mikey's Thread of Penguin Randomness

[mikey]

No, BC asked that the other day...still active.

[Gaucho]

[mikey]

Yeah, it's not the power play really for me...I mean, it was a bit of an issue, but it didn't kill the series...hell, two teams in the East, including the one that beat us, had a 0% power play and still advanced...ours was 18%.

Murray wasn't good except for being decent in game 2...you can't overcome bad goaltending, our defensive structure was bad which made Murray look worse (and led to Jarry's only goal against), and then we just didn't look very engaged outside of the folks that I named (87, 16, 17, 13)...putting squarely on the power play or even primarily on the power play doesn't register for me...

[Fire0nIce228]

My frustration stems from the hype we heard before the play in started. Maybe it was all hype media driven but all I read about was how Sid and the gang are locked in, realize they have a great chance, want to get another Cup, etc. etc. and then they come out and aside from the first 10 minutes of game one, generally lay a turd. They did not look dangerous all series long - It looked like they knew they couldnt beat Price and that getting through the NZ was too tough.

Anywho - I think/agree that its time to back off the "all in" every season and start determining if the team is firing on all cylinders and has a real chance or if its a bubble type situation. We are spoiled - It dawned on me this weekend while talking with my brother about how terrible it would be to never see another Cup win, but then there are teams like the Leafs or others that have been around for decades and never won.. we got to witness 5 cups in the last 30 years.. thats crazy..

Come on #1 pick loll

[mikey]

Re: spoiled. Crudely using Stanley Cup odds since 1985, the Penguins are #1 by a mile in terms of "expected Cups" vs actual.

Tm | Exp. | Actual | Diff
Pit | 2.02 | 5 | 2.98
Edm | 1.75 | 4 | 2.25
NJ | 1.39 | 3 | 1.61
Chi | 1.44 | 3 | 1.56
Det | 2.52 | 4 | 1.48
...
SJ | 0.9 | 0 | (0.9) [1 SCF]
Tor | 0.94 | 0 | (0.94) [0 SCF]
Buf | 0.96 | 0 | (0.96) [1 SCF]
Van | 1.04 | 0 | (1.04) [2 SCF]
Phi | 1.98 | 0 | (1.98) [4 SCF]

We're super spoiled...

[NTP66]

We are. Now give us that first overall pick, NHL. WE DEMAND IT.

[faftorial]

Does that drawing happen tonight?

[MR25]

6 PM

[Gaucho]

We are. Now give us that first overall pick, NHL. WE DEMAND IT.

[Fire0nIce228]

We are. Now give us that first overall pick, NHL. WE DEMAND IT.

[NAN]

Anywho - I think/agree that its time to back off the "all in" every season and start determining if the team is firing on all cylinders and has a real chance or if its a bubble type situation. We are spoiled - It dawned on me this weekend while talking with my brother about how terrible it would be to never see another Cup win, but then there are teams like the Leafs or others that have been around for decades and never won.. we got to witness 5 cups in the last 30 years.. thats crazy..

Come on #1 pick loll

Yeah, it's crazy. We've been extremely fortunate. Even with the Steelers as well. People get pissed that both teams "left a lot of championships out there". IMO, not really. It's supposed to be hard to win. And some of the wins, we can say we weren't the favorite and the "one's we left out there" were offset with ones we weren't supposed to win.

I look at franchises, proud ones, that haven't won as much. The Rangers have only won 1 cup since 1940, and I think 4 overall. Boston has only won 1 in the last 50 years. Toronto hasn't won since expansion. Then you've had some good franchises like San Jose that never won. In football, the Chiefs had to 2 wait 50 years. Dolphins have been since the 70s. Bears only won 1 since the Super Bowl era, Cleveland nothing.

Even if we don't win, I'm glad we are in the conversation most year.

We experience the other side with the Buccos.

[NAN]

Does that drawing happen tonight?

I just don't want it to go to the Rangers, Leafs or Oilers. Which means it will go to the Rangers, Leafs or Oilers.

[NAN]

DK annoys me with some of his stuff, but I actually agree with his thoughts on what the Pens have to do going forward, and it's been talked about in here:

- You don't have to wholesale anything, or break up the "core". They are actually a bargain for what they cost with the talent you get, and while they may not be able to carry the team to the championship like in the past, they still produce

- Let some of the older guys walk, Marlue (sp), Shultz, Sheary, etc

- Give Jarry the reigns in goal and let Murray go, he's been a mess for 3 seasons, but will still demand money for his 2 cups

- Let some of the younger guys show their stuff. Lafferty, etc. They may not be the best, but they aren't bad either. Time to have Sullivan allow them to show their stuff.

- Rutherford has to shift focus to acquiring younger talent to work around instead of going all in for proven, but more expensive vets, especially not giving up draft picks

The tools are still there, and if all goes well, we still have something there, but the shift has to go from "win at all costs" to "let's get younger while also supporting the core and if all breaks well, we still have a chance for a few years".

[meow]

I'm not spoiled, you bunch of brats

[MalkinIsMyHomeboy]

Phi | 1.98 | 0 | (1.98) [4 SCF]

lol

[mikey]

"Marlue" is tops

[MR25]

New Autocorrect Now

[Rylan]

Build a 3rd line with the expectation of it being a 3rd line, not a 2nd line with expectations of it being a third line but kinda be a 2nd line. I would like that.

[Jim]

I mean, I think you follow the league pretty well. We have acquired some d-men over the years that were on their way out of the league and we turned them right around and made them some serious money...Niskanen was the worst player in the NHL when we acquired him, Schultz was nothing, Dumo was nothing, Engelland was a minor leaguer, etc. etc.

