The most disturbing thing for me is that I don