Nonetheless, I think our team needs to add at least a couple of respectable wingers to the mix, learn to activate our D into our offensive push, and most importantly begin playing a smarter game with less low-risk plays in order to separate themselves and step into "elite" territory.
Not in question, but we already have threads for that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sidney the Kidney
What would that be? Oh wait, I know! We need to draft more puck moving defensemen in the draft, amirite?
Seth Jones will be ours. Let the non-elite tanking begin!
Pfff... 3rd in the league? Might as well blow this whole thing up. With teams like Carolina and Minnesota on the rise, this team is run and done.
If this team could...
A) Get Crosby AND Malkin going at the same time
B) Still manage to stick to something that resembles a system
C) Get A & B on a consistent basis
Then there would no doubts or concerns regarding them being "elite" (whatever the OPs standard) or not. The question isn't whether they are elite or not (they are), but whether they stick with the other elite teams. Either way, this team will always have a chance to win games, with either Crosby or Malkin embarrassing teams on any given night.
Pfff... 3rd in the league? Might as well blow this whole thing up. With teams like Carolina and Minnesota on the rise, this team is run and done.
If this team could...
A) Get Crosby AND Malkin going at the same time
B) Still manage to stick to something that resembles a system
C) Get A & B on a consistent basis
Then there would no doubts or concerns regarding them being "elite" (whatever the OPs standard) or not. The question isn't whether they are elite or not (they are), but whether they stick with the other elite teams. Either way, this team will always have a chance to win games, with either Crosby or Malkin embarrassing teams on any given night.
Might as well call it the Cole Harbor Conspiracy.
Yes. And then we can complete the tanking by landing Connor Mcdavid. We will then finally be elite.
When we don't cycle the puck- "We are horrible at puck possession. What the heck Bylsma"
When we do cycle the puck- "You're sapping this team creativity Bylsma! What the heck!!"
The perception that starts threads like this really has to do with the speed / fluidity of the WC game (at least for those teams I mentioned, maybe EDM too). It's very different from what we see most of the time, and generates chances from other parts of the ice (based on their players' strengths). People need to resist the idea of thinking we're not "hangin' with the big dogs" if we don't look like we're playing Olympic-style hockey.
There's no question our system does stifle Sid and especially Geno's creativity somewhat (except on rushes / breakaways / Powerplays) but Bylsma is playing the percentages. The more we're not relying on outside shooting, the better the odds we'll score more goals. Neal is a God-send because he opens up the legitimate threat of a guy who can blow pucks past a goalie from 15-20 feet away... which opens up our bread and butter down low (in theory). Teams can't just protect against the grungy goals down low.
It's like a post team in basketball vs. a perimeter/post team. The latter is a lot more fun to watch because they mix it up and score from everywhere, but the former can be dominant too depending on the players.
Last edited by Chancellor Vitale: 02-18-2013 at 06:10 PM.
When we don't cycle the puck- "We are horrible at puck possession. What the heck Bylsma"
When we do cycle the puck- "You're sapping this team creativity Bylsma! What the heck!!"
Bylsma can do nothing right, Geno can do no wrong, every winger in the league wants to play for us and Shero just doesn't want to pay for one, we don't give young players a chance, ......... Am I missing anything?
No, they weren't. But, not unlike the Pens in 2009, they replaced their coach when the found themselves out of the playoffs, moved a top four defenseman for help up front, make a few other tweaks, got hot at the right time, and got the breaks any team needs. You don't need to be elite to win the cup. You also can't be stale, predictable, or too deficient in critical areas (goaltending, up front if playing against really tight defensive teams, on the blueline if playing offensive powerhouses, behind the bench [not in the Pens case, just in general]).
The Kings weren't an "elite" team last year at this time. Nor were the Devils. I don't agree with the western/eastern conference thing either. Last year, the Pens were 13-2-3 against the West and 5-0-1 against the NW. The Sharks and the Canucks are almost always in the top of the standings, as were the Caps for several years.
I just don't think "elite" means much in the salary cup era. Not to say there aren't a few franchises that perenially stink and are never in the mix. But there are probably 10-12 teams every year (which vary to some extent from year to year) who are capable of getting hot and winning the Cup. And that's all that really counts.