Hell, it's a little on the nose, but even Jack somehow, after 15 straight years of doing it, stopped chasing players into their own bench and locker room on sustained attacks against...he has literally been doing that since he was in college and they made him not a complete loose cannon this year...

So, the development of the defense has been unreal...our defensive structure failed to join us in the bubble...but what we have been able to do salvaging some of these D, is really top notch league wide and in hockey circles it is recognized...

Niskanen was 8 years ago, Engelland 9 years ago... what does any of that have to do with current coaching performance? Schultz was 3 years ago and has fallen again. Which, since he has slipped off again, supports my position.
Dumoulin was 21 and a solid prospect when he was traded to the Pens, and became an NHL regular at 24, 5 years ago, so I don't understand the connection.


Actual recent work, last four seasons:

Pettersson was groundlessly praised, got his new contract, stumbled, then Marino came in and the luster was off of the Pettersson and people started to notice that he is not anything special at all. EVERYONE jumped off of that bandwagon onto Marino. Riikola... I don't even know what the coaches are doing there. They couldn't get Maatta straight. Cole got booted for calling out the coaches as opposed to anything on the ice. Hunwick, Gudbranson, Pouliot, misuse of Oleksiak, etc.

Schultz's re-slip from grace, inability to get Letang to get his basics together (turnover machine, etc), Johnson usage...

When you look at the last few seasons, their list of D failures (many) is much stronger than their list of successes (one, who only has 56 games so far though).

I don't care who you want to blame or not blame; assistant coaches or head coach. I'm going all of the above.

[Blue Canary]

We are. Now give us that first overall pick, NHL. WE DEMAND IT.

WE WANT THE WORLD AND WE WANT IT NOW

Edit: We don’t want the world, we just want everyone else’s half.

[willeyeam]

So we'll ignore turning Schultz into a useful piece in the first place, Marino developing into a very good piece, Cole turning into a good d-man for us, Pettersson turning into a 2nd pairing guy that we got for Sprong because he was bad in Anaheim, Gudbranson actually being okay here compared to the worst rated d-man in the league when we got him, Daley and Hainsey fitting right in.. Okay...

[meow]

Yes we are

[mikey]

Jacques Martin's first year with us was 2013-14. Niskanen got Norris votes that season. Jultz got Norris votes (then he had a serious injury) a few years ago. They made JMFJ serviceable this past season. 100% got Maatta straight (top 5 rookie, top 5 in +/- I think). Ian Cole is another good advantage of a salvage, he wasn't an NHL regular when we got him. Dumoulin was an average prospect, who improved massively since being in the NHL. I won't even give them Marino, he may have been good anyhow...

Pettersson was the Maatta replacement...I'm not sure he was "groundlessly praised"...I was alive during all this, Jim. I don't know who you're trying to sell on this stuff...

There's definitely guys that haven't worked out and we keep throwing these guys garbage to work with...fringe/non-NHLers: Hunwick, Badbranson, Pouliot, Oleksiak, Johnson, etc.

The "I don't care who to blame" is how failures occur...because it's very important that you find out where the point of failure is. In my 1, 2, 3, 4 approach a couple pages ago, it seems like a fair opinion at worst that they're making chicken salad out of chicken feathers with this group...

I think the fault belongs on the GM more than anyone at this point...this roster isn't that good. This isn't a new opinion for me this year, I'm not a big change with the wind guy...

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1567&p=721290&hilit ... er#p721290

10/2 :

Yeah, we still have some stars and ya never know what a star can do...but it's a roster without a real direction...

10/9:

Yeah, this looks like a personnel issue...it's not a very good roster...and I don't see a lot of good outs...we have a shot at making the playoffs, of course...but the roster is full of very average players..

12/5:

Meh, I don't get too high or too low. But we won a game against the Blues. That's good. We win two lose two. We're like 7-8 last calendar month or whatever. I'll start looking for other avenues when the roster starts to not match the results. Average team (mas o menos) is producing about what you'd expect.

1/15:

Man, I hate to say it because I'm gonna get beaten up here because everyone is so high...this team isn't anything special to a man...it's well-coached and believing in their defensive structure and the new faces have fit in like gangbusters (Jarry, Tanev, not Chucky, etc.)...but it's a pretty average roster with some star power...

Playing structured defense, but having a couple guys who can just take a game over when the time comes...that's a great combination...but this isn't a particularly noteworthy roster for me...

Even if our coaching wasn't great the last four games...it's tough with a roster like this. I have a lot of respect for Sully, Gonchar, and Martin have done, so do folks around the league for the most part...so it is extremely important where you place the blame because if you replace the good thing we have going with something worse and pair that with the bad thing we have going, you're going to get a real tough situation here for a while...

Do it right, or pay the price.

[NTP66]

I am not a Pettersson fan, personally.

[Jim]

So we'll ignore turning Schultz into a useful piece, Marino developing into a very good piece, Cole turning into a good d-man for us, Pettersson turning into a 2nd pairing guy that we got for Sprong because he was bad in Anaheim, Gudbranson actually being okay here compared to the worst rated d-man in the league when we got him, Daley and Hainsey fitting right in.. Okay...

I mentioned that I was looking at the last 4 seasons, recent time vs the Niskanen and Engelland arrivals when were brought up for some reason.

I addressed Schultz's up and down, I addressed Marino as the only positive, I addressed Cole, I addressed Pettersson. Who was I ignoring? I mentioned Gudbranson, who only had 26 games as a Pen). Hainsey had only 16 games.

Daley was Daley when he came here, and only one of his two years falls into the time frame discussed.