OT pens gave 4
- Thread starter Dan1911
- Start date
The Penguins weren't going to win that series if they had Patrick Roy in his prime in goal.
That series was lost at the other end of the rink.
The Islanders played a system that absolutely stymied the Pen's game, frustrated them, and one they had no clue how to attack.
You don't win playoff series by scoring 1 or 2 goals a game, having virtually no power play, and your first line essentially getting shut out. The goal scorers didn't score goals.
Could Murray have been better? I suppose he could have pitched 4 shutouts and that would have been better, but he faced so many odd man rushes and guys in alone because of turnovers or poor decisions it is hard to put much blame on him.
This was the perfect storm of crap for the Pens. Trotz knows them, he had his guys on the same page and they bought in to the man and it worked to perfection.
Amazing, the two top seeds from the East and West are out and so are the Pens with all that star power. Bruins next perhaps. Looks like Washington may repeat after all.
You know next year's club will look different. Hopefully younger and hungrier, faster and smarter. One last hurrah for Crosby/Malkin would be nice.
That series was lost at the other end of the rink.
The Islanders played a system that absolutely stymied the Pen's game, frustrated them, and one they had no clue how to attack.
You don't win playoff series by scoring 1 or 2 goals a game, having virtually no power play, and your first line essentially getting shut out. The goal scorers didn't score goals.
Could Murray have been better? I suppose he could have pitched 4 shutouts and that would have been better, but he faced so many odd man rushes and guys in alone because of turnovers or poor decisions it is hard to put much blame on him.
This was the perfect storm of crap for the Pens. Trotz knows them, he had his guys on the same page and they bought in to the man and it worked to perfection.
Amazing, the two top seeds from the East and West are out and so are the Pens with all that star power. Bruins next perhaps. Looks like Washington may repeat after all.
You know next year's club will look different. Hopefully younger and hungrier, faster and smarter. One last hurrah for Crosby/Malkin would be nice.
What part of adding a goalie has trading Murray on your brain-
Other than your usual melodramatic love affair.
You tout his stats -
I show he’s indistinguishable from our backup-
You instead ramp up the silliness.
To the Guy Who keeps Making Different handles, Why do you Randomly Capitalize Your replies? It’s Easy to Tell You’re the Same Person.
It's not my silliness here, you do realize this. No one else except some old hicks in Blawnox are blaming Murray. Just you. You don't see anyone from the local hockey media or national media. Just you. And Bert from Blawnox "Shoulda kept Fleury an' at". Just you. And Bert.
This is not an Owt thing, this is a Soufie thing. You have the obsession.
Rooting like hell for Carolina....please.....it is wide open for the Caps. Of course, the Leafs look really good. But I want to go back to before the playoffs, I said "Columbus will give Tampa all they can handle because their roster is really good". I think it is going to be a CBJ/Washington final in the East, which would be a fantastic matchup.
Columbus is good, likely this is their last shot with a bevy of free agents but I give them credit for the guts to go for it.
I didn’t blame Murray.
I pointed out his play wasn’t good
Not in the playoffs, not in the regular season- not the past 2 seasons.
His backup is essentially a replacement player statistically.
That’s a problem .
The only person who keeps talking about fleury is you.
He’s ancient history
You tout Murray’s save %.
I point out desmith had the same %.
I point out Murray gave up nearly 3 goals a game in the regular season.
He did the same in the playoffs.
You have this bizarre fascination with him .
He’s Casey desmith the past two seasons.
Do you think DeSmith would have the same save percentage over 55 games??
Come on, that is a ridiculous analogy. Ben Bishop and Anton Khudobin have similar numbers. Tukka Rask and Jaroslav Halak. Greiss and Lehner. Rinne and Saros. This usually happens. It is not like say a Tom Vokoun with a .925 save percentage and a Marc Andre Fleury with an .890 save percentage in the same playoff year.
Murray's playoff performance evaluation ...... I'm going to break this down into .... 1) The eyeball test (my eyeballs based on watching the games, replays, and analyzing the tape) ..... 2) Murray's basic stats ...... 3) Murray's advanced analytic stats ..... 4) Finally, some comments ........
