RRP's "Hey I'm Tanked, Where's Cole's +/-?"
- Thread starter Dipsy Doodle
- Start date
- May 28, 2006
- 76,686
- 22,478
That would be a 109 point pace over a full season. I don't think that should be the watermark for a "non ********" start.
17 points over the first 15 games would prorate to 93 points over an 82 game season, which would make the playoffs each of the last 3 years. I think that would be sufficient to show that our regular season isn't in danger due to playing "******** hockey".
- May 28, 2006
- 76,686
- 22,478
MichiganWolverines
Big Mac Attack
Ben Lovejoy was getting leveled by Alex Burmistrov last night. His balance was terrible, Despres or Bortuzzo should have played yesterday.
In the end, in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter if we won or lost last night. This team along with its coaching are good enough to make the playoffs.
Take last night game for example, more often than not, Malkin's line would have had one or two goals to show for all the scoring chances they had.
Had some bounces gone our way(and last night was more an anomaly then the norm) chances are we would have won this game.
But, it doesn't change the fact that all our shortcomings (coaching, holes in the lineup) will be once again badly exposed in the playoffs by good coaches and we won't adjust.
That's what happened the last few years.
One thing about Bylsma, he seems to think that, when his system is executed perfectly, it can't be countered, problem is, it can (any system really, can be countered given the right personnel) but IMO, he sees the failures of his system as coming from a lack of execution from his players not from the other team forcing them to make some mistakes. The fact that he refuses to dictate match up at home is in the same vein of 'I don't care what they are doing, if we are playing our game, we won't be stopped' thinking.
Well, either that or he just can't find the adjustments.
Either way, these are some issues that will cost us post season success.
Take last night game for example, more often than not, Malkin's line would have had one or two goals to show for all the scoring chances they had.
Had some bounces gone our way(and last night was more an anomaly then the norm) chances are we would have won this game.
But, it doesn't change the fact that all our shortcomings (coaching, holes in the lineup) will be once again badly exposed in the playoffs by good coaches and we won't adjust.
That's what happened the last few years.
One thing about Bylsma, he seems to think that, when his system is executed perfectly, it can't be countered, problem is, it can (any system really, can be countered given the right personnel) but IMO, he sees the failures of his system as coming from a lack of execution from his players not from the other team forcing them to make some mistakes. The fact that he refuses to dictate match up at home is in the same vein of 'I don't care what they are doing, if we are playing our game, we won't be stopped' thinking.
Well, either that or he just can't find the adjustments.
Either way, these are some issues that will cost us post season success.
Last edited:
Doesn't the fact that Lovejoy played last night show that the battle for the 8th spot was between Strait and Bortuzzo and not Strait and Lovejoy like we were all thinking?
No wonder he waived Strait.
The talent will get us in the playoffs like it has before. The coaching will get us knocked out. As long as we win meaningless games it keeps people from looking at the underlying problems that keep us from wining anything important. Finishing the regular season with a 100 points means nothing. A 1/3 of the league had 100 point seasons last year.
Team defense wins important games & even in our wins I don't see how anyone can say they saw that from this team.
Team defense wins important games & even in our wins I don't see how anyone can say they saw that from this team.
SuburbanRhythm
WorldClassJagoff
Not to defend the Rev, but hasn't Burmi taken Chara down in a prior game?
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
Ding ding ding! You're spot on and frankly, he's done it for years.
Post loss interview: "We didn't get to our game"
Translation: "I dunno what happened. I told them exactly what to do and they didn't do it!"
BHD
Eh...
Fair enough. I'm an Arts major. So please excuse my math.
The 17 point mark works as a threshold.
- May 28, 2006
- 76,686
- 22,478
Fair enough. I'm an Arts major. So please excuse my math.
The 17 point mark works as a threshold.
Alright man. It's a deal.
Let's both hope I win, haha.
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
Day after plus/minus FWIW:
Lovejoy didn't pick up his man on the one goal. At the same time I liked how he got into the play on offense a couple times. Meh.
Missed some opportunities on offense when the Jets were running around.
Good to see Crosby starting to rack 'em up. For some reason I'm still not seeing the speed through the neutral zone that much, but he "re-added" his crazy board work to his game last night.
I know it's taboo to say but the third line has to look a little more dangerous. We need them to score a little more frequently or it's going to be a long year.
The closer it got to crunch time the more the team started flinging pucks around the rink 6" off the ice to each other. It's really frustrating when they lose sight of the process between gaining possession and working your way down the ice to a scoring chance.
The 3rd or 4th goal, where someone stickhandled through two Penguins near the boards in our zone, was awful. It was Engelland and I think Malkin.
Bob Grove, in a moment of non-biased commentary which is becoming less and less common for him, said before the game he thought the Penguins tried to mail it in against the Leafs. I don't know if that's what happened against the Jets, but after they got up 2-0 it looked like that was a possibility.
PS: Since we've talked so much about him and most of us have trashed him, it's only fair to mention Tangradi played a pretty decent fourth line game. I still don't think he wins literally any 50/50 puck battles but he actually looked involved on a lot of shifts.
