Speculation: Penguins off day talk thread: Yes, Sully is still the coach

[Jaded-Fan]

Crosby, Malkin and Letang make a combined ~21M and are old. Rust, Rakell, Smith and Graves make ~21M and are "not old."

Which group is the anchor, really?

Getting a little tired of this narrative. The old guys are playing up to their contracts. It isn't their fault that the team has still been built around the idea of them not just carrying their line but the whole damned team while they are pushin' 40. Like yeah... players lose their edge as they get older and time is undefeated etc. etc. But simply saying "the biggest problem by far with this team is age and nothing that can be done matters because of this" is a vast misrepresentation of the facts.

It depends on your goals. Possibly making the playoffs and a one and done. Sure. Maybe. They are good enough for that with some minor changes.

More? Nope.

That was my point.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

It depends on your goals. Possibly making the playoffs and a one and done. Sure. Maybe. They are good enough for that with some minor changes.

More? Nope.

That was my point.

Well with all due respect I guess my crystal ball doesn't work nearly as well.

I'd be perfectly happy with a team that can make the dance and take their chance. The core deserves that. Roll your eyes if you want. They provided me with like 16 years of memories and entertainment.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Well with all due respect I guess my crystal ball doesn't work nearly as well.

I'd be perfectly happy with a team that can make the dance and take their chance. The core deserves that. Roll your eyes if you want. They provided me with like 16 years of memories and entertainment.

I wouldn't roll my eyes at that. I said as much before the season. I would prefer a complete rebuild. I called for it. It is the logical route.

But I can't argue with the idea that we owe the core not only a chance if they want it. But a gracious send off.

Logic is one thing. But emotionally I certainly get your position.

 

[HandshakeLine]

I would suggest that a couple more offensive-minded men wouldn't be the worst thing. However, I will point out that when our offensive men get caught because of bad defensive reads, pinches, etc. - it absolutely infuriates the board.

Like, sure we want the "101pt Karlsson" here but we largely ignore the -26 +/- rating. So maybe the question should be - what's the happy medium? And what NHL player would be a good example of what we are looking at?

I am speaking in hyperbolic generalities here but I hate low-event 1-0 slop hockey which is what we usually get nowadays when we talk about defensive hockey. Just 60 minutes of turtling and waiting out the clock once someone scores.

I would much rather see sloppy 5-4 games with lots of energy and interesting plays than teams that dump chase and lock the play to the corners and boards the whole game.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

I am speaking in hyperbolic generalities here but I hate low-event 1-0 slop hockey which is what we usually get nowadays when we talk about defensive hockey. Just 60 minutes of turtling and waiting out the clock once someone scores.

I would much rather see sloppy 5-4 games with lots of energy and interesting plays than teams that dump chase and lock the play to the corners and boards the whole game.

You wouldn't rather Play The Right Way™ HSL?

That's Winning Hockey™ after all.

You gotta grind those... wait wrong era.

 

[SEALBound]

I am speaking in hyperbolic generalities here but I hate low-event 1-0 slop hockey which is what we usually get nowadays when we talk about defensive hockey. Just 60 minutes of turtling and waiting out the clock once someone scores.

I would much rather see sloppy 5-4 games with lots of energy and interesting plays than teams that dump chase and lock the play to the corners and boards the whole game.

There's a "cost" to that though. Those are fun games to watch. Great when you win but really shitty when you lose. If it's a tight checking game with good defense, it seems a bit more acceptable to lose 2-1 rather than a sloppy 5-4.

I'd much rather watch the sloppy, high-stakes 5-4 game but I'm also projecting what I think others would feel.

 

[ChaosAgent]

I would suggest that a couple more offensive-minded men wouldn't be the worst thing. However, I will point out that when our offensive men get caught because of bad defensive reads, pinches, etc. - it absolutely infuriates the board.

Like, sure we want the "101pt Karlsson" here but we largely ignore the -26 +/- rating. So maybe the question should be - what's the happy medium? And what NHL player would be a good example of what we are looking at?

Letang is a really good offense first player who is a huge net positive. If we are talking about our own team.

