Toggle sidebar

Is PIT's team-building model flawed?

meangene

meangene

Registered User
Jul 5, 2014
212
3
The inter webs
It feels like most of the "elite" teams in the NHL these days all have a very specific way they're constructed: Solid two-way centers with elite wingers who drive offense and help relentlessly cycle and maintain the puck mixed with elite two-way defensemen with big shots and good hockey sense. Chicago, LA, Anaheim, Montreal, etc. are all built this way and it seems like it the general trend towards team building now.

Pittsburgh is totally different: built to be a rush team that pushes the pace on the backs of it's two elite centers that seems more focused on speed than maintaing possession. I understand you build a roster to your strengths, but are the Penguins committing to a way of team building that is fundamentally flawed and outdated in today's NHL? Dallas aside, I can't think of another contending team who plays a similar style.
Click to read more...
 
I think a lot of these threads are a bit premature. Can we see what happens the rest of the season? They are actually starting to look good.
 
meangene said:
It feels like most of the "elite" teams in the NHL these days all have a very specific way they're constructed: Solid two-way centers with elite wingers who drive offense and help relentlessly cycle and maintain the puck mixed with elite two-way defensemen with big shots and good hockey sense. Chicago, LA, Anaheim, Montreal, etc. are all built this way and it seems like it the general trend towards team building now.

Pittsburgh is totally different: built to be a rush team that pushes the pace on the backs of it's two elite centers that seems more focused on speed than maintaing possession. I understand you build a roster to your strengths, but are the Penguins committing to a way of team building that is fundamentally flawed and outdated in today's NHL? Dallas aside, I can't think of another contending team who plays a similar style.
Click to expand...

Many ways to skin a cat. What matters most is the execution of the model.
 
All team building models are flawed unless you're the Soviet Red Army team or the 1950s or the Montreal Canadiens circa 1956-1960. :laugh:
 
MrBurghundy said:
I think a lot of these threads are a bit premature. Can we see what happens the rest of the season? They are actually starting to look good.
Click to expand...

My point is that they've committed to this style for years while alot of teams have gone a different route, which I find odd since so many people see them as contenders. Anaheim doesn't have dynamic scoring talent on the wings but stocks big bodies who are physical and skilled that can help cycle and keep possessions alive.
 
meangene said:
My point is that they've committed to this style for years while alot of teams have gone a different route, which I find odd since so many people see them as contenders. Anaheim doesn't have dynamic scoring talent on the wings but stocks big bodies who are physical and skilled that can help cycle and keep possessions alive.
Click to expand...

And they have exactly one cup in their existence and are currently sitting at 4th in the Pacific. So, what conclusion should we draw from that?
 
Anaheim isn't any more successful than we are, they're just a far lower profile team so their failures fly under the radar. Their regular season success has gotten them absolutely nowhere come playoff time.


The Habs...well, look at what happens when you build from the goal out and the goalie gets hurt. Their offensive depth is non-existent, they don't have any real game-changing forwards, and Subban can only do so much.
 
Last edited:
Matthew Mitchell said:
Anaheim?Montreal?I don't think they build that way.
Click to expand...

Yeah, Montreal is a pretty bad example.

They have Price, Subban and Pacioretty as elite players, but their supporting cast, especially on D, is pretty terrible. They have no center depth, no one of note on D after Subban (the corpse of Markov doesn't really count) and outside of Gallagher and Galchenyuk (who should be a C), they have no one after Pacioretty on the wing.

They are a bad team badly put together that was willed to multiple good finishes by the best goalie of this generation.
 
Last edited:
meangene said:
My point is that they've committed to this style for years while alot of teams have gone a different route, which I find odd since so many people see them as contenders. Anaheim doesn't have dynamic scoring talent on the wings but stocks big bodies who are physical and skilled that can help cycle and keep possessions alive.
Click to expand...

They have? That's news to me.

When were these years they had all of this "dynamic scoring talent on the wings?" Please enlighten me.
 
meangene said:
My point is that they've committed to this style for years while alot of teams have gone a different route, which I find odd since so many people see them as contenders. Anaheim doesn't have dynamic scoring talent on the wings but stocks big bodies who are physical and skilled that can help cycle and keep possessions alive.
Click to expand...
They maybe have been committed to this style for years, but they did a **** job of executing it. As other's have said, there's a ton of ways to do it, but you have to do it well. The Pens haven't done much well in the last 5 years.
 
Arguing that the Pens' model is flawed is legit. But posting Anaheim as the counterargument just reeks of a 2009 sponsored post 'round these parts.

Trolling: D+
Style: D
Effort: C-

See me after class.
 
But what exactly is their model? And how long have they actually been playing with their current model? I'd argue that it's only been since Sullivan took over.

Before that, they had an incompetent coach.
Before that an injury ravaged defense.
Finally, before that an even worse coach with considerably less talent surrounding Sid and Geno.
 
Gee, i thought trading top4 dmen for crap and playing plugs over better players was the right model. :sarcasm:
 
MrBurghundy said:
They have? That's news to me.

When were these years they had all of this "dynamic scoring talent on the wings?" Please enlighten me.
Click to expand...

