ADVERTISEMENT

OT: Pens

Sullivan seems to want a team with no role players.

Our bottom forwards and defensemen are not good enough top two lines and defensive pairings.

Give him a true role player and he will refuse to play him.
 
But we got Bob Dillabough instead. Why did they bring this guy back?

Rodrigues is basically a 4th liner and penalty killer ...... should not be on the 1st line, just doesn't have the talent, and it is hurting us but not a lot of other great options without weakening the 3rd line (which has been our best line) greatly until Kapanen is ready to play ..... we were really weak on 3rd and 4th line wingers and cap space was tight, so I would guess they brought Rodrigues back because they could afford him and thought he could help the bottom 6/penalty kill ...... he is playing out of place right now for sure.

Flyers made the key adjustment during the 3rd period when they started dumping the puck in deep behind our trap and forechecked well keeping the play more in our end then they did in the first two periods ...... we had more trouble getting it out of our end and that slowed us and our counter attacks down ..... that and their goalie making all the saves was key in the 3rd period.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USN_Panther
Letang on the ice for all five goals against on Friday night...but he’s great—I know. Penguins need to dump him for whatever they can get for him. Maybe there is another GM dumber than JR.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chem95 and jctrack
Letang on the ice for all five goals against on Friday night...but he’s great—I know. Penguins need to dump him for whatever they can get for him. Maybe there is another GM dumber than JR.
The three on one short handed was executed very poorly.

You can not have a turnover in that situation.

Dumb play. A consistent attribute of this team. Always bent on attempting the perfect play.
 
A better idea would be to want more of guys who could actually play.
Everyone of those guys on that list were solid hockey players who were good in their roles and knew how to play the game. I am not sure what you are getting at. Guys like these and Hainsey and Bonino and Kunitz are the types we are missing. Every team could use more skill,but the grit and smart play that these players provided was vital.
 
Letang on the ice for all five goals against on Friday night...but he’s great—I know. Penguins need to dump him for whatever they can get for him. Maybe there is another GM dumber than JR.
Maybe package him with Malkin who has been worthless
He needs demoted to the 4th line - he’s single handily killing the 2nd line
 
Everyone of those guys on that list were solid hockey players who were good in their roles and knew how to play the game. I am not sure what you are getting at. Guys like these and Hainsey and Bonino and Kunitz are the types we are missing. Every team could use more skill,but the grit and smart play that these players provided was vital.
That’s what tanev , McCann, janikowski, and Rodrigues are
 
None of this looks like a happy ending. Yes, only two games but if they lose Sunday the collective organization will be tighter than a crabs ass.
 
This isn’t complicated
Jake isn’t playing like Jake
Rodrigues is a 4th line player - not a top liner

Malkin is just garbage right now so he’s single handly destroying the second line

3rd line has been really good

And the defense just isn’t good
This who all puck moving concept sucks
They need 1 puck mover and 1 body mover per pairing

I mean the flyers are really good -
They are fast , skilled , and physical -
We aren’t
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jctrack and Dan1911
That’s what tanev , McCann, janikowski, and Rodrigues are
Tanev is a good hockey player and Janikowski has shown decently so far. McCann and Rodrigues have been disappointing to me dating back to last season. They are role players though, and are clearly not the main problem with this team.
 
Then why did you make up a list that had five guys on it, exactly one of whom was a good hockey player?
Why? Because he wanted to pull 5 obscure Penguins from the early-mid 70's to show how long he has been a fan and his opinion means more than others. It was a bad analogy.

I don't think he is eloquating the problem. The problem is not "not enough role players" but......."too many of the same players" (and the addition of 2 of the 3 "core" superstars are no longer that good at hockey anymore). That's the problem. Too many smallish wingers who can skate but that is about all they can do. Teams are like puzzles, you need different parts, and Sullivan seems to only value players he sees himself in.
 
This isn’t complicated
Jake isn’t playing like Jake
Rodrigues is a 4th line player - not a top liner

Malkin is just garbage right now so he’s single handly destroying the second line

3rd line has been really good

And the defense just isn’t good
This who all puck moving concept sucks
They need 1 puck mover and 1 body mover per pairing

I mean the flyers are really good -
They are fast , skilled , and physical -
We aren’t
Very fair assessment.

It is possible that Jake's serious injury has taken a mental toll on him, and it could be a season or two before he returns to the real Jake Guentzel.

I don't know what happened to Geno. He skates out there like a chicken with his head cut off.

The defense is the biggest issue. They are weak in front of the net and have trouble moving the puck.

We used to be fast, we used to be skilled, and there was a time when we had players who played with a physical edge.

We let GMJR mortgage the future for now, and now doesn't look very bright.

We let Sully stay to long. He likes to play one style of hockey and our guys are to old to play it.

I think it is time to clean house, and get some new talent at GM and Head coach. There will be need for a rebuild starting anytime now.

Kaboly, has said the Buccos might be the Pittsburgh team closest to a championship. I believe that to be hyperbole, because they will never win anything with that owner. However, the statement does clearly indicate that the Penguins and Steelers are on their way down and it is going to be a while before we can get excited about those teams competing for anything meaningful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary2
Tanev is a good hockey player and Janikowski has shown decently so far. McCann and Rodrigues have been disappointing to me dating back to last season. They are role players though, and are clearly not the main problem with this team.

I agree. I also believe the guys who say Letang and Malkin are shells are absolutely correct.

Make no mistake, I am not dismissing the contributions each guy has made to this organization. Malkin in 2009 was absolutely unbelievable and we will not see a performance like his against Carolina in a very long time. Letang scored the cup winning goal in 2016 because of his synergy with Crosby and has logged 1st line minutes for almost a decade. He’s definitely in the top 3 if not top 2 defensemen in Pens history but on January 16th 2021 both guys are simply a step slow and should either be demoted or kindly agree to be traded. They’re the two biggest issues right now and Sullivan is remarkably close in that regard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pittisit4me
Maybe package him with Malkin who has been worthless
He needs demoted to the 4th line - he’s single handily killing the 2nd line
I advocated a Letang trade TWO years ago. They could have gotten some nice assets for him then. His value continues to go down.

Malkin? Same. I wouldn't have had an issue. It is time the Penguins (and this includes the owner) stop romanticizing about this "two headed monster". Malkin, even moreso than Letang, has given me more "WTF" yells at the TV over the past few years including last night. It is the same old same old.

I said yesterday, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing (or allowing the same thing to happen) and expecting different results. We see it first and foremost with these two guys. Letang passing up a shot, Letang missing the net, Letang, with the blind bad pass in his own zone, Malkin with gaining an entry then just curling up and blindly throwing a pass into the slot which is intercepted and leading to an odd man break against, Malkin missing the net, Malkin staying on the perimeter, Malkin taking the bad retaliatory penalty, Malkin stickhandling into oblivion. Same two guys, doing the same things, with the same coach, and expecting things to be different.

It's frustrating. They are going to miss the playoffs. They don't even have a 1st rd pick this year, (to Minnesota in the Zucker trade) and that will be a lottery pick. It's sad because Rutherford will likely give up a #1 and a Poulin for "another winger for Sid" when things continue to go south, just further putting this franchise with a loaded anchor to the very abyss. I expect a 1000 word rebuttal by Doc claiming the virtues of Letang that boils down "who are you going to get that's better in return" in a trade and while that maybe right, getting a better player and making your hockey team better are two different things.
 
Teams are like puzzles, you need different parts


Exactly. You need guys who fit together. Guys from yesteryear who were in many cases lucky to simply be on the team aren't what is missing. The notion that there is something special about some of those guys because they rode the coattails of someone like Mario Lemieux to a ring is silly.
 
Guys like Hainsey, Bonino and Kunitz were better hockey players, in some cases much better hockey players, than all but one of the guys on his list.
I believe your quote was that several on that list were "well below average players". That is just not true. I don't know if you were just trying to smear Gary or if you really believe that. They were not great players. Just solid in their roles and smart. I will agree that my list of three included better and perhaps more important players than Gary's list. That said, to completely devalue the contributions of the players on his list by calling them well below average is disingenuous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary2
I believe your quote was that several on that list were "well below average players". That is just not true.


Sure it is. I mean come on, you think that Troy Loney was some sort of talented player that couldn't have been replaced in a heartbeat had the need arose?

To use the baseball term, those guys were "replacement level". Meaning that there were guys playing in the minors who were just as good as they were. If you were ranking the guys on the team in order of talent and importance they would have ranked near the bottom of the list every year they were on the team. Which means, kind of by definition, well below average.
 
One other thing.........Mother Nature wins all ties. From 2008-2017...if you would match the Pens up against mostly any other contender, and rank each player on the roster (so say 40 spots).
The Pens would always have #1, and mostly #2 (xcept for Wash), #3. The next team might have the next 3-4 slots, but the Pens would then have the next 3-4.

Now? The Pens still would have #1 or #2, but now?? Looking on Philly's roster, after Sid at 1, the Flyers might have 10 of the next 12. And therein lies the problem. The Pens other 2 "stars" are in serious decline, the goaltending situation where before you might have a 1 and 1a, now is shaky and questionable, Jake is still finding himself after a horrific injury, Marino is still developing, I guess what I am saying, they aren't that good anymore. The lack of talent and the constant trying to win it all at all costs catches up with you. I am not saying they were wrong in doing this, taking this approach.

BUT....I do believe and have been vocal about it that almost every move Rutherford has made over the past 3 years he has OVERPAID. And now here we are. Plus Sullivan is still trying to force a style this team cannot play. Nor does he give young guys a shot (for example, why is Rodrigues on Sid's top line, why not give Poulin a look for a game if Kapanen can't play yet or why not put Lafferty up just to see) but Sully has too much allegiance to these big nothings like Rodrigues because they remind him of himself as a player.
 
Sure it is. I mean come on, you think that Troy Loney was some sort of talented player that couldn't have been replaced in a heartbeat had the need arose?

To use the baseball term, those guys were "replacement level". Meaning that there were guys playing in the minors who were just as good as they were. If you were ranking the guys on the team in order of talent and importance they would have ranked near the bottom of the list every year they were on the team. Which means, kind of by definition, well below average.
No. But I do believe that Errey, Bourque and Loney also brought much to the lockerrom and were really good leaders.
 
Nor does he give young guys a shot (for example, why is Rodrigues on Sid's top line, why not give Poulin a look for a game if Kapanen can't play yet or why not put Lafferty up just to see)


That's one of the big things that I don't get. Rodrigues is 27 years old. He is what he is. He isn't ever going to be any better than what he has shown in this career to this point. And that is a guy who shouldn't be anywhere near a top line, unless his line is on the ice against the other team's. Sure, some of those other guys, or heck, all of those other guys, might fail if you put them in that spot. How is that any different than what you are going to get with Rodrigues there? Other than one of the younger guys might actually work?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pittisit4me
No. But I do believe that Errey, Bourque and Loney also brought much to the lockerrom and were really good leaders.


They may very well have been, but was that something that those teams even needed from those guys? I mean in 1990, was it the leadership from someone like Phil Borque that was making the difference, or was it Lemieux and Stevens and Trottier and Coffey and Murphy and guys like that who were the difference makers?
 
I love Lafferty and the way he plays. I would say he deserves a chance there at least until Kappenen is ready. Kappenen may solve our first line issues. That said, how do we fix Letang and Malkin. The team has just slid to far too fast. Sully really needs to give the young guys a shot.
 
They may very well have been, but was that something that those teams even needed from those guys? I mean in 1990, was it the leadership from someone like Phil Borque that was making the difference, or was it Lemieux and Stevens and Trottier and Coffey and Murphy and guys like that who were the difference makers?
How many cups did Lemieux win?

How many championships did Russell win? Jordon? Lebrun?

You are confusing sports. It is hard, very hard to win a cup. It is long, physically draining journey.

it takes a. Village.

I think the playoffs are as much about effort, dedication and perseverance as they are about skill.

An extremely skilled player can’t just pop in, see disappointing results and retire time and again.
 
Last edited:
They may very well have been, but was that something that those teams even needed from those guys? I mean in 1990, was it the leadership from someone like Phil Borque that was making the difference, or was it Lemieux and Stevens and Trottier and Coffey and Murphy and guys like that who were the difference makers?
They may not have been difference makers, but all three of those guys killed penalties. All three were tough and were not afraid to throw their bodies around.

Bourque had plenty of speed and grit and was a solid third line player. Troy Loney would score an occasional goal, but he was tough as nails and would drop the gloves when necessary.
Bob Errey was undersized, but a good skater who played with a big heart.

Most importantly, they were all smart, and rarely cost their team by beiing out of position.

Everybody knows those were Lemieux's teams. However, the puzzle eventually fit together well enough for them to win two cups. I am not sure those 3 players could be replaced by just anyone and fit right in. Each added value in their own way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary2
You are confusing sports. It is hard, very hard to win a cup. It is long, physically draining journey.


You have to win exactly the same number of games to win a Stanley Cup as you do the NBA championship. It is, by definition, no tougher to win in hockey than it is in basketball. Someone wins every single year.

The difference is that having the best player is a far bigger advantage in basketball than it is in hockey. As anyone who understand the two sports knows, because it is so obviously true.

I mean seriously, do you not understand why the team with the best basketball player is more likely to win a game or a championship than the team with the best hockey player is?
 
You have to win exactly the same number of games to win a Stanley Cup as you do the NBA championship. It is, by definition, no tougher to win in hockey than it is in basketball. Someone wins every single year.

The difference is that having the best player is a far bigger advantage in basketball than it is in hockey. As anyone who understand the two sports knows, because it is so obviously true.

I mean seriously, do you not understand why the team with the best basketball player is more likely to win a game or a championship than the team with the best hockey player is?

Yeah I wasnt quite sure what he meant by that. More physically draining? Probably apples and oranges with the NBA, but cmon most of these guys are in their 20’s they can handle it.

If you’re including college sports winning an NCAA football championship is way harder than winning an NHL title. Not only do you have to somehow manage to break into an exclusive group, then you have to beat the Alabama’s and Clemson’s of the world. I’m in my early 50’s and am pretty much resigned to the fact Pitt will never win another title in my lifetime.

If you’re talking pro sports only look at the NFL, there are so many teams that go for generations without having any kind of legitimate shot to win a Super Bowl. Tell their fans it’s harder to win an NHL title. That’s why when the Browns beat a flawed Steeler team last week thousands of people show up at the airport at 3AM to welcome the team home. To Browns fans even getting this far may seem like a miracle.

Whether it be a physical grind, tradition, logistics, no salary cap, or whatever it is very, very, hard to win a team title in pretty much every sport.
 
You have to win exactly the same number of games to win a Stanley Cup as you do the NBA championship. It is, by definition, no tougher to win in hockey than it is in basketball. Someone wins every single year.

The difference is that having the best player is a far bigger advantage in basketball than it is in hockey. As anyone who understand the two sports knows, because it is so obviously true.

I mean seriously, do you not understand why the team with the best basketball player is more likely to win a game or a championship than the team with the best hockey player is?
You are not smart and even less smart to keep defending your stupid statements. Those players were all above average NHLers and were import to having a winning team.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary2
I do find it interesting that Drew O’Connor is already getting some time in the lineup (at least in practice) with McCann’s hearing. I’ve been looking forward to his debut since we signed him; IMO him and some of the other young guys coming up will be crucial to this team’s success this season and next.
 
If you watched those guys play all those years and you came away thinking that Troy Loney was an above average NHL player then one thing is clear. You have no idea what you are talking about.
Why do you keep going back to Troy Loney? He wasn’t the only one you said is below average.

But for reference, Troy Loney played more than 600 NHL games. That is quite a bit more than the average. Stop posting nonsense to cover for your original nonsense. It’s just a lot of nonsense.
 
Why do you keep going back to Troy Loney? He wasn’t the only one you said is below average.

But for reference, Troy Loney played more than 600 NHL games. That is quite a bit more than the average. Stop posting nonsense to cover for your original nonsense. It’s just a lot of nonsense.


Wait, so the fact that someone played 600 games means that he was an above average player when he played?

Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about.

And if it will make you feel better, I can pick on Phil Borque. Because he was a below average NHL player too.
 
Wait, so the fact that someone played 600 games means that he was an above average player when he played?

Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about.

And if it will make you feel better, I can pick on Phil Borque. Because he was a below average NHL player too.
Yes, NHL teams keep below average players around for more than 600 games.

It doesn’t make me feel better or not better, but it does make me think that it isn’t only that you write stupid things. Seems you are genuinely a stupid person. :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: gary2
Yes, NHL teams keep below average players around for more than 600 games.

It doesn’t make me feel better or not better, but it does make me think that it isn’t only that you write stupid things. Seems you are genuinely a stupid person. :p


No, sure, you are right. Every player on every NHL roster is above average. There are really no below average players.

Mathematically it doesn't make any sense, but I guess it does to someone as "smart" as you.
 
Wait, so the fact that someone played 600 games means that he was an above average player when he played?

Like I said, you have no idea what you are talking about.

And if it will make you feel better, I can pick on Phil Borque. Because he was a below average NHL player too.
Phil bourque served only one role in the team -
Hurt anyone who took a run at Mario

He was a slightly better Krystof Oliwa
 
ADVERTISEMENT