1) Eyeball test ...... I'm not going to give a detailed analysis of each goal Murray gave up but some general conclusions after watching the games and reviewing tapes ...... overall, I thought Murray played pretty well, not as well as Lehner for sure but pretty well especially in games 1, 2, and 4 ...... not so well in game 3. Of the 12 goals he gave up in the playoffs, many were one timers off 2 on 1's where he didn't have enough time to get in position, some shots right around the crease by unguarded Islander's which he ( or any goalie) had little chance to save, a screen where he couldn't see the puck, and a deflection off another player right on the stick of an Islander where Murray had little chance to make a save ...... there were only 3 (maybe 4) goals where he either wasn't in good position and could have been or used poor technique and should have made the saves ..... 2 of those were in game 3 and 1 (maybe 2) in the other 3 games ..... it was obvious that he faced a lot of high and medium danger shots and a lot of difficult saves opportunities..... by my eyeball, Murray was not outstanding but overall played pretty well especially based on the difficulty of shots he was facing..
2) Murray's basic stats ......(all stats I use in this post are after 4 games for all teams and are full game stats in any game situation 5v5, PK, PP) ...... Murray's stats .... GAA = 3.01 and Sv% = .906 ..... these are not very good, even poor ....... however, GAA and Sv% are more team stats rather then goalie stats ..... the same goalie playing on two different teams, one a really good team with a really good defense and one poor team with poor defense will have a much better GAA and Sv% on the good team but is the same goalie ...... I look at the GAA and Sv% much as I look at +/- for skaters ........ so is Murray's poor GAA and Sv% in the playoffs because of him, or because of his teammates playing in front of him, or both and who is more responsible for the poor basic stats, the goalie or his teammates ? ...... that is where advanced stats help us so let's look at Murray's advanced analytics ......
3) Murray's advanced analytic stats .... first some definitions ... Sv% = "save %" or saves/shots on goal ..... xSv% = "expected save %" which is the Sv% an average NHL goalie would be expected to make based on the difficulty of shots the goalie has faced (the tougher the shots faced, the lower the expected save %) ..... dSv% = "delta save %" which is the goalies actual save % minus his expected save % ( a positive dSv% means the goalie is saving more shots then the average goalie for the shots he is facing and a negative dSv% means he is saving less shots then the average NHL goalie) ...... GSAA = "goals saved above average" tells whether the goalie is saving more (+) or less (-) goals then the average NHL goalie based on the difficulty and number of shots the goalie faces..... so what are Murray's advanced stats and how do they compare to other goalies in the playoffs ?
Sv% = 90.55 (11 out of 18 goalies after 4 games ..... remember this is a basic stat and more a team stat not an advanced stat)
xSv% = 88.66 (his expected save % is low because Murray faced a lot of high danger shots, in fact Murray had the 4th lowest expected save % meaning he faced the 4th most difficult combination of shots of all 18 goalies.....remember the 88.66 xSv% is not what Murray did but what the average NHL goalie would have been expected to do with the shots Murray faced .... Murray's dSv% below shows he did better than the average NHL goalie)
dSv% = (+) 1.89 (Murray had the 6th best dSv% in the playoffs out of 18 goalies)
GSAA = (+) 2.4 ( Murray was 5th best out of 18 goalies in goals saved above average).
In addition, Murray faced 43 high danger shots which was the 2nd most of all 18 goalies and the goalie who faced more only faced one more (44) than Murray ..... Lehner faced only 23 high danger shots which was tied for 15 out of 18 goalies .... so only two goalies faced fewer high danger shots than Lehner.
33.86% of the shots against Murray were high danger (2nd highest of all the goalies) as opposed to 16.91% of shots against Lehner were HD (3rd lowest %).
There are some other stats I could give, but suffice it to say that Murray's advanced stats are good and in the top 1/3 of goalies in the playoff after 4 games..... Lehner's stats, basic and advanced, were better not only than Murray but better than every other goalie in the playoffs.
