage in first-period shots on goal and grabbed a 3-1 lead. Then we literally stopped skating. The Oilers outshot us 26-4 in the second period and pounded five-straight goals past Tristan Jarry to win 6-3.

That’s far from the only example.

Ten times we blew third-period leads and went on to lose the game. Win even one or two of those games and we’d be prepping for our first-round opponent instead of scheduling tee times.

Indeed, we displayed an abject inability to play with a lead. We either fell back into a defensive shell or tried to outscore our foes, rather than play sound, structured hockey. It’s the coaches’ job to correct those issues. Sully never did.

We gave up goals early in periods. We gave up goals late in periods. In all my years of watching hockey, I’ve never seen a team yield so many breakaways and odd-man breaks. Due at least part to Sullivan’s instance that the defensemen pinch and help drive the attack. While sound in theory, a practice that often rendered our d-man out of position and vulnerable, especially given our forwards propensity to cheat on the offensive side.

The appalling lack of attention to detail. The sloppiness…the careless penalties. Our special teams play, spotty at best.

If Sullivan and his staff were preaching the right words, the message didn’t seem to be getting through. And if a team tunes out its coach…

Did I mention his stubbornness and ram-rod refusal to adjust? Believing in your system is fine to an extent, but not if it means cutting off your nose to spite your face. It was clear Sully didn’t have the horses to play his beloved speed game, especially on defense. However, rather than adapting his system to fit the talent on hand, he tried to force the players to fit his system (see above reference to odd-man breaks). Trying to pound the proverbial square peg into a round hole, if you will.

His personnel choices left much to be desired as well, particularly in the case of Jeff Carter. It was evident Carter was in serious decline as early as Thanksgiving. Yet Sully continued to deploy him as the third-line center, often in crucial situations, until late in the season. In the process sinking both the team and the third line.

He was slow to react to Brian Dumoulin’s mid-season struggles as well.

Last but certainly not least, his rigid personnel preferences. Sully’s both kid and tough guy averse. In terms of the former, younger players often bring an enthusiasm and spark that can liven up the mix. We sure could’ve used a double-shot of that this season. All too often we looked languid and stale, if not downright dispirited.

As for the latter? I’m not talking about a knuckle-dragging heavyweight, but guys who play a  straightforward physical game like Boston’s Trent Frederic, Nick Foligno and Garnet Hathaway. They’re good enough to play for the 65-win Bruins, but not us.

We’ll never have that type of player as long as Sullivan’s behind the bench. In the meantime, opponents will continue to take liberties with our stars.

Just play.

Yes, Sullivan led us to those back-to-back Cups, an achievement that shouldn’t and won’t be forgotten. But it isn’t 2017 anymore. The league has adjusted. Sully hasn’t.

I, for one, don’t want his fingerprints on the retool process.

It’s time for a new voice and a new philosophy. It’s time to move on.