HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Pittsburgh Penguins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Episode IX|The Off-Season Thread|It's... still the offseason.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-27-2012, 01:16 PM
  #676
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,054
vCash: 500
What's with the Gonchar talk? I know I've been absent from here since pre-lockout, but I'm not sure I understand. Is it because we don't like our chances of keeping Malkin in the fold long term unless we reach out to Gonchar?

I don't think we need anymore D-men on this team, even a PP QB. Our kids are developing. Let's have the mother of all training camp competition next September and see what we have.

After watching Olli Maatta play for both London and Finland, I think he's pretty close to being NHL-ready. Another one for us to try to make room for. Gonchar only complicates matters.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 02:27 PM
  #677
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
You bring Gonchar in as a PP QB, plain and simple. We don't have anyone to step up in that role aside from Morrow. And if we're not moving anyone, not enough room on the roster for him. Next year Harrington gets added to the equation.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 03:07 PM
  #678
Jag68Sid87
Registered User
 
Jag68Sid87's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 28,054
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
You bring Gonchar in as a PP QB, plain and simple. We don't have anyone to step up in that role aside from Morrow. And if we're not moving anyone, not enough room on the roster for him. Next year Harrington gets added to the equation.
Disagree. Harrington isn't PP quarterback material, he's the opposite of Gonchar, and he will have to win a job by beating out several others, including Morrow and Maatta (who is better than Harrington, imho).

Gonchar is a disaster defensively nowadays, and we don't need anymore of those after last spring's debacle.

This would basically be like when we got Kovalev back. I love nostalgia, but at this time we need to play the kids on D and see what we have. Also, if Kris Letang can't tweak his game a little to become our legit No. 1 PP QB, then he may not be long for this organization. Whoever emerges as our No. 1 overall defenseman in the next few seasons should also become our power-play QB. We have several candidates for the role, let's see what happens.

If we end up losing an entire season, all of the prospects will have gained a lot of ground on most of the veterans. That's why guys who are pushing 40 should be off-limits, even a guy like Gonchar who has been playing in the KHL this season.

Jag68Sid87 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 04:20 PM
  #679
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
You didn't watch Gonchar this past postseason. Comparing him to Kovalev is a joke. He was one of Ottawa's better defenders against one of the best teams in the league.

Using him in a 3rd pairing role and on the PP with a system and personnel he's familiar with for one more season is something Id explore.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 04:39 PM
  #680
Stecz
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 799
vCash: 500
In 2011/2012, we were 1st in goals a game, 2010/2011 we were 13th with a metric tonne of injuries, 2009/2010 we were 5th, 2008-2009 we were 6th. We don't need more offensive players. A move for Gonchar would be a move in the wrong direction and cost a lot of salary.

Stecz is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 07:36 PM
  #681
TheRollingPuck
Keep Calm & Corsi On
 
TheRollingPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jag68Sid87 View Post
Gonchar is a disaster defensively nowadays, and we don't need anymore of those after last spring's debacle.
This is the main reason for my anti-Gonchar position. I just don't see the need to improve the offense/powerplay when this team was craptastic in it's own end.

TheRollingPuck is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 07:57 PM
  #682
JTG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Sierra Leone
Posts: 38,684
vCash: 500
Don't tell Ottawa how poor he is defensively

JTG is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 08:18 PM
  #683
TheRollingPuck
Keep Calm & Corsi On
 
TheRollingPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,058
vCash: 500
I've given up on that.

TheRollingPuck is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 08:38 PM
  #684
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superunknown94 View Post
This is the main reason for my anti-Gonchar position. I just don't see the need to improve the offense/powerplay when this team was craptastic in it's own end.
And you think adding a rookie Despres to our top 4 will magically solve our issues from last season? Or bringing in another D-man unfamiliar with our system?

The way I see it. Our issues last year get solved with adjustments in the way we defend in our own end. It's on coaching as well as team defense.

We'll miss Sullivan on the point on the PP. And we'll certainly miss Staal's ES scoring.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 08:41 PM
  #685
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 32,643
vCash: 500
I would like Gonchar if the plan is to continue using offensive possession and pressure as our main defensive strategy. If the plan is to change to a more defensive scheme, I could go either way on him considering his cap hit.

