On this thread, please refer to me by my newly annointed title - De Jan.

If Ray, Mario and De Jan were to take any type of test that measured intelligence, well, only a fool would bet on the front office guys. Unfortunately, I know where many of you would bet, which would lead me to my next natural conclusion....
- Daman

Mario Lemieux has more hockey intelligence in his stool than you possess in every fiber of your body. Not one person out of millions of hockey players, analysts and fans would choose your advice over his. This is fact. Accept it and move on.

I heard an interview last night with peter taglianetti...

He was asked a question about why the defense look so bad at times....

He said he thought there were big problems with communication. He said it looked like one guy didn't know what the other was going to do. I really do wonder if Simone Despres was allowed to play and gel with Letang all season, would Letang have looked like the player most of us considered a must keep this off season?
- madmike71

Penguins use a lot of switches and certainly a lack of communication will be fatal, and was.

One positive from these situations is that you can easily pick out the posters who you can ignore in the future based on ridiculous comments IE Penguins should trade/will trade Malkin.

If you see that, don't waste your time, move along.

One positive from these situations is that you can easily pick out the posters who you can ignore in the future based on ridiculous comments IE Penguins should trade/will trade Malkin.

If you see that, don't waste your time, move along.
- Gunner Staal

How were the Bruins able to shut down yourself and the team's other top stars?

Crosby: "I think if we get those chances consistently, there’s no real explanation for it. I don’t feel like we got shut down. I felt like we didn’t score. I feel like the chances were there. In Game 3, I think [Malkin] had 21 attempted shots. You don’t see numbers like that. To think that we had those chances and it didn’t go in or that it hit posts, it’s hard to explain that."



It's a rare thing to see that many attempts at goal, and not produce a goal. I also think if you take some of these suggested coaching replacements that this poop wouldnt even be tracked the way it is by Bylsma's group.

How were the Bruins able to shut down yourself and the team's other top stars?

Crosby: "I think if we get those chances consistently, there’s no real explanation for it. I don’t feel like we got shut down. I felt like we didn’t score. I feel like the chances were there. In Game 3, I think
- Deadstar[Malkin] had 21 attempted shots. You don’t see numbers like that. To think that we had those chances and it didn’t go in or that it hit posts, it’s hard to explain that."



It's a rare thing to see that many attempts at goal, and not produce a goal. I also think if you take some of these suggested coaching replacements that this poop wouldnt even be tracked the way it is by Bylsma's group.

On Saurday, before deleting game 4 from my DVR, I rewatched the game mostly skipping through. There was an amazing number of "chances" that consisted of a Pens forward coming down the wing and just shooting it on net from the boards. In VERY FEW of these, was there even another forward on the screen. No one was driving to the net. It seemed like either the forward with the puck just saw a rare shooting lane to the net and just shot it, not caring where his linemates were, or in many instances, the linemates just being slow coming up ice or staying high looking for one of our favorite cross ice drop passes.

Of what I saw skipping aroud, the 4th line had the most realistic scoring chances, because guys like Morrow or Adams just barreled down the slot and while they didn't really get any rebounds, at least there was a chance.

On Saurday, before deleting game 4 from my DVR, I rewatched the game mostly skipping through. There was an amazing number of "chances" that consisted of a Pens forward coming down the wing and just shooting it on net from the boards. In VERY FEW of these, was there even another forward on the screen. No one was driving to the net. It seemed like either the forward with the puck just saw a rare shooting lane to the net and just shot it, not caring where his linemates were, or in many instances, the linemates just being slow coming up ice or staying high looking for one of our favorite cross ice drop passes.

Of what I saw skipping aroud, the 4th line had the most realistic scoring chances, because guys like Morrow or Adams just barreled down the slot and while they didn't really get any rebounds, at least there was a chance.
- rival22

He was speaking of game 3, not 4. And the team tracks chances at net, scoring chances, etc as different metrics.

He was speaking of game 3, not 4. And the team tracks chances at net, scoring chances, etc as different metrics.
- Deadstar

I get that, but my comment was basically that the number of shots on goal doesn't necessarily mean quality chances.

I can't think of many highlight reel saves that Rask had to make after game #1, regardless of the number of shots fired.

I get that, but my comment was basically that the number of shots on goal doesn't necessarily mean quality chances.

