Winning in the NHL is clear. Good is better than great

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

What struck me about the NJ beating of Philly and Phoenix's dismantling of the Predators was just how much the modern game rewards teams full of good players and punishes those with a few great ones. We all should have learned this when the Red Wings were soaring but we didn't. More than ever, I think it is time to ditch some of these big boys and get a bunch of good role players. Talbot won us the cup for crying out loud. Who was a bigger everyday dude than Max?

[jwit]

While i think your first premise has merit, in the playoffs, big, defensive minded guys seem to be the current winning formula. But Talbot, please! He benefited from playing on Geno's wing in the cup run. Every game he scored a goal, he should have had three. It took four to five great quality chances for him to score a goal. Go back and watch those games if you do not believe me.

There is no denying his performance in game seven. However, he was a ghost of himself for two straight seasons , and was awful in his contract year. I love all the fanboi fever (not you) saying we needed max. Last time i checked max was in the lineup against Montreal and Tampa in the playoffs and all his glorius guts and leadership made no difference.

[thehockeyguru]

The trend that I see amongst the final 4 (or soon to be when the Rangers) is they all have top goaltenders.

[Fire0nice228]

The trend I see amongst the final 5 teams alive is a commitment to total team defense (never thought I'd say about Caps!). Few odd man rushes against, shot blocking, physicality, nothing too fancy in the neutral zone. And stellar goaltending.

[interstorm]

wrong, wrong, wrong...

What is happening is that via the salary cap - there are no true power house teams...parity is the norm. Due to this, teams (no matter how they are constructed) are generally very close...especially once you take only the top half that make the playoffs. Whether a team is filled with grinders or high end talent, there will always be a weakness somewhere. While some teams match up better against others (in the regular season, Philly beat us, the Rangers owned them, we handled the Rangers) -- the truth is that [color=#FFBF00]due to parity it is only a couple bounces of the puck, a few good/bad calls and keeping one's emotions in check that more often than not dictate the winner[/color].

When the playoffs are done and over with (let's say LA beats NY) -- do you think that if each and every playoff team jumped right back in and started from round 1 again that the Kings would win every time (let's also suspend fatigue and injuries for a moment)? No way. A winner has to be a good team -- well, turns out these are all good teams (Devils and Coyotes included). Beyond that, a big part is having some luck (Rangers) and getting hot at the right time (Washington). Yeah, you need guts, coaching and skill -- but for the most part, you wouldn't be here if you didn't have it.

Let's all get off the bridge here. The team is fine (besides, it isn't like the Detroit team you mentioned didn't have high end talent). We lost. So will every team other than 1. Each of those teams will be built a little different and year after year a different type of team will win.

Do I think the guys in our locker room give us a really good chance to win?

Yes.

Do I expect that to happen every year?

Nope.

It has only been a couple years since our last cup. The team has done great over the last few regular seasons while playing through adversity. Give us all a break with the "blow the whole thing up" stuff...

[interstorm]

The trend that I see amongst the final 4 (or soon to be when the Rangers) is they all have top goaltenders.

that is this year -- same can't be said a few years ago when Philly and Chicago played. That offseason all we heard was how unimportant the goal tending position had become.

There is no magic formula here, folks...

[Streaks House]

What is happening is that via the salary cap - there are no true power house teams...parity is the norm. Due to this, teams (no matter how they are constructed) are generally very close...especially once you take only the top half that make the playoffs. Whether a team is filled with grinders or high end talent, there will always be a weakness somewhere.

Exactly. Now that the salary cap has been in place since the lockout, this being the 7th season, most GMs have adapted to managing in this environment. Teams with a solid core in place that have impact players outperforming entry level contracts have an advantage. This illustrates the importance of developing young talent from within. Not necessarily saying only stars like Crosby, Malkin, Toews, but even a Tyler Kennedy, Brad Marchand, Chris Kreider/Carl Hagelin this year with NYR. Players that can contribute...ideally down the road, players like Simon Despres, Joe Morrow, Scott Harrington, Beau Bennett, Tom Kuhnhackl can fill this need for the Pens.

[jwit]

Mindset and personnel are key. We just did not have enought sandpaper guys. Problem is they are not valuable in the regular season. We had dupuis and sullivan skating with post concussion sid. They are fine during the season, but not enough nastiness and grit for postseason. Nobody going to the wall and bashing to retrieve pucks, killing guys in the crease and slot on the other end. Waxpaper version of Matt Cooke is a nice story but useless in postseason. Never going to get or buy a call. Hated by refs.

If they are going to officiate the way they did in the 90's , perhaps the pens old strategy might work again. Play the first half wide open, let secondary scorers build stats with your stars and increase their value. At the deadline trade them for grit. Play more defensive the last 1/4 to 1/3 of the season (playoff hockey). Pens are now like a fast break basketball team, run and gun. Don't turn the ball over and shoot a high % against them and no fast breaks go the other way.