And as good as the offense was last year, we will definitely miss Staal and Sullivan. Who is going to take Sully's spot on the PP? Gonchar would allow Letang to slide over to that spot. I certainly wouldn't break the bank to bring in Sarge, but for a reasonable cost I wouldn't be upset to have him.

That said, I really don't want to block all of the young guys. Gonchar would be best if we are moving out Martin.

Ogrezilla is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 08:55 PM
  #686
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
It's pretty simple to me. We don't have a PP QB. Or anything closely resembling one aside from Morrow. Gonchar is more than capable of playing a third pairing role on a contender. If you can get him for a mid pick, you do it.

Gonchar is a far more effective NHL player than Sullivan. The talent is still there. We don't need him to be anything more than serviceable in his own end and bring it on the PP.


Last edited by mpp9: 12-27-2012 at 09:02 PM.
mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:03 PM
  #687
TheRollingPuck
Keep Calm & Corsi On
 
TheRollingPuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Moncton, NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
And you think adding a rookie Despres to our top 4 will magically solve our issues from last season? Or bringing in another D-man unfamiliar with our system?
Yes and no. I can see the hesitation to put him in a big role, but I think the second pairing would be best.

Quote:
The way I see it. Our issues last year get solved with adjustments in the way we defend in our own end. It's on coaching as well as team defense.
The defensive scheme is another thing. We saw how Martin and Michalek have struggled with it. The same thing would happen with Gonchar.

So yeah, Gonchar is terrible in his own right and he would be terrible in Bylsma's system.

TheRollingPuck is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:11 PM
  #688
UnrealMachine
Registered User
 
UnrealMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
It's pretty simple to me. We don't have a PP QB. Or anything closely resembling one aside from Morrow. Gonchar is more than capable of playing a third pairing role on a contender. If you can get him for a mid pick, you do it.

Gonchar is a far more effective NHL player than Sullivan. The talent is still there. We don't need him to be anything more than serviceable in his own end and bring it on the PP.
Letang at least resembles one. It makes sense as well considering the high probability that Malkin could occupy the right point with Crosby on the half boards. Letang's career is trending up while Gonchar's is not.

Gonchar had 2 goals and 14 points in 74 games as a "pp qb" last season.
Letang had 4 goals and 15 points in 51 games as "someone on the point" last season.

UnrealMachine is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:15 PM
  #689
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnrealMachine View Post
Letang at least resembles one. It makes sense as well considering the high probability that Malkin could occupy the right point with Crosby on the half boards. Letang's career is trending up while Gonchar's is not.

Gonchar had 2 goals and 14 points in 74 games as a "pp qb" last season.
Letang had 4 goals and 15 points in 51 games as "someone on the point" last season.
I hear that Karlsson kid ate some minutes up on the PP. I'll take their second unit PP man anyday.

Gonchar simply has better instincts in the offensive zone than Letang. Even near the end of his career. He'd be a great stopgap until Morrow is ready to contribute.


Last edited by mpp9: 12-27-2012 at 09:22 PM.
mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:17 PM
  #690
Til the End of Time
Registered User
 
Til the End of Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 7,015
vCash: 500
why do the penguins need a pp quarterback when they have crosby and malkin?

cant they quarterback things?

Til the End of Time is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:20 PM
  #691
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 32,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Til the End of Time View Post
why do the penguins need a pp quarterback when they have crosby and malkin?

cant they quarterback things?
i haven't seen them do it yet

Ogrezilla is online now  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:20 PM
  #692
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Til the End of Time View Post
why do the penguins need a pp quarterback when they have crosby and malkin?

cant they quarterback things?
Neither is comfortable at the point. You need someone who can consistently gain the zone and keep plays alive at the point. Sullivan did that for us. As did Gonchar.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:23 PM
  #693
UnrealMachine
Registered User
 
UnrealMachine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Pittsburgh, USA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
I hear that Karlsson kid took ate some minutes up on the PP. I'll take their second unit PP man anyday.
Seems they were mostly out on the ice together for the PP:

5 vs 4 TOI/60

1. Karlsson: 3.67
2. Gonchar: 3.02
3. Kuba: 1.97

UnrealMachine is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:25 PM
  #694
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by UnrealMachine View Post
Seems they were mostly out on the ice together for the PP:

5 vs 4 TOI/60

1. Karlsson: 3.67
2. Gonchar: 3.02
3. Kuba: 1.97
Karlsson was their PP QB last year. Gonchar took a backseat. Phillips played alot on the 1st unit especially later in the year.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:33 PM
  #695
Til the End of Time
Registered User
 
Til the End of Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Buenos Aires
Posts: 7,015
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
Neither is comfortable at the point. You need someone who can consistently gain the zone and keep plays alive at the point. Sullivan did that for us. As did Gonchar.
this is largely semantics, but i dont really think those are jobs of pp "quarterbacks" exactly. i view the q-back as someone who directs and controls the play in the o-zone, whom the majority of plays run thru. that can be someone at the point or on the half-wall.

they could use another player to lug the puck up the ice, but thats not necessarily a q-back.

or maybe my definition of q-back is off.

Til the End of Time is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:35 PM
  #696
mpp9
Registered User
 
mpp9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 17,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Til the End of Time View Post
this is largely semantics, but i dont really think those are jobs of pp "quarterbacks" exactly. i view the q-back as someone who directs and controls the play in the o-zone, whom the majority of plays run thru. that can be someone at the point or on the half-wall.

they could use another player to lug the puck up the ice, but thats not necessarily a q-back.
Fair enough. Ideally, I'd like someone who can run things from the point, but I'll gladly take someone who can skate the puck up ice and calm things down from the point position.

Gonchar does that.

mpp9 is offline  
Old
12-27-2012, 09:51 PM
  #697
Ogrezilla
Nerf Herder
 
Ogrezilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 32,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Til the End of Time View Post
this is largely semantics, but i dont really think those are jobs of pp "quarterbacks" exactly. i view the q-back as someone who directs and controls the play in the o-zone, whom the majority of plays run thru. that can be someone at the point or on the half-wall.

they could use another player to lug the puck up the ice, but thats not necessarily a q-back.

or maybe my definition of q-back is off.
we are missing a threatening point shot. That's the biggest thing Gonchar could provide that nobody on our roster provides. Malkin and Crosby can take one timers, but neither can possess the puck and threaten to shoot or pass from outside the circles. Its either a one timer or pass.

Ogrezilla is online now  
Old
12-28-2012, 12:45 AM
  #698
Honour Over Glory
Registered User
 
Honour Over Glory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: North America
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 9,748
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Til the End of Time View Post
why do the penguins need a pp quarterback when they have crosby and malkin?

cant they quarterback things?
And Letang.

I think this lockout is a blessing in disguise for the Pens young D.

Honour Over Glory is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 12:54 AM
  #699
JTG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Sierra Leone
Posts: 38,684
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mpp9 View Post
Neither is comfortable at the point. You need someone who can consistently gain the zone and keep plays alive at the point. Sullivan did that for us. As did Gonchar.
Mario QB'ed the powerplay his entire career here...never once did he play the top point.

Our powerplay woes seem very simple to me. Our powerplay is at it's best when both Sid and Geno can dominate one board by themselves...where they can move freely all up and down one side.

Take that how you will.

JTG is offline  
Old
12-28-2012, 02:07 AM
  #700
Candyman
Registered User
 
Candyman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Evansville, Indiana
Country: United States
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JTG View Post
Mario QB'ed the powerplay his entire career here...never once did he play the top point.

Our powerplay woes seem very simple to me. Our powerplay is at it's best when both Sid and Geno can dominate one board by themselves...where they can move freely all up and down one side.

Take that how you will.
I tend to agree with you, when we let our superstars on the half boards or in Crosby's case (more so than Malkin) down below the net they work their magic and create opportunities. I wouldn't mind having a nice point shot, but i'm not uncomfortable with Letang and another pens D on the point (I'd like to see Niskanen there with Letang). and just letting our top guys control the play on the half boards.

Candyman is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:22 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.