Kevin Gorman: Weighing the pros, cons of Penguins extending Mike Sullivan | TribLIVE.com
Penguins/NHL

Kevin Gorman: Weighing the pros, cons of Penguins extending Mike Sullivan

Kevin Gorman
1361781_web1_1138291274
Getty Images
Mike Sullivan works the bench March 25, 2019, against the New York Rangers at Madison Square Garden in New York City.
1361781_web1_ptr-Benz-042219
Tim Benz | Tribune-Review
Penguins general manager Jim Rutherford (right) sided with coach Mike Sullivan instead of winger Phil Kessel, according to columnist Kevin Gorman. The action could have positive and negative effects.

On the opening day of NHL free agency, Jim Rutherford’s biggest revelation was about what the Pittsburgh Penguins will do with Mike Sullivan moving forward.

Sullivan won the power struggle with Phil Kessel, as the Penguins chose their two-time Stanley Cup champion coach over the two-time Stanley Cup champion sniper.

But Rutherford was noncommittal Monday about extending Sullivan before the final year of his contract, and that left some room for interpretation.

The Penguins general manager has been too busy remaking his roster this offseason, trading defenseman Olli Maatta to the Chicago Blackhawks, Kessel to the Arizona Coyotes and signing free-agent winger Brandon Tanev, to address his coach’s future with the organization.

“Up until this point, my focus was to change some of the players,” Rutherford said. “There’s obviously some work I have to do going forward, make some decisions. Personally, I feel Mike is a terrific coach. He’s done a very good job. He has good communication with the players, and I would like to see him stay long-term. But when I get to that, I don’t know.”

Failing to do so would leave the Penguins with a coach in limbo. That could make for an uncomfortable season.

“Well, there’s positives and negatives to that,” Rutherford said. “So, yeah, you do have some concerns. But it can work both ways.”

There are pros and cons for Rutherford to offer an extension — and for Sullivan to sign one.

Pro: Penguins players know Rutherford sided with Sullivan, so an extension would allow the coach to carry more clout and insist on a better buy-in from his team.

Con: If Sullivan isn’t extended, Penguins players would see him as nothing more than a lame duck. That could undermine his authority and expedite his departure.

Pro: Sullivan could be convinced to stay, given he has one of 31 coveted jobs in the NHL, coaches two of the game’s biggest stars in Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin and has led the Penguins to a pair of Cup championships.

Con: Coaches often provide diminishing returns, and Sullivan has gone from winning back-to-back Cup championships to being eliminated in the second and first rounds, respectively, in the past two playoffs.

Pro: Promoting coaches from the AHL has worked well for the Penguins, as Dan Bylsma and Sullivan both led them to Cup championships. The Penguins have a potential successor in reigning AHL coach of the year Mike Vellucci, who replaced Clark Donatelli at their Wilkes-Barre/Scranton affiliate.

Con: Rutherford replaced Bylsma with Mike Johnston, who was fired in December of his second season for “underachieving.” Sullivan’s predecessor is proof the Penguins could do worse.

Pro: Sullivan could be coaching for his job and to restore his reputation after the Penguins were swept in the first round of the playoffs by the New York Islanders. That should serve as inspiration for a season that could see marked improvement.

Con: If the Penguins make major strides under Sullivan without an extension, he could become a hot commodity next offseason. Bylsma landed with the Sabres (and Barry Trotz with the Islanders after leading the Capitals to the Cup), so Sullivan shouldn’t have trouble finding another NHL coaching job. Then again, if Sullivan doesn’t find the right job, he could end up as an assistant in Detroit someday.

Pro: By trading Kessel, Rutherford backed Sullivan. The GM and coach presented a united front at their season-ending news conference, and they appear to be on the same page as for the future of the organization. An extension would fortify that front.

Con: The Penguins set a precedent they could blame their coach and GM if the team underperforms, as they did by firing Bylsma and Ray Shero in 2014. That should be a warning for Rutherford not to tie his own fate to that of his coach.

After all, it can work both ways.

Keep up with the Pittsburgh Penguins all season long.

Kevin Gorman is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Kevin by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.