I can't think of many highlight reel saves that Rask had to make after game #1, regardless of the number of shots fired.
- rival22

I thought in Game 3 Malkin by himself had multiple great chances.

On Saurday, before deleting game 4 from my DVR, I rewatched the game mostly skipping through. There was an amazing number of "chances" that consisted of a Pens forward coming down the wing and just shooting it on net from the boards. In VERY FEW of these, was there even another forward on the screen. No one was driving to the net. It seemed like either the forward with the puck just saw a rare shooting lane to the net and just shot it, not caring where his linemates were, or in many instances, the linemates just being slow coming up ice or staying high looking for one of our favorite cross ice drop passes.

Of what I saw skipping aroud, the 4th line had the most realistic scoring chances, because guys like Morrow or Adams just barreled down the slot and while they didn't really get any rebounds, at least there was a chance.
- rival22

The Bruins secondary defensive puck support was amazing. They were able to take option 1 and option 2 away. It led to the illusion that there was 6 Bruins skaters on the ice. Part of the reason why they were able to accomplish that feat is because of their great neutral zone play. Penguins rarely were afforded the option of skating the puck into the Bruins zone on a controlled entry. Penguins were forced to chip and chase and the Bruins were more than ready for it.

Bruins forwards commitment to the backcheck through the neutral zone is what set the table for everything in the series IMO.

I get that, but my comment was basically that the number of shots on goal doesn't necessarily mean quality chances.

I can't think of many highlight reel saves that Rask had to make after game #1, regardless of the number of shots fired.
- rival22

In hind sight... The Pens could have won 3 of the 4 games. It wasn't like every game was like game 2. Rask stole game one, and both games 3 and 4 were 50/50 games. I think the Pens were the better team in game 3 by decent margin. I don't think I've ever seen a playoff series where one team virtually didn't get a single break. It was remarkable. That's the way it goes... credit to the B's.

The Bruins secondary defensive puck support was amazing. They were able to take option 1 and option 2 away. It led to the illusion that there was 6 Bruins skaters on the ice. Part of the reason why they were able to accomplish that feat is because of their great neutral zone play. Penguins rarely were afforded the option of skating the puck into the Bruins zone on a controlled entry. Penguins were forced to chip and chase and the Bruins were more than ready for it.

Bruins forwards commitment to the backcheck through the neutral zone is what set the table for everything in the series IMO.
- Gunner Staal

Bruins played low risk/low reward offensively. It works when you have a team as committed and solid as them up and down the lineup. Tortorella wishes he had a team that deep with players who could play. Can you remember a Bruins forward getting caught below the goal line let alone venturing below it?

Bruins played low risk/low reward offensively. It works when you have a team as committed and solid as them up and down the lineup. Tortorella wishes he had a team that deep with players who could play. Can you remember a Bruins forward getting caught below the goal line let alone venturing below it?
- Deadstar

Not without the Bruins in complete 100% possession of the puck.

In hind sight... The Pens could have won 3 of the 4 games. It wasn't like every game was like game 2. Rask stole game one, and both games 3 and 4 were 50/50 games. I think the Pens were the better team in game 3 by decent margin. I don't think I've ever seen a playoff series where one team virtually didn't get a single break. It was remarkable. That's the way it goes... credit to the B's.
- madmike71

It goes to show that a combination of better teamwork, better discipline, more intelligence, hard work, better defense, and selflessness can overcome individual skill.

Boston's whole is greater than the sum of its individual parts.

Pitts whole is less than the sum of its individual parts.

Not without the Bruins in complete 100% possession of the puck.
- Gunner Staal

I think a major failure (and you touched on this in your game 2 assessment at HH) was the lack of the defense's ability to move the puck effectively up ice. Outside of Martin-Orpik pairing, no one else did. The forwards constantly looked out of sorts in the neutral zone because the defensemen did a very poor job moving it up ice effectively.

PK just took home the Norris....

On Saurday, before deleting game 4 from my DVR, I rewatched the game mostly skipping through. There was an amazing number of "chances" that consisted of a Pens forward coming down the wing and just shooting it on net from the boards. In VERY FEW of these, was there even another forward on the screen. No one was driving to the net. It seemed like either the forward with the puck just saw a rare shooting lane to the net and just shot it, not caring where his linemates were, or in many instances, the linemates just being slow coming up ice or staying high looking for one of our favorite cross ice drop passes.