Lovejoy didn't pick up his man on the one goal. At the same time I liked how he got into the play on offense a couple times. Meh.
Missed some opportunities on offense when the Jets were running around.
Good to see Crosby starting to rack 'em up. For some reason I'm still not seeing the speed through the neutral zone that much, but he "re-added" his crazy board work to his game last night.
I know it's taboo to say but the third line has to look a little more dangerous. We need them to score a little more frequently or it's going to be a long year.
The closer it got to crunch time the more the team started flinging pucks around the rink 6" off the ice to each other. It's really frustrating when they lose sight of the process between gaining possession and working your way down the ice to a scoring chance.
The 3rd or 4th goal, where someone stickhandled through two Penguins near the boards in our zone, was awful. It was Engelland and I think Malkin.
Bob Grove, in a moment of non-biased commentary which is becoming less and less common for him, said before the game he thought the Penguins tried to mail it in against the Leafs. I don't know if that's what happened against the Jets, but after they got up 2-0 it looked like that was a possibility.
PS: Since we've talked so much about him and most of us have trashed him, it's only fair to mention Tangradi played a pretty decent fourth line game. I still don't think he wins literally any 50/50 puck battles but he actually looked involved on a lot of shifts.
I put this in the other thread, and I'll ask it here: Is it merely a coincidence that we don't seem to get to our game mostly where the other team gameplans specifically for the Pens (playoffs, certain regular season games) or makes obvious in game adjustments?
Interesting if he's seeing that. When homer media people like him start to say, effectively, I'm seeing the disturbing trend, then usually fans wondering if the GM is seeing it have their answer.
BTW, yes, Tangradi played a pretty inspired, noticeable, and effective game.
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
Yeah you can look at that two ways: Bad in-game coaching or the team just not working hard enough to accomplish what's been drawn up. I wonder which one Bylsma thinks it is?
IcedCapp
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2009
- 35,959
- 13,542
As someone who's defended him: he seems really bad at finding pucks around his feet. I think that's the best way to describe it. Always seems slow just because he can't find the puck. No clue what that's about.
Does it really matter? Bad coaching is on Bylsma. The team not trying is on Bylsma (when a team, as Grove suggested, 'mails it in', then it means they've tuned the coach out . . . 'coaches are hired to be fired').
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
Yeah you're right. I don't like this coach or this system so I actually don't have much to add. I just saw a lot of Bylsma talk today so that rekindled my passion about it haha
Ah ah I don't put any stock in whatever analysis Grove can make. Much like Steigy, he sounds like he's paid by the Penguins organization to say only good thing about them(in fact, maybe he is)
Then again, it was pretty funny listening to his post game shows last year, doing whatever he could to defend Martin when almost every call was ripping him a new one.
UnderratedBrooks44
Registered User
Ah ah I don't put any stock in whatever analysis Grove can make. Much like Steigy, he sounds like he's paid by the Penguins organization to say only good thing about them(in fact, maybe he is)
Then again, it was pretty funny listening to his post game shows last year, doing whatever he could to defend Martin when almost every call was ripping him a new one.
I think you're right, but I think Grove was a really good Penguin personality with solid analysis until recently. As of last year he seemed to take the Steigy approach. Much more subdued (MUCH more), but still.
I wouldn't criticize him for the Martin stuff though really. I think it's more a product of the frustration that comes with hearing the same thing from every other caller, after every single game. He was the same way with Whitney and he's doing the same with Tangradi. Again you're right, a large part of it is the propaganda machine but I'd probably act like a dick too if people kept saying the same things and going WAY overboard with their comments.
And I think your point was that EVEN Grove was saying it looked like the Pens mailed it in against the Leafs.
I hear you, sometimes it's downright brutal, you gotta wonder : don't they make any kind of selection between the callers?
But then again, sometimes a good laugh right after a bad loss is the best prescription and listening to Grover dealing with all the Martin critics last year didn't disappoint in this regard.
BTW, nothing against Grove he knows his hockey but his post game analysis where he carefully try not to criticize anything Penguins related, they just don't hold much interest to me.
Last edited:
JTG
Registered User
- Sep 30, 2007
- 50,480
- 6,487
I'm currently chalking up terrible puck management to the fact that we had 5 days of training camp and immediately started the season. It has been terrible. The blind passes to the middle of the ice need to stop. They are breaking our back.
I thought Letang had a poor game, specifically in the offensive zone. He's got to find a way to get shots on net. The hesitation he has when shooting the puck is the reason he has to quadruple clutch. Just shoot the damn thing.
I thought Letang had a poor game, specifically in the offensive zone. He's got to find a way to get shots on net. The hesitation he has when shooting the puck is the reason he has to quadruple clutch. Just shoot the damn thing.
MrBurghundy
I may be older but I'm never forgetting #47 & #41
- May 28, 2006
- 76,686
- 22,478
Other teams are. We just have ours under a microscope.
Even Pens board golden boy Ryan Suter has been very poor by all Wild fan accounts. But it's the first week of the season.
MrBurghundy
I may be older but I'm never forgetting #47 & #41
I don't know. It could be that, but there are just other things that make you question whether it isn't something bigger. It's not like this kind of performance is unique to this season...