4) Comments .... A) Lehner outplayed Murray and basically every goalie in the 1st four games. ..... B) Murray overall played pretty well (I think based on his advanced stats you could actually make a case that he played well (not outstanding), his full game advanced stats were in the upper third of goalies in the playoffs) especially in games 1/2/4 and his poor game was game 3..... C) Murray faced the 2nd hardest overall shots in 4 games of any goalie in the playoffs...... D) Based on his good advanced stats, I think we can say that Murray's poor GAA and poor Sv% are more based on the poor play of his teammates rather than the goalie although Murray could have done somewhat better especially 5v5 ..... E) Just an opinion, but if the rest of the team had advanced stats at the level of Murray, there probably would have been a game 5 Thursday and maybe a game 6 tonight (in other words, if the rest of the team played as well as Murray, there likely would not have been a sweep and we may even still be playing)..... F) During the regular season, Murray played poorly in October and November but from December through the end of the season was outstanding.
1) Eyeball test ...... I'm not going to give a detailed analysis of each goal Murray gave up but some general conclusions after watching the games and reviewing tapes ...... overall, I thought Murray played pretty well, not as well as Lehner for sure but pretty well especially in games 1, 2, and 4 ...... not so well in game 3. Of the 12 goals he gave up in the playoffs, many were one timers off 2 on 1's where he didn't have enough time to get in position, some shots right around the crease by unguarded Islander's which he ( or any goalie) had little chance to save, a screen where he couldn't see the puck, and a deflection off another player right on the stick of an Islander where Murray had little chance to make a save ...... there were only 3 (maybe 4) goals where he either wasn't in good position and could have been or used poor technique and should have made the saves ..... 2 of those were in game 3 and 1 (maybe 2) in the other 3 games ..... it was obvious that he faced a lot of high and medium danger shots and a lot of difficult saves opportunities..... by my eyeball, Murray was not outstanding but overall played pretty well especially based on the difficulty of shots he was facing..
2) Murray's basic stats ......(all stats I use in this post are after 4 games for all teams and are full game stats in any game situation 5v5, PK, PP) ...... Murray's stats .... GAA = 3.01 and Sv% = .906 ..... these are not very good, even poor ....... however, GAA and Sv% are more team stats rather then goalie stats ..... the same goalie playing on two different teams, one a really good team with a really good defense and one poor team with poor defense will have a much better GAA and Sv% on the good team but is the same goalie ...... I look at the GAA and Sv% much as I look at +/- for skaters ........ so is Murray's poor GAA and Sv% in the playoffs because of him, or because of his teammates playing in front of him, or both and who is more responsible for the poor basic stats, the goalie or his teammates ? ...... that is where advanced stats help us so let's look at Murray's advanced analytics ......
3) Murray's advanced analytic stats .... first some definitions ... Sv% = "save %" or saves/shots on goal ..... xSv% = "expected save %" which is the Sv% an average NHL goalie would be expected to make based on the difficulty of shots the goalie has faced (the tougher the shots faced, the lower the expected save %) ..... dSv% = "delta save %" which is the goalies actual save % minus his expected save % ( a positive dSv% means the goalie is saving more shots then the average goalie for the shots he is facing and a negative dSv% means he is saving less shots then the average NHL goalie) ...... GSAA = "goals saved above average" tells whether the goalie is saving more (+) or less (-) goals then the average NHL goalie based on the difficulty and number of shots the goalie faces..... so what are Murray's advanced stats and how do they compare to other goalies in the playoffs ?
Sv% = 90.55 (11 out of 18 goalies after 4 games ..... remember this is a basic stat and more a team stat not an advanced stat)
xSv% = 88.66 (his expected save % is low because Murray faced a lot of high danger shots, in fact Murray had the 4th lowest expected save % meaning he faced the 4th most difficult combination of shots of all 18 goalies.....remember the 88.66 xSv% is not what Murray did but what the average NHL goalie would have been expected to do with the shots Murray faced .... Murray's dSv% below shows he did better than the average NHL goalie)
dSv% = (+) 1.89 (Murray had the 6th best dSv% in the playoffs out of 18 goalies)
GSAA = (+) 2.4 ( Murray was 5th best out of 18 goalies in goals saved above average).
In addition, Murray faced 43 high danger shots which was the 2nd most of all 18 goalies and the goalie who faced more only faced one more (44) than Murray ..... Lehner faced only 23 high danger shots which was tied for 15 out of 18 goalies .... so only two goalies faced fewer high danger shots than Lehner.