[thehockeyguru]

The trend that I see amongst the final 4 (or soon to be when the Rangers) is they all have top goaltenders.

that is this year -- same can't be said a few years ago when Philly and Chicago played. That offseason all we heard was how unimportant the goal tending position had become.

There is no magic formula here, folks...

Less clutching and grabbing, those were both very good offensive teams. The magic formula is how the refs call the game.

[interstorm]

Mindset and personnel are key. We just did not have enought sandpaper guys. Problem is they are not valuable in the regular season. We had dupuis and sullivan skating with post concussion sid. They are fine during the season, but not enough nastiness and grit for postseason. Nobody going to the wall and bashing to retrieve pucks, killing guys in the crease and slot on the other end. Waxpaper version of Matt Cooke is a nice story but useless in postseason. Never going to get or buy a call. Hated by refs.

If they are going to officiate the way they did in the 90's , perhaps the pens old strategy might work again. Play the first half wide open, let secondary scorers build stats with your stars and increase their value. At the deadline trade them for grit. Play more defensive the last 1/4 to 1/3 of the season (playoff hockey). Pens are now like a fast break basketball team, run and gun. Don't turn the ball over and shoot a high % against them and no fast breaks go the other way.

I think there personnel were fine -- not perfect, but what team is? The problem were the bone-head mistakes; lovejoy throwing the puck through the crease. duper not dumping the puck in but rushing it during a penalty kill. malkin not able to control his temper. there were so many mistakes made in that series -- every player on the team will have marathon video sessions this off season. just like bryz last night -- bone head play but 99 out of 100 times nothing bad happens...just this time (for us and the flyers last night) it did.

you can say "get rid of the guys who make these bad plays" -- but virtually everyone does...it just don't always go bad. mike smith is looking like an MVP candidate out west, even though he has almost turned the puck over a handful of times and could have easily destroyed the coyotes momentum. just lucky for him, the bounces mostly haven't gone that way.

he got lucky - we didn't.

with the parity this league has (which is mostly a good thing) -- it's pretty much that simple.

the gap between conn smyth and goat is not necessarily that big.

[IanMoran]

There is no magic formula / only 1 team can win

/thread should have ended there

[sil]

Would trading Malkin for some good old fashioned role players like Talbot make you happy?

Trading Malkin for the Talbot's, Cooke's and Kennedy's of the world...yeah, that's a pretty stupid idea. Trading Malkin for (just as an example) the Oshie's and Pietrangelo's and a pick/prospect, or some combination of young talent that (combined) make $2,000,000 less than him......eh, I'm not leaning to that being such a bad idea.

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

Would trading Malkin for some good old fashioned role players like Talbot make you happy?

Trading Malkin for the Talbot's, Cooke's and Kennedy's of the world...yeah, that's a pretty stupid idea. Trading Malkin for (just as an example) the Oshie's and Pietrangelo's and a pick/prospect, or some combination of young talent that (combined) make $2,000,000 less than him......eh, I'm not leaning to that being such a bad idea.

Exactly. I never intended my post to be a "I love Max Talbot" thing. Could care less really. My point is what sil says. You take a huge asset and turn him into 3 solid role players. That minimizes the risk of a lot of things: injuries, slumps, line combinations, etc...

I am shocked at some of the responses here. The Pens didn't lose because of some bad luck. They gave up 30 goals!!! That isn't bad luck, it is horrific playing. The Devils soundly proved that Philly wasn't a goal machine. Good teams win because they adapt to the teams they are playing against with a solid core of players top to bottom who all contribute. Bad luck may affect one game, not a best of 7. How stupid! My point about Talbot was that he scored the goals in game 7. Not Sid, not Malkin. Who scored the only goal for Philly in their final game this year? Yep, you guessed it.

BTW, I loved the idea of changing up your style towards the end of the year to a more controlled, defensive plan. Could have helped us a ton.

[offsides]

Exactly. I never intended my post to be a "I love Max Talbot" thing. Could care less really. My point is what sil says. You take a huge asset and turn him into 3 solid role players. That minimizes the risk of a lot of things: injuries, slumps, line combinations, etc...

I am shocked at some of the responses here. The Pens didn't lose because of some bad luck. They gave up 30 goals!!! That isn't bad luck, it is horrific playing. The Devils soundly proved that Philly wasn't a goal machine. Good teams win because they adapt to the teams they are playing against with a solid core of players top to bottom who all contribute. Bad luck may affect one game, not a best of 7. How stupid! My point about Talbot was that he scored the goals in game 7. Not Sid, not Malkin. Who scored the only goal for Philly in their final game this year? Yep, you guessed it.

BTW, I loved the idea of changing up your style towards the end of the year to a more controlled, defensive plan. Could have helped us a ton.

Tend to agree with you. I think we are too top heavy and need a more balanced team. The balanced teams are still playing. Not sure if RS agrees, guess we will see.

[Arlow]

I'd happily take a team that shows up.