As an aside, I don't think the Pens have the makeup to win the Cup this year. Their defense isn't strong enough and the loss of Staal on the forecheck on the third line (not that I'm getting on the hate Sutter bandwagon that seems to be gathering steam), as well as the lack of a coherent second line are glaring weaknesses. Can't honestly compare them to the Canucks, as I haven't seen them much this year.
I think the following blog post extrapolates a bit too much from a small sample size, but the OP made me think of it.
It's a theory that the sub-par ice at CONSOL is holding the team back.
Quote:
In praising the high quality of the ice at Buffalo’s First Niagara Center, Crosby reminded us how important a smooth sheet is to talented offensive players like himself, Evgeni Malkin, James Neal and Kris Letang. Any fourth-line plugger can play the chip-and-chase game in glorified slush, but an artist needs a pure canvas.
I'm not sure I fully agree with the premise -- certainly the team's shortcomings can't all be written off to the ice surface. But it plays into the discussion about puck possession and the team's style.
I'm not sure I fully agree with the premise -- certainly the team's shortcomings can't all be written off to the ice surface. But it plays into the discussion about puck possession and the team's style.
OP... I enjoyed your post, but I want to hear more of what you think they can do schematically. I think we've heard the arguments over and over again, but I want to hear solutions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shureshot66
I think the following blog post extrapolates a bit too much from a small sample size, but the OP made me think of it.
It's a theory that the sub-par ice at CONSOL is holding the team back.
I'm not sure I fully agree with the premise -- certainly the team's shortcomings can't all be written off to the ice surface. But it plays into the discussion about puck possession and the team's style.
Thoughts?
It's an interesting take, but I think it's ********. I think we are trying to do a bit too much out there w/ no puck support. This team feels there is not a single wall of defense they can't pass through. It gets them in trouble more often than not. Especially in our breakout and the powerplay.
That being said - sure.. maybe ice helps out a little. But I think the percentage chance that these long ass passes and trying to force pucks is low in the first place. They don't play high percentage hockey like they did in 09. It's something I'll die wondering. I just BEG someone to ask Bylsma why he would ever leave a system that won him the Cup. I literally get so bothered by it.
OP... I enjoyed your post, but I want to hear more of what you think they can do schematically. I think we've heard the arguments over and over again, but I want to hear solutions.
It's an interesting take, but I think it's ********. I think we are trying to do a bit too much out there w/ no puck support. This team feels there is not a single wall of defense they can't pass through. It gets them in trouble more often than not. Especially in our breakout and the powerplay.
That being said - sure.. maybe ice helps out a little. But I think the percentage chance that these long ass passes and trying to force pucks is low in the first place. They don't play high percentage hockey like they did in 09. It's something I'll die wondering. I just BEG someone to ask Bylsma why he would ever leave a system that won him the Cup. I literally get so bothered by it.
I won't comment on the season as a whole Cole, but I noticed a ton of times last game when they came up as a 5 man unit on the PP.
I won't comment on the season as a whole Cole, but I noticed a ton of times last game when they came up as a 5 man unit on the PP.
The powerplay part I'm talking about is when they force passes through the box because they are good enough to do it (Geno/Sid). Instead, they could keep it simple as they did for the first PP goal against Buffalo when they just shot the puck and looked for loose change.
I didn't mean the breakout for the PP. The in-zone forced passes on the set PP.
OP... I enjoyed your post, but I want to hear more of what you think they can do schematically.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ColePens
The powerplay part I'm talking about is when they force passes through the box because they are good enough to do it (Geno/Sid). Instead, they could keep it simple as they did for the first PP goal against Buffalo when they just shot the puck and looked for loose change.
I didn't mean the breakout for the PP. The in-zone forced passes on the set PP.
Cole, from what I've read of your posts, we share a lot of the same frustrations with regards to schematics. I'll also readily admit that I'm not the most knowledgable Xs and Os guy.
Offhand, here are some things that I see at even strength:
We have trouble winning board battles in the offensive zone. It seems rare that we double up on a man on the boards in the offensive zone and emerge with the puck. When we do, we are often stuck pinballing the puck between the half wall and to our dmen on the point. That is to say, even when we win battles for pucks in the offensive zone, we have trouble mustering scoring chances as a result.