33.86% of the shots against Murray were high danger (2nd highest of all the goalies) as opposed to 16.91% of shots against Lehner were HD (3rd lowest %).
There are some other stats I could give, but suffice it to say that Murray's advanced stats are good and in the top 1/3 of goalies in the playoff after 4 games..... Lehner's stats, basic and advanced, were better not only than Murray but better than every other goalie in the playoffs.
4) Comments .... A) Lehner outplayed Murray and basically every goalie in the 1st four games. ..... B) Murray overall played pretty well (I think based on his advanced stats you could actually make a case that he played well (not outstanding), his full game advanced stats were in the upper third of goalies in the playoffs) especially in games 1/2/4 and his poor game was game 3..... C) Murray faced the 2nd hardest overall shots in 4 games of any goalie in the playoffs...... D) Based on his good advanced stats, I think we can say that Murray's poor GAA and poor Sv% are more based on the poor play of his teammates rather than the goalie although Murray could have done somewhat better especially 5v5 ..... E) Just an opinion, but if the rest of the team had advanced stats at the level of Murray, there probably would have been a game 5 Thursday and maybe a game 6 tonight (in other words, if the rest of the team played as well as Murray, there likely would not have been a sweep and we may even still be playing)..... F) During the regular season, Murray played poorly in October and November but from December through the end of the season was outstanding.
Last edited:
He played in 36 and started 30 -
So yeah.
You’re the one touting 91.9% number .
Which I’ll point out was the same as his playoff numbers including the gaa
What scares me about "analytics" sometimes while they factor in where a shot comes from as a "high danger" shot they can't differentiate what is a "great shot" from merely a weak shot in a high danger area.
What I am saying, take a few of the Jordan Eberle goals, a couple of them were absolute snipes inside the post or corner, rockets. Compare them with some of the Pens shots in the same areas, where they were weak wrist shots hitting the logo....you can perhaps argue that one goalie is in better position than the other to stop the shot, but our eyes seen that the this series, the Isles weren't missing on their opportunities, where the Pens who had few, but when they did they hit the post or flubbed the shot.
All of that, of course Lehner outplayed Murray. But we have seen other playoff series (think Pens/Caps in 2009) where you seen an opposing goaltender stand on his head but it was only a matter of time before the Pens got to him......there was no evidence of that today. It reminded me a lot of the Pens/Bruins in 2013 (also a sweep). It wasn't that Tukka Rask was that overwhelmingly better than the Pens goalie, it is just most of the Pens shots were just weak attempts, regardless of where they originated from.
But again, a Murray obsessed poster has made it again all about him. All about him, instead of talking about the Penguins as a whole. I think we see that the guy with all of the fake names, might as well be Soufie. I want to discuss the Pens and NHL playoffs moving forward, not an attempt to smash a goalie because he jilted my kid out of an autograph or something like that.
You make some good points and I agree that advanced analytics are definitely not perfect but I think they are significantly better in evaluating the goalies overall performance (and separating out the goalies performance from the rest of the teams performance) then basic stats like GAA and Sv% which are more team stats......
The quality of a shot within any danger zone (low/medium/high) can vary as you said (weak vs sniper) but they tend to even out over time (in a game/a series/a season) and the higher the danger area of a shot, the more chance overall of a goal ......
However, since advanced analytics aren't perfect and don't tell everything you want to know about the goalies play, that is why an educated eyeball test (review of film) is also very important in evaluating goalies and why I included it in my evaluation ...... an educated review of the film can tell not only the danger level and quality of the shot but more importantly how the goalie played it and whether he could have played it better ....... that is why it is important for goalie coaches to watch film with the goalie and analyze what happened on all goals and what, if anything, could have been done better to make the save and what the goalie needs to work on in practice ..... advanced analytics just won't tell you all of those specifics about how a goalie is playing, you really need to evaluate film of the goalie for the specifics of his play (angles/position, goalie movement, rebound control, technique, how he plays the puck outside the crease, etc., etc.) ..... the advanced analytics tell more about overall/general performance of the goalie separate from how the rest of the team is playing in front of him and are better than GAA and Sv% in doing that ..... my eyeball test (review of all 12 goals that Murray gave up) told me that he actually played pretty well and certainly the advanced analytics confirmed that overall assessment..... I didn't type the analysis I made of each goal he gave up, but part of that evaluation took into account the danger of the shot, the quality of the shot along with the goalies angles/position, goalie movement, technique, rebounds, screens, deflections, etc.
