I think this is a key. Is Woodcroft a good coach or did he give the team a "played well after new coach boost"?
I remember when the Pens first promoted Bylsma after firing Therien. They played great (even resulted in a Cup) and we all thought "coach of the future! more championships to come". Turns out Bylsma simply took Therien's existing structure, but loosened the reins and allowed more offensive freedom and the players responded to that -- for a short time.
After that, when Bylsma had fully implemented his own system, the team kept underachieving and never again reached the level they did immediately after he took over.
Is Woodcroft in the same boat where the players simply played well because he was a breath of fresh air after Tippett? Or is he a quality coach? This season should be telling.
To my eye at least there were major changes to the system with Woodcroft that were visible within a couple of games. There was far more puck support, which really improved our possession numbers.
He also managed the bench far differently than Tippett, including going to a 11-7 lineup many nights to help reduce pressure on his D and play them more situationally (which you need to do with guys like rookie Bouch and never-gonna-change Barrie). He also elevated youth that he was familiar with from the AHL, putting them in roles he knew they were capable of (like McLeod on PK).
Of course "new coach, players coach" fresh air factored in, but the above were not trivial changes, so I think Woody deserves all the credit he's had so far (honestly thought he had a case for coach of the year).
We'll see though... can he keep it going this year.