Henry Hank wrote:always thought that in the Cup season, beyond the coaching change, it was important that they brought in Kunitz, Guerin, and Adams to reinforce what they wanted to do. All three were previous Cup winners, played with some grit, and most importantly played simple north-south games. It's funny but that's exactly the kind of thing that needs to be reinforced again. This group clearly knows how they have to play. A lot of them were doing it two years ago when Crosby/Malkin were hurt and last year without Crosby. With the full squadron, they get stupid and try to play video game hockey for some reason.
shmenguin wrote:wrong year
pcm wrote:People shaking their heads at our core players' immaturity have to realize that these guys are 25 year olds. Maybe these posters haven't gotten there yet themselves, but for anyone old enough to have lived through their 20's and be able to look back on them should not be surprised at some of the travails that these guys are going through. The ups can be really high and the lows pretty low.
"I presume you know the difference between front and back, right hand and left hand?"
The girls replied: Yes.
Sun Tzu went on: "When I say "Eyes front," you must look straight ahead. When I say "Left turn," you must face towards your left hand. When I say "Right turn," you must face towards your right hand. When I say "About turn," you must face right round towards your back."
Again the girls assented. The words of command having been thus explained, he set up the halberds and battle-axes in order to begin the drill. Then, to the sound of drums, he gave the order "Right turn." But the girls only burst out laughing. Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame."
So he started drilling them again, and this time gave the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers."
penmyst wrote:So where is the diconnect? Is it the general or the officers? General=HCDB, officers=on-ice leaders.
Because there is a problem in there somewhere.
Desiato wrote:Impossible for any of us to tell. However, the head coach is ultimately accountable. If the players aren't listening, it's a problem he has to solve. It's part of his job.
Desiato wrote:Anyway, this analogy is completely flawed. The "on-ice leaders" are peers with no real authority over their teammates, not officers. It's so incredibly naive to think the Pens are going to trade for a Gary Roberts type guy, and he's going to will them to play better D. DB may be the general, but he and his staff are also the officers.
IMO, star players need a tough coach who isn't afraid to send a message. Remember when Bowman did things like put Coffey on left wing and Fedorov on the 3rd line and D? I think a player coach only does well as a short-term follow-up to a disciplinarian.
As the cliche goes, you can't fire the whole team.
smoothmoneyb wrote:How come nobody's talking about how bad the power play was last night? On 3 out of the 4 PP's we had, we registered exactly 0 shots on goal.. ZERO SHOTS ON GOAL. That's three powerplays without a single SOG. That's pathetic! The third power play was at least decent, as we got a few shots off. Overall the power play has been pretty good this year, but not great, and definitely not as good as it probably could be considering the personnel we have out there.
penmyst wrote:It's not flawed.
While there is no direct chain of command, such as in a military situation, that does not mean there aren't players who have the commanding presence to lead. Most of us see this in our workplaces, or perhaps in social casual gatherings. Where even though most of us are on "even" ground with each other, there are certain people who command respect or can organize/direct others. Leaders and followers. And it's not always your most talented players, despite sports wisdom of always handing these "C"s and "A"s to them.
Desiato wrote:I think those leaders need to be validated by the staff to have any real hold over a player with a motivational issue. If the advice of the 'officer' is not heeded, there needs to be consequences. When the leaders set an example, it needs to be reenforced.
I've stated my opinion a lot of times already. I don't think the Pens have a personnel issue. We've seen most of these guys as warriors before. The will is there, but confidence has vanished. I blame the system. They turn the puck over way too often and don't seem to learn from it. There's no patience or savvy at all. It seems they constantly try to force the play whether it's there or not. The usual solution is to up the tempo which just results in more errors. Opponents seem to have a really easy time reading breakouts by the Pens.
Someone posted that the Pens were cruising earlier in the season. I disagree. Most wins I've watched, even with big differentials have been ugly to me. When this team looks good, it's because of talent.
Users browsing this forum: It'sagreatdayforhockey! and 16 guests