Bottom line is that my evaluation of Murray's film and the advanced analytics both showed that Murray played pretty well and his poor GAA and Sv% had more to do with the poor play of his teammates in front of him than his own play.... I don't know if I'm making this understandable to all.
Last edited:
Appreciate the breakdown goalieman. I have to say I am not surpriised that the advanced stats show that Murray was better than the rest of his teammates despite being outplayed by Lehner. Of course the Pens made Lehner look better by banging pucks off the post and off of Islander defenseman when they had half of an empty net to shoot at. That said, the Isles had many great chances and hit quite a few posts of their own. Goalie play often determines the winner in these series, Like when Tuka Rask tortured the Pens in 2013. However, this series had little to do with the goalies. I think you could have swapped goalies, Lehner to the Pens, Murray to the Isles, and the result woulld have still been and Islander sweep.
People are still not addressing the primary reason Pittsburgh lost. People are talking about the number one defenseman and the number one goaltender on a team that struggled to score goals for long stretches of the season and which was completely shut down in the playoffs.
In other words, precisely why were there so many neutral zone turnovers? Come on, guys. Put on your thinking caps.
Again, they scored three goals in the final three games of the series and two of them came from the sticks of Erik Gudbranson and Garrett Wilson. In other words, statistically speaking, they were basically flukes.
That’s not nearly good enough.
The Pens can’t get in on the forecheck. That was an issue all season long and really stood out in the playoffs. Honestly, a team-wide lethargy was very apparent throughout the season. I was more forgiving of it last year because of the grind they been through the previous two seasons. Seeing it again this year was absolutely concerning and has definitely convinced me that it’s time to make significant changes - particularly up front.
We. Must. Get. Faster.
Any discussion about what they need to do needs to start there because that was clearly our greatest shortcoming -- and not only against the Islanders.
In other words, precisely why were there so many neutral zone turnovers? Come on, guys. Put on your thinking caps.
Again, they scored three goals in the final three games of the series and two of them came from the sticks of Erik Gudbranson and Garrett Wilson. In other words, statistically speaking, they were basically flukes.
That’s not nearly good enough.
The Pens can’t get in on the forecheck. That was an issue all season long and really stood out in the playoffs. Honestly, a team-wide lethargy was very apparent throughout the season. I was more forgiving of it last year because of the grind they been through the previous two seasons. Seeing it again this year was absolutely concerning and has definitely convinced me that it’s time to make significant changes - particularly up front.
We. Must. Get. Faster.
Any discussion about what they need to do needs to start there because that was clearly our greatest shortcoming -- and not only against the Islanders.
the core is too old... everyone should be "touchable" except crosby, geuntzel and maybe murray. the longer you wait to trade malkin, letang, kessel, the lower the return. love hornquist because of the fire, but, body might be beat to death
Malkin had a horrible year. There is no way I would trade him now. I think the odds of you getting back a decent return are much lower than the odds are that he will come back next year and be much, much better.
I think Kessel has to go. Even if you have to retain salary, and you aren't going to get a great return. Teams need guys who can score. Maatta also will go, he is a $4 mill a year, 24 year old Dman who has played on two cups. He will fetch some decent return.
Letang's comments at the end didn't help endear him to anyone. He has to learn to play smarter. I saw some reference about him "training harder" this offseason, but that is and never was the problem. It is always his decision making, and I am talking more than just the ill advised pinch, I am talking retaliatory penalties and getting involved in scrums where now his neck is a potential issue always, he needs to avoid these things. I just don't know if he is smart enough to do this.
I still can't get over the fact that Sid was +18 and Geno was a -25. People say +/- is a bad stat, but when it is this glaring between your 1st and 2nd Centers, that is just an amazingly telling stat. Geno needs to get better. I mean in Game 4, that failed spin a rama that resulted in a weak backhand was endemic of Geno this season. Geno needs to simplify his game, shoot the puck more.