Our puck support is OK at its best and terrible on its worst nights. This one is the biggest mystery to me. We have a proven ability to be a great team when it comes to puck support, but it just seems that we aren't prioritizing it at the moment.
Other times, our offensive zone entries are followed by the puck carrier button hooking, looking for a cross-seam pass that fails and the puck quickly goes the other way. This one is also very frustrating. Sometimes I feel like we just have no options...when we dump the puck in deep, we have a difficult time retrieving it (along with our other board play troubles I mentioned), and our only other tactic seems to fail even more spectacularly.
On the PP:
Cole, you have done a good job diagnosing this before, but in a nut shell, we don't do a good enough job of creating odd-man situations. How many times have we seen Malkin blast sharp angle, low-percentage one timers wide with the puck careening around the boards and out of the zone? With that said, our PP has looked drastically better since Martin joined the first PP unit. With Martin working the top of the umbrella, our guys have done a good job moving around and finding space. I am also adamant that we put the first unit on a tighter leash when it comes to their ice time. If the PP is 1 min in, they haven't generated a chance, and there is an opportunity to get them off the ice, switch them up for the 2nd unit. It's not a problem if the 1st unit plays 1:40 of the PP, but it seems that our first unit consistently plays 1:20+ regardless of how well they're playing. Again, if they're failing to set something up, put the second unit out there more quickly!
I won't comment on the season as a whole Cole, but I noticed a ton of times last game when they came up as a 5 man unit on the PP.
While once in a while we can still ***** about the PP, at this point where we are literally free scoring on it and 2nd in the NHL with the man advantage, I think we can agree this is not something to count among our troubles. Several of us hated that we had forwards miscast on the points. That experiment died and the PP righted itself.
Where we don't have satisfying puck support and what Cole is referring to is 5 on 5, where there's both too much of a gap between forwards and defenders, and where we are winning far too few battles/getting to lose pucks in the offensive zone, partly because there's little support and our guys are too often one against two opponents. Same goes when in possession where too often the puck carrier (forward) have to go it alone or force low percentage passes, because there aren't any high percentage outlets available. Or outlets from D, where our forwards vacate the zone racing forward in all directions to get to the expected stretch pass.
You all can point to us being one of the top teams in the league and dismiss these concerns as those of overly critical 'wishing for perfection all the time' fans. But I honestly think we have quite a few more points than our performances deserve so far, and we'd be in quite a bind if Neal, Kunitz and Duper were not all shooting at above 20% at the same time as our PP is rocking at +27% for the season so far. Later on Malkin is going to get hot and help mask issues also, but the point is that you don't win in the post-season without playing fundamentally solid hockey.
There is plenty of time to get there, but you can only fix issues when you identify them and try to fix them. I am going to be a cry baby throwing tantrums until I see that we attempt to change these things.
And for the record, that is probably me being 100% on the same page as Cole asking why the hell the structural integrity to our 08\09 playoff team is like a buried treasure? If anyone has a map for it, it is supposed to be Bylsma. Go dig, man!
While once in a while we can still ***** about the PP, at this point where we are literally free scoring on it and 2nd in the NHL with the man advantage, I think we can agree this is not something to count among our troubles. Several of us hated that we had forwards miscast on the points. That experiment died and the PP righted itself.
Where we don't have satisfying puck support and what Cole is referring to is 5 on 5, where there's both too much of a gap between forwards and defenders, and where we are winning far too few battles/getting to lose pucks in the offensive zone, partly because there's little support and our guys are too often one against two opponents. Same goes when in possession where too often the puck carrier (forward) have to go it alone or force low percentage passes, because there aren't any high percentage outlets available. Or outlets from D, where our forwards vacate the zone racing forward in all directions to get to the expected stretch pass.
You all can point to us being one of the top teams in the league and dismiss these concerns as those of overly critical 'wishing for perfection all the time' fans. But I honestly think we have quite a few more points than our performances deserve so far, and we'd be in quite a bind if Neal, Kunitz and Duper were not all shooting at above 20% at the same time as our PP is rocking at +27% for the season so far. Later on Malkin is going to get hot and help mask issues also, but the point is that you don't win in the post-season without playing fundamentally solid hockey.
There is plenty of time to get there, but you can only fix issues when you identify them and try to fix them. I am going to be a cry baby throwing tantrums until I see that we attempt to change these things.