As far as prospects go, Puustinen could be in that mold which is why people are rightfully angry that he keeps getting buried.

In hindsight Matheson was also a huge loss. You were right about him. I miss that guy.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

There's a "cost" to that though. Those are fun games to watch. Great when you win but really shitty when you lose. If it's a tight checking game with good defense, it seems a bit more acceptable to lose 2-1 rather than a sloppy 5-4.

I'd much rather watch the sloppy, high-stakes 5-4 game but I'm also projecting what I think others would feel.

I know a lot of people will clutch their pearls at this but unless it's a life-on-line regular season or playoff game I think I'd rather watch a fun loss than a slog of a win. I'm mostly in it for entertainment. I'm not out there winning anything or cashing a paycheck.

Letang is a really good offense first player who is a huge net positive. If we are talking about our own team.

As far as prospects go, Puustinen could be in that mold which is why people are rightfully angry that he keeps getting buried.

In hindsight Matheson was also a huge loss. You were right about him. I miss that guy.

FWIW I liked Math from the moment I first saw him play here.

Was very confused at all the controversy surrounding his "awful" contract.

Wish he were still here.

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

Like, sure we want the "101pt Karlsson" here but we largely ignore the -26 +/- rating. So maybe the question should be - what's the happy medium? And what NHL player would be a good example of what we are looking at?

You've mentioned Karlsson's +/- in San Jose a couple of times, but I think it should be pointed out that Karlsson was actually dead even at 5on5. Where his +/- took a massive hit was stuff like when the goalie was pulled (they lost a lot so they pulled their goalie a lot).

Point being, that 101 point Karlsson still managed to break even at 5on5 despite playing on a horrific team. So I'd argue that's EXACTLY the Karlsson we need - an offensive difference maker who still managed to be sufficient defensively despite playing for a trainwreck.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

You clearly didn’t read my post. There hasn’t been activity because teams don’t want to make trades. Do you think Dubas can just snap his fingers & a trade gets done?

I read your post. I think (actually, I know) that if you're determined enough you can make it happen as a GM.

 

[ChaosAgent]

I know a lot of people will clutch their pearls at this but unless it's a life-on-line regular season or playoff game I think I'd rather watch a fun loss than a slog of a win. I'm mostly in it for entertainment. I'm not out there winning anything or cashing a paycheck.



FWIW I liked Math from the moment I first saw him play here.

Was very confused at all the controversy surrounding his "awful" contract.

Wish he were still here.

We would be better off with Math + Marino + our 1st RP vs. EK/Graves and uhhhh, Ty Smith. No question. Even if you subtract Marino, fine just sign Ruutta and pair him with Matheson.

 

[BlindWillyMcHurt]

We would be better off with Math + Marino + our 1st RP vs. EK/Graves and uhhhh, Ty Smith. No question. Even if you subtract Marino, fine just sign Ruutta and pair him with Matheson.

The whole defensive carosel the last like three-ish years has been so pointless. It just doesn't make a difference in this system.

That energy and assets should have been spent on more modest upgrades to the blueline and better depth but most importantly someone to play with/center Malkin. At least in hindsight. Though I admit I was a fan of the "retool" by Hextall and the EK acquisition this past year. But I'm finally at the point where I'm realizing in a Mike Sullivan world you aren't manufacturing offense from the back end or helping your forwards there, either.

 

[SEALBound]

We would be better off with Math + Marino + our 1st RP vs. EK/Graves and uhhhh, Ty Smith. No question. Even if you subtract Marino, fine just sign Ruutta and pair him with Matheson.

Would reversing all of the trades mean that we don't get Granlund? That was half the benefit of the Karlsson trade - jettisoning him.

If I could go back and make the defense:

Pettersson-Letang
Matheson-Marino

With a bottom pairing of who we have between POJ, Rudwedel, or a signing like Rutta, I would do it.

 

[ChaosAgent]

Would reversing all of the trades mean that we don't get Granlund? That was half the benefit of the Karlsson trade - jettisoning him.

If I could go back and make the defense:

Pettersson-Letang
Matheson-Marino

With a bottom pairing of who we have between POJ, Rudwedel, or a signing like Rutta, I would do it.