In fact "simplify their game" is an oft use phrase for this team. But it is true. Desperate for goals, Sid has the puck in the slot in a "high danger" position with a "high danger" player, and he..........throws a blind backhand pass to I forget who that didn't even result in a shot on goal. I know Sid likes to dish, but he has to shoot the puck there. That is "simplifying your game". Jordan Eberle certainly didn't over pass his chances.
Phil could and would be replaced by Jake Guentzel on the PP, which may simplify things, because he seems to be one guy who doesn't over pass, he'll shoot and bury it.
Sure, the Pens got to get some more speed, get some more hunger, but here's a thought, since the core is now 3 years older, maybe you tweak that all out speed game and trying to constantly score off the rush and work more down low, which I would think be strengths of Sid, Geno, Hornquist, Bjugstad, instead of always flying off of the rush.
One other thing.......I am not for blowing it all up. Looking at these playoffs, this is just one kooky first round. So many things that happened that no one could have predicted, instead of emulating the Islanders as the new trend, if I am the Penguins I be the Penguins, but maybe a smarter, more savvy version, This means stop with the friggin drop passes at the blue line!!!!!!!!
Interesting interview with Pierre Maguire on Poni-Mueller a bit ago. If they put that up as a podcast worth a listen. One point of interest, he hasn’t heard anything about a “core” player being moved but thought there’d be significant interest in Letang if the Pens are looking to move on. Thought it was good GMJR said what he said.
Lots of good points, but as I’m watching the Carolina-Islanders series, I’m reminded what a mediocre team the Islanders are. And they dominated us for 4 straight games.
I love the Pens, but it is absolutely time to blow it up. Tweaking this team might get them into the playoffs as the 7 or 8 team. But they will easily be beaten in the 1st round and will be less of a threat to win the cup than they were this year. They keep getting older and slower. Malkin, Letang, Kessel, Hornquist, and whoever else should be traded. And I appreciate all 4 of them. But they need to do it to to not become the Hawks or Kings.
My thoughts are similar to yours but I think it has much more to do with motivation than talent. A motivated Penguins team could have beaten these Islanders in 5. Hell, Carolina might do it in 4. The difference is that both of these teams are much hungrier than the Penguins and Capitals were. That’s why it took nearly 20 years for a team to repeat as champions and it doesn’t happen often.
Circling back to your point, you’re absolutely correct. I don’t want to necessarily lose any of these guys you mentioned either but collectively they’re on the decline.
Circling back to your point, you’re absolutely correct. I don’t want to necessarily lose any of these guys you mentioned either but collectively they’re on the decline.
Two things.
I said next year I will be the Isles don't make the playoffs and no one will hear of Robin friggin Lehner.
But as far as "blow it up", sometimes I just think this is one of those years. Just a fluke year. Maybe. Look, I would trade Malkin too if he is going to play the same sloppy, undisciplined way going forward. He no longer is as physically good and dominate as he once was.
The Pens can still win without blowing it up, but they need to change styles. If they won't or can't, then yeah, blow it up.
But Kessel got to go.
Every time in the Crosby era when it looked like it was”over” things have gotten better so I agree with you. I think they will be alright. They just can’t stand pat like they did towards the end of this season and expect everything to be fine.
The pens won two more cups because they got younger and faster which complimented Sullivan’s style of play.
Sullivan is a very good coach-
But the team is older and slower now-
And there isn’t some young blood to bring in to get fresher legs.
So- the coach has to adjust style of play to match his team- or the coach needs to change .
From that point- then start looking at personnel moves to match the identity you want to create .
Sullivan is a very good coach-
But the team is older and slower now-
And there isn’t some young blood to bring in to get fresher legs.
So- the coach has to adjust style of play to match his team- or the coach needs to change .
From that point- then start looking at personnel moves to match the identity you want to create .
How do you trade Malkin when he has a full blown no movement clause in his contract??
I see these articles and hear the talk, but everyone seems to ignore/minimize this MINOR detail.
Malkin seems perfectly happy and at ease here, not like Jagr who stewed in Mario's shadow.
I believe even Kessel has a limited no trade clause although I may be wrong.
Letang can be traded to about 6 or 8 clubs.
Pretty hard to get a fair return with those clauses hung around your neck.