And for the record, that is probably me being 100% on the same page as Cole asking why the hell the structural integrity to our 08\09 playoff team is like a buried treasure? If anyone has a map for it, it is supposed to be Bylsma. Go dig, man!
I despise the Canucks and their diving ways, being compared to them in any way is just wrong.
I don't think there are any elite teams, I hate that term for teams. The Pens are a contender, I like that word, contender. As long as this team is a contender, they are worth mentioning for a team to beat or emulate.
A for effort, obviously, but i think using the Canucks as your comparison is where you lost a lot of credibility. The Canucks have a reputation of being soft, not difficult to play against, and it has show in their continuing failure to win a cup. Is it not evident the few times the Penguins played the Canucks over the last few years? Pittsburgh has dominated them nearly every time.
I agree that this team isn't elite, still has a few problems, but i really could find flaws with just about every team in the league if i tried.
The Penguins struggle in finding motivation to play at home. Not sure why that is exactly. Something that could remedy itself practically overnight - who knows? There were significant issues with their special teams in the playoffs last year, and they appeared to have been working on those.
The team has also lacked a little killer instinct in the standings. the last few years they've fallen 1 or 2 games short of the division and gotten a tougher 4-5 seed matchup. They would have faired better last year not seeing the Flyers in round 1, and maybe getting to tune up their game vs the Senators instead.
Goaltending, lastly, is probably the most major issue - because of the fanbase it is difficult to navigate. I think Vokoun was the right decision and will pay dividends in the playoffs. Hardly something to brag about if you are a Vancouver fan though.
While once in a while we can still ***** about the PP, at this point where we are literally free scoring on it and 2nd in the NHL with the man advantage, I think we can agree this is not something to count among our troubles. Several of us hated that we had forwards miscast on the points. That experiment died and the PP righted itself.
Where we don't have satisfying puck support and what Cole is referring to is 5 on 5, where there's both too much of a gap between forwards and defenders, and where we are winning far too few battles/getting to lose pucks in the offensive zone, partly because there's little support and our guys are too often one against two opponents. Same goes when in possession where too often the puck carrier (forward) have to go it alone or force low percentage passes, because there aren't any high percentage outlets available. Or outlets from D, where our forwards vacate the zone racing forward in all directions to get to the expected stretch pass.
You all can point to us being one of the top teams in the league and dismiss these concerns as those of overly critical 'wishing for perfection all the time' fans. But I honestly think we have quite a few more points than our performances deserve so far, and we'd be in quite a bind if Neal, Kunitz and Duper were not all shooting at above 20% at the same time as our PP is rocking at +27% for the season so far. Later on Malkin is going to get hot and help mask issues also, but the point is that you don't win in the post-season without playing fundamentally solid hockey.
There is plenty of time to get there, but you can only fix issues when you identify them and try to fix them. I am going to be a cry baby throwing tantrums until I see that we attempt to change these things.
And for the record, that is probably me being 100% on the same page as Cole asking why the hell the structural integrity to our 08\09 playoff team is like a buried treasure? If anyone has a map for it, it is supposed to be Bylsma. Go dig, man!
Bylsma's dedicated to quick transition and a north-south game, and the fact is that you will always be able to pass the puck a lot faster than you can skate it. Get the puck up-ice, get it deep, and make the opposition play in their zone is the DB mantra. It's always going to be a big part of his repertoire, much to the chagrin of this board (do people remember that the stretch pass was a big reason why Philly beat us last year?).
Given the options we have on defense, that sort of play shouldn't be off-limits. Our defensemen are a helluva lot more talented in transition than our forwards are outside of Geno and Sid, and I have more faith in them completing a long pass than I do the likes of Dupes or TK making a short pass in the neutral zone. I have a feeling that if the board had its way and we started relying on short-passing plays, we'd backpedal pretty quick after the 11,000th neutral zone turnover and subsequent odd-man rush the other way. A blueline with Letang, Niskanen, Martin, and Despres should be executing stretch plays.
That said, I don't think Bylsma's nearly as rigid or one-note as he's portrayed here. I see more than a few plays where the team comes up as a unit. The problem is that whenever a stretch is used, that seems to be all anyone can focus on, and it's always assumed to be the wrong move (even when it works).