I'd still take it back even if I had to buy out Granlund.

 

[edog37]

I read your post. I think (actually, I know) that if you're determined enough you can make it happen as a GM.

Right because all Dubas has to do is Jedi mind trick a trade

 

[wej20]

Rakell - Crosby - Rust
DOC - Geno - Big Puus
Smith - Eller - Bemstrom
Carter/Harkins - Acciari - Jesse

Do it you coward!

 

[Josey Wales]

Right because all Dubas has to do is Jedi mind trick a trade

HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Sidgeni Malkby]

Would reversing all of the trades mean that we don't get Granlund? That was half the benefit of the Karlsson trade - jettisoning him.

If I could go back and make the defense:

Pettersson-Letang
Matheson-Marino

With a bottom pairing of who we have between POJ, Rudwedel, or a signing like Rutta, I would do it.

In retrospect it all looks good.

But remember that Math was a reclamation project and we bought low, and were trying to sell high. I think people were expecting him to turn back into a pumpkin, which never happened.

I agree that:
Math + $5M player > EK

 

[pistolpete11]

We would be better off with Math + Marino + our 1st RP vs. EK/Graves and uhhhh, Ty Smith. No question. Even if you subtract Marino, fine just sign Ruutta and pair him with Matheson.

I say let's completely revamp the defense just oooooone more time and see if that's magically the right mix for Sullivan.

 

[Tasty Biscuits]

Point being, that 101 point Karlsson still managed to break even at 5on5 despite playing on a horrific team. So I'd argue that's EXACTLY the Karlsson we need - an offensive difference maker who still managed to be sufficient defensively despite playing for a trainwreck.

Eh. I'd rather have the version of Karlsson who PLAYS THE RIGHT WAY.

 

[eXile3]

I say let's completely revamp the defense just oooooone more time and see if that's magically the right mix for Sullivan.

Right? That’s what makes all this so hopeless. The personnel only matters to a certain point when your coach is actively a large part of the problem.

 

[Wattsburgh]

It’ll always be an off day if Sully is still the Coach. Thread should be pinned to Kyle’s glasses.

Right? That’s what makes all this so hopeless. The personnel only matters to a certain point when your coach is actively a large part of the problem.

Precisely.

 

[pistolpete11]

There's a "cost" to that though. Those are fun games to watch. Great when you win but really shitty when you lose. If it's a tight checking game with good defense, it seems a bit more acceptable to lose 2-1 rather than a sloppy 5-4.

I'd much rather watch the sloppy, high-stakes 5-4 game but I'm also projecting what I think others would feel.

I think people view defense as something anybody can do, you just need a good structure and a willingness. I think that's largely correct, too. So if you're giving up 4 or 5 goals a game, it reflects poorly on the coach.

On offense, though, it's seen more as player's skill. Player X, Y, Z just suck. We're too old. Our xGF is good so the bounces will come. A coach can't score for the players.

This isn't football, though. Offense and defense transition into each other quickly. So if you sell out one way or another, it's going to hurt the other side. But since defense is viewed as more of the coach's responsibility, that's the direction most coaches will lean. Especially when you're not winning enough games.

 

[AuroraBorealis]

Puustinen is 2nd on the team in 5v5 P/P60 behind Sid. Naturally, you gotta bench him in the 3rd. And obviously, you gotta give him 9mins of 5v5 on average for the season when shitters are getting 13-14. Because scoring is definitely not a primary need atm.
This coach is exhausting to watch operate.

 

[Icarium]

You've mentioned Karlsson's +/- in San Jose a couple of times, but I think it should be pointed out that Karlsson was actually dead even at 5on5. Where his +/- took a massive hit was stuff like when the goalie was pulled (they lost a lot so they pulled their goalie a lot).

All you need to know about plus/minus that there was a season not so long was Ryan Graves was number one in the entire league in that department and another one when Brian Dumoulin was fifth.

Do I wish EK65 was better defensively? Of course but the whole point of trading for a player like that is to use him to give your offense a massive boost, not trying to turn him into a Dumoulin with better passing. It would be silly to try it even if he were 23 but the guy is 33 and coming off a 101 points season.