Malkin has a full NMC and would have to approve a trade. There are reports that he may be amenable to being traded to about 4 clubs/cities if it comes down to it. I don’t think the team is fully happy with Geno but by no means does it appear they have decided to try to move him, either. It kind of works both ways. Does Malkin want to stay if he feels the club wants to move him? Letang and Kessel have limited NMCs and provide lists to the team of where they can/can’t be traded.
The point is that the reports and articles are well aware of his NMC and it is still being considered by the club. Maybe some message board posters yelling “trade him” are ignorant of the fact but the journalists certainly are not, nor is team management. Players with such clauses are, sometimes, moved despite the clause.
I dunno. It would be tough. But I heard he is not enamored with Sullivan. But he likes and wants to play here.
Here's the thing....Malkin has to change his style. He is no longer the dipsy do, dangle do, walk through 4 defenders spectacular goal player. Sid to his credit has changed his game to become more of a down low, 200 foot player. Geno needs to also.
But.....SULLIVAN NEEDS TO CHANGE ALSO. If we are keeping a lot of these guys, the way they play, they need to change some of it, defense needs not to pinch in situations, team needs to become more of a cycling, puck possession, "simplify your game" instead of trying to be that team that is so deadly on the rush.
Well, yeah.
Malkin ignores Sullivan, that's pretty clear. Sullivan ignores Rutherford.
In order for Sullivan to change, he needs buy in from the players. Geno doesn't listen, Letang has said it is unnecessary, and Phil just had another hot dog.
Quite the dilemma!
Sullivan's post game comments were something like this for every loss.
"they beat us to the pucks, they're faster, they had a lot of guys on the puck" on and on.
Well Coach Sullivan maybe the team is getting slower and older and the PENS traded away a lot of speed.
So if your team is slower you need to adjust or get some faster guys???
Everything regarding Malkin being traded is white noise. Going back to 2010 there were rumors that Malkin would be dealt for Kopitar. Until he says he wants out it’s not happening. Sullivan will be fine before he is and at this point no one is listening to him. He probably should be axed.
Carolina embarassed Barry Trotz and the Islanders. That tells me that the Pens were lazy and lacked the motivation and the desire it takes to win this time of year. This tells me that they need to axe Sullivan before next season. The team shut him off and didn't want to hear his same old spiel over and over again. He failed to motivate a team that had plenty of talent, he shouldn't get another chance. He was ignored by his players, and showed no flexibility in his approach to the game.
A new coach and system along with a few player moves is what this team needs. There is no need to blow it up. These players need refocused and some motivation, they may be older, but they played like they were physically and mentally spent. I am hoping for a new start next season, and that begins with a new coach.
A new coach and system along with a few player moves is what this team needs. There is no need to blow it up. These players need refocused and some motivation, they may be older, but they played like they were physically and mentally spent. I am hoping for a new start next season, and that begins with a new coach.
If you are a Sirius/XM app user, look up the on demand Executive Suite Series interview with Jim Rutherford. He came right out and said that the teams the last two years lacked leadership. He said Sid is a guy that everyone looks up to and is a great leader, but he basically had to do it all by himself. He noted guys like Daley, Kunitz, Bonino and Cullen as guys that left a big hole when they left (of course, they did re-sign Cullen this year just for that reason). Essentially, you could read into what troubles him about this year’s and last year’s team and that was a lack of leadership among the other stars (Letang, Kessel and Malkin).
Also, he talked glowingly about Sullivan and how the two of them are very close. So anyone that wants Sullivan gone is going to have to wait until Rutherford is out of the picture because the head coach is firmly entrenched.
Also, he talked glowingly about Sullivan and how the two of them are very close. So anyone that wants Sullivan gone is going to have to wait until Rutherford is out of the picture because the head coach is firmly entrenched.
Here’s the thing. The last GM to hitch his wagon to his coach was fired. Rutherford is not immune to that same fate if he’s too loyal.
Surely seeing the Islanders swept by Carolina, will push GMJR toward thinking he needs to blow it up.
The Pens were thoroughly dominated by a team that isn’t very good. The blackhawks, kings, coyotes, senators would all have performed better in the playoffs.
We all need to accept this team has zero chance to win a cup, without MAJOR changes.