Of what I saw skipping aroud, the 4th line had the most realistic scoring chances, because guys like Morrow or Adams just barreled down the slot and while they didn't really get any rebounds, at least there was a chance.
- rival22

I'm with you on this. I can recall maybe 3 rebound opportunities the entire series. Boston was certainly a much better and more disciplined team but we didn't go to the areas I thought we needed to so they could test that. Maybe cause some confusion. IMO if a professional goalie sees a puck and it's not deflected he is well compensated to stop it.

I think a major failure (and you touched on this in your game 2 assessment at HH) was the lack of the defense's ability to move the puck effectively up ice. Outside of Martin-Orpik pairing, no one else did. The forwards constantly looked out of sorts in the neutral zone because the defensemen did a very poor job moving it up ice effectively.
- Deadstar

This shouldn't happen for a 4 game span. Maybe a 1 game span then adjustments should be made. No way around it this was a collapse. The front office believed they had the team to win and they proved that with all of the acquisitions. Suddenly Morrow, a 1st and some 2nds seems like a big chunk of the future they didn't get the return on.
Had it gone 7 you'd be ok but we got swept. And I am in no way claiming we lost this series because Boston took it. They were perfect in what they wanted to do.

This shouldn't happen for a 4 game span. Maybe a 1 game span then adjustments should be made. No way around it this was a collapse. The front office believed they had the team to win and they proved that with all of the acquisitions. Suddenly Morrow, a 1st and some 2nds seems like a big chunk of the future they didn't get the return on.
Had it gone 7 you'd be ok but we got swept. And I am in no way claiming we lost this series because Boston took it. They were perfect in what they wanted to do.
- dbell646

They did make adjustments. They were a ton better in 3 and 4. Still not good enough in the end. Where I differ is I dont see the difference between a sweep and a 7 game loss. A bounce here or there and we lose in 6. Then what? A bounce is the difference between blowing the team up and firing the coach?

Claude Julien was a minute away from being fired in round 1. Now everyone thinks hes a genius.

all I know if letang and fleury get traded for a couple of 1st, I really hope we get some wingers..

all I know if letang and fleury get traded for a couple of 1st, I really hope we get some wingers..
- nh4442

I just can't see Fleury getting a 1st as return. He's gotta be viewed as somewhat damaged goods at this point.

I just can't see Fleury getting a 1st as return. He's gotta be viewed as somewhat damaged goods at this point.
- rival22

I think to ateam who needs a goalie like edm a 1st wont be an issue. they have the fire power on offense, they needed a decent goalie

I think a major failure (and you touched on this in your game 2 assessment at HH) was the lack of the defense's ability to move the puck effectively up ice. Outside of Martin-Orpik pairing, no one else did. The forwards constantly looked out of sorts in the neutral zone because the defensemen did a very poor job moving it up ice effectively.
- Deadstar

Not using Despres is a tough pill to swallow. Even the Leafs and Randy Carlyle (who is stubborn with using his unskilled physical players) realized that Jake Gardiner had to be part of the solution.

It is bizarre... If he didn't play so well in the '08 & '09 playoffs, you could just chalk it up to him being a guy who can't play under pressure.

If he does come back next year, in addition to a new goalie coach, the Pens really have to bring in a sports psychologist or something. He could have another great regular season, but his confidence level will still be negative going into the playoffs.
- rival22

Thy whats so strange about it he's won a cup before and won the eat before and looked good. Billy G was asked about it on nhl network and he says he has no idea what te problem is. I don't even think fleury knows twhat the problem is otsbthe strangest thing I think I've ever seen.

PK just took home the Norris....
- nelson911

I think it should have gone to suter.

Not using Despres is a tough pill to swallow. Even the Leafs and Randy Carlyle (who is stubborn with using his unskilled physical players) realized that Jake Gardiner had to be part of the solution.
- Gunner Staal

Its my biggest gripe with how it played out. We were loaded up so that we didnt have a repeat of last year where Engelland had to dress. I have a hard time seeing Marchand get that pass across to Bergeron in game 3 if thats Despres instead of Engelland. And I like Engelland as a 7th in the regular season.