[Jasmine]

I dont exactly agree with your premise. You do have to be GOOD during the regular season to make the playoffs, but you have to be GREAT once you get in. Teams that just play "good" now are not moving on. New Jersey played GREAT against the Flyers . . . owned the boards and won all the battles, same with LA, Phoenix, etc. You have to play GREAT to win four rounds and the Cup!!
My theory is that once the playoffs start, it's not so much about the players, but rather the coaches who win or lose series. Laviolette kicked Bylsma's arse, and, in turn, the Devils coaching staff kicked Laviotte where the sun don't shine. It's our coaching staff that has disappointed me more than the players!!!!!!!!!!!

[Henry Hank]

I think it's just that good TEAMS win. Collections of a bunch of good to great players, like what the Pens have going on, are not successful if they aren't playing well as a team. I really think that any other playoff team probably would have beaten the Pens in the first round. That's how unfit the Pens were for playoff hockey. Theoretically, the advantage the Pens should have over other teams is that they have that star power that few teams have, problem is that it's all nullified when their play as a team is complete dirt. They better figure out a way over the summer to present a team next season that plays smart, disciplined, responsible hockey and not just expect to roll over everyone just because they have more talent.

I think a lot of people are completely off base. It's not luck. It's not that the Pens weren't balanced. On paper, the Pens have a great roster, top to bottom. As a team, they failed. Great collection of talent, BAD team.

[Gaucho]

As a team, they failed.

/thread

[no name]

due to parity it is only a couple bounces of the puck, a few good/bad calls and keeping one's emotions in check that more often than not dictate the winner

Really can't argue with this. But i think balanced teams are also having more success do to where as a team with only top teir talent struggles a bit more since if you match or shutdown the top 2 lines you can beat them in the long run. The pens in the end beat themselves, they Flyers didn't need any help after our team decided to implode. NJ turned the other cheek at every chance they could. Pens were to stupid and fell into the trap everytime.

[André]

Nah. The Caps pay their top three players 23 mil a year. Top five 33.

The Rangers pay their top five 29 mil a year.

You're right with the Western teams but I think the more obvious pattern is great goaltending and solid defensive comittment/systems.

[Rylan]

I mean Phoenix is the only team that doesn't have major names on their roster aside from Doan and Whitney. And those are not household names that's for sure.

[jcgopens]

I think it's just that good TEAMS win. Collections of a bunch of good to great players, like what the Pens have going on, are not successful if they aren't playing well as a team. I really think that any other playoff team probably would have beaten the Pens in the first round. That's how unfit the Pens were for playoff hockey. Theoretically, the advantage the Pens should have over other teams is that they have that star power that few teams have, problem is that it's all nullified when their play as a team is complete dirt. They better figure out a way over the summer to present a team next season that plays smart, disciplined, responsible hockey and not just expect to roll over everyone just because they have more talent.

I think a lot of people are completely off base. It's not luck. It's not that the Pens weren't balanced. On paper, the Pens have a great roster, top to bottom. As a team, they failed. Great collection of talent, BAD team.

Good points - so, does it come down to coaching? I felt this season, especially towards the end, that something was off. I couldn't put my finger on it, just seemed that the chemistry and pack mentality wasn't there. Of course, none of us are in the locker room and have no real idea what was going on, but it appeared to have something was lacking.

[RisslingsMissingTeeth]

I think it's just that good TEAMS win. Collections of a bunch of good to great players, like what the Pens have going on, are not successful if they aren't playing well as a team. I really think that any other playoff team probably would have beaten the Pens in the first round. That's how unfit the Pens were for playoff hockey. Theoretically, the advantage the Pens should have over other teams is that they have that star power that few teams have, problem is that it's all nullified when their play as a team is complete dirt. They better figure out a way over the summer to present a team next season that plays smart, disciplined, responsible hockey and not just expect to roll over everyone just because they have more talent.

I think a lot of people are completely off base. It's not luck. It's not that the Pens weren't balanced. On paper, the Pens have a great roster, top to bottom. As a team, they failed. Great collection of talent, BAD team.

Good points - so, does it come down to coaching? I felt this season, especially towards the end, that something was off. I couldn't put my finger on it, just seemed that the chemistry and pack mentality wasn't there. Of course, none of us are in the locker room and have no real idea what was going on, but it appeared to have something was lacking.

I think if you read the article in Trib about defense, Kov makes a very good case that it was coaching. Dan said and was quoted in print that his system was predicated on offensive oppression. Basically the "the best defense is a good offense". Problem is, that simply isn't true at ALL. When we gave up the massive amount of goals early on, Dan said that the problem was guys weren't playing the system. Well, the problem WAS the system. As this offseason progresses, I am increasingly thinking his tenure here needs to wrap up. Either that or he needs to change his system. Too much talent for what just happened.

[BurghersAndDogsSports]

Let's not forget the new jersey was right up there with us until the final 3 games, was with Philly until the final 2 games and the Caps were 11- 1 with all players in the line up.

Just saying I think it's more the parity thing. All the teams except Ottawa in the east had a shot going in I thought.

[knives of ice]

you mean there are now role players that step up in the playoffs and score big goals???? holy crap thats NEVER happened before and is a completely new trend.

might as well get rid of all the superstars.