The Pens were thoroughly dominated by a team that isn’t very good. The blackhawks, kings, coyotes, senators would all have performed better in the playoffs.
We all need to accept this team has zero chance to win a cup, without MAJOR changes.
Things I have heard....
Kessel has definitely hit his shelf life. He's gone, even if it is pennies on the dollar, his disruption and lack of following drills and coaching orders has undermined leadership, not just coaches, but also Sid's. They like him, because he is a likeable guy, he doesn't do it in an AB way, but in a Phil way that is funny when you are winning, not so much when you are struggling.
Malkin is a big child. Still not fully confident in English and American ways so he is very impressionable. Phil is not a good influence on him. If you can remember, the first month of this year, he was a plus player, in the top 5 leading scorers, showing he still can be a star, then the bottom fell out and he never recovered. He supposedly loves to score goals, but for whatever reason, he passes up shots. He's become a turnover machine. He either has to change his game, stop the dipsy do stuff, actually shooting the puck more, or be gone. He is not so enamored of Sullivan, but that maybe because his play causes Sullivan to be on him.
Letang? He is what he is. He was really, really good this season. He was not really good in the playoffs. There has to be some compromise in his game. He has to understand the game situation more and adjust his play accordingly. Both Geno and Letang also need to dial down their retaliation antics when they are or feel they are receiving physical play.
I think what the Pens are trying to come to grips with is, a) is the core and group aging rapidly? Concern with Malkin, Kessel, Hornquist's decline in numbers or b) is this just one of those "fluky" years in the East. I think probably a little in both.
Sports, especially the NHL is a copycat league, look at how many teams changed to match the Pens when they won Back2backs. But the Caps won last year playing a different style than the Pens. Now with the Isles success and the Canes, and maybe Jackets, now teams are going to think the "less star approach" is the way to go. Except, the Caps, the Pens, the Hawks and Bruins all were heavy on stars. The Jackets have a lot of talent, maybe not THE superstars, but a whole lot of stars. And Boston is still around. I think the Islanders and Canes are just flukes, not a start of an anti star movement in the league.
Kessel has definitely hit his shelf life. He's gone, even if it is pennies on the dollar, his disruption and lack of following drills and coaching orders has undermined leadership, not just coaches, but also Sid's. They like him, because he is a likeable guy, he doesn't do it in an AB way, but in a Phil way that is funny when you are winning, not so much when you are struggling.
Malkin is a big child. Still not fully confident in English and American ways so he is very impressionable. Phil is not a good influence on him. If you can remember, the first month of this year, he was a plus player, in the top 5 leading scorers, showing he still can be a star, then the bottom fell out and he never recovered. He supposedly loves to score goals, but for whatever reason, he passes up shots. He's become a turnover machine. He either has to change his game, stop the dipsy do stuff, actually shooting the puck more, or be gone. He is not so enamored of Sullivan, but that maybe because his play causes Sullivan to be on him.
Letang? He is what he is. He was really, really good this season. He was not really good in the playoffs. There has to be some compromise in his game. He has to understand the game situation more and adjust his play accordingly. Both Geno and Letang also need to dial down their retaliation antics when they are or feel they are receiving physical play.
I think what the Pens are trying to come to grips with is, a) is the core and group aging rapidly? Concern with Malkin, Kessel, Hornquist's decline in numbers or b) is this just one of those "fluky" years in the East. I think probably a little in both.
Sports, especially the NHL is a copycat league, look at how many teams changed to match the Pens when they won Back2backs. But the Caps won last year playing a different style than the Pens. Now with the Isles success and the Canes, and maybe Jackets, now teams are going to think the "less star approach" is the way to go. Except, the Caps, the Pens, the Hawks and Bruins all were heavy on stars. The Jackets have a lot of talent, maybe not THE superstars, but a whole lot of stars. And Boston is still around. I think the Islanders and Canes are just flukes, not a start of an anti star movement in the league.
Take it FWIW, but a source of a friend of mine says “everyone not named Crosby or Murray is on the table.” Full disclosure, I don’t have nor do I pretend to have any inside sources but this guy works for a company downtown that does a lot of work with the Mario Lemieux Foundation and Pens Charities.
Similar threads