They committed to the model of building down the middle and playing north-south hockey where your centers are usually the ones leading the rush up the middle of the ice. When I say teams like Anaheim and Montreal play differently this, I don't mean individual talent, I mean that their centers are used more often as support players that jump the rush late while the wingers are responsible for working the puck up ice and maintaing possession. Both curl and drag and go east-west more than the full bore north-south game Pens play (although I admit I see Anaheim dump and chase more than others.)

This is what I rarely see PIT do. It's usuallyone d-man with the puck and four guys all heading up ice to try and create center lane space for Sid and Geno to catch defenders flat-footed.
 
The only way the Pens team-building has been flawed was that JR didn't have any sort of real identity in his first year as GM. He just added good players without any sort of team structure in mind. That's no longer an issue now, the Pens want to build a team with strong puck moving defenseman and speed at forward. I like the way they are planning on making the roster and Sullivan's system fits what they want to do very well.

Going into next year, if Pouliot continues to develop, Sprong plays every night on the 3rd line and the Pens continue to increase the speed of their forwards, I have no doubt they'll be a top tier team next year.
 
We were flawed under Therrien because he was too rigid and defense-oriented. We were flawed under Bylsma because he liked grinding too much for this roster. We were flawed under Johnston because we couldn't score for crap under his tutelage.

Under Sullivan, at least on the surface it seems we're finally playing the right way for THIS roster. We just need to start protecting our stars better and continue to add more youth (with size) onto the roster.

What would be more flawed would be to continue to try to win by playing someone else's game.
 
meangene said:
Pittsburgh is totally different: built to be a rush team that pushes the pace on the backs of it's two elite centers that seems more focused on speed than maintaing possession.
Click to expand...

meangene said:
My point is that they've committed to this style for years while alot of teams have gone a different route, which I find odd since so many people see them as contenders.
Click to expand...

I don't believe the Pens have committed to the above style for years at all. If they did, they've been doing a horrible job of building the team to follow that style up until now, at least.

Until this year, when Rutherford has made a distinct effort to make the team faster, what moves would you say were made in order to build the team around a style that is "more focused on speed"?

You said they've "committed to this style for years", but over the last 5 years, I can only come up with a few moves made to get faster, and they've pretty much all been made by Rutherford in the past year.
 
If the coaching change happened after game 12, it'd be different. At this point it's a wait and see approach, we're seeing more positives in the coaching change right now than negative. Players are starting to produce again as well. If anything, the team could use a stay at home physical defender to add to the top 4, but the team is faster, plays with more of a killer instinct and play like they are never out of a game - which is awesome because the last time I saw that was in 2008-2009.

Like that game against the Wings where the Pens were out of it and then Staal goes beast mode. Pens are more "cardiac kids" than "Oh we gave 30mins of effort...meh."
 
I believe the answer to your short form question is yes. I believe the answer to your long form question is no.
 
meangene said:
It feels like most of the "elite" teams in the NHL these days all have a very specific way they're constructed: Solid two-way centers with elite wingers who drive offense and help relentlessly cycle and maintain the puck mixed with elite two-way defensemen with big shots and good hockey sense. Chicago, LA, Anaheim, Montreal, etc. are all built this way and it seems like it the general trend towards team building now.

Pittsburgh is totally different: built to be a rush team that pushes the pace on the backs of it's two elite centers that seems more focused on speed than maintaing possession. I understand you build a roster to your strengths, but are the Penguins committing to a way of team building that is fundamentally flawed and outdated in today's NHL? Dallas aside, I can't think of another contending team who plays a similar style.
Click to expand...

Shero after the cup win was building for puck possession and speed. The NHL was in that format at the time, but then came their rollback to clutch and grab interference hockey ways again. Shero said this: "Had I known you were gonna allow interference I would have locked up Hal Gill for 10 years."

Add in all.....the injuries and the failures of not making the right moves at the right times, like when Sid, Geno and Staal all missed time, that should have been a shedding season and collect picks or make trades that make the team better. They did one with Goligoski for Neal and Niskanen, why not keep going and not do Kovalev. Shero was not exactly privy to when to sit on his hands and when not too.

The team became a grinding team that fit well for DB who can get a lot out of secondary players. It got him a Jack Adams award. But Sid, Geno and whomever else was in the lineup they cheated like heck. Stretch passes.

Never any real attention to defense, and then intern messed with the type of D-men they had. Unless your name is Letang, you shouldn't be trying to pinch a 50/50 puck around the bluelines. Contain and wait for help.

Knowing the situation doing the right thing and fallowing protocol "Keep pucks north" got them in a ton of trouble. They left Fleury out to dry game in and out in droves per. game. This is why Fleury cracked. Goalies are not meant to be your entire defense.

I thought Johnson wasn't much different, better, but ultimately, the same. That was without being the players bestest of buddies.

In the end, those saying any system can win if it fits your team are correct. This team was a constant moving parts. Good and bad with a lot of bad.

I like what JR has done, I don't even care of the mistakes. A lot of turnover to expect it to smell like roses. Finally they might have gotten the right coach, though, I'm still not a fan of first time coaches.

It's time to maybe strap on and start plowing the road to the playoffs.

Responsible hockey at both ends will win you a lot of games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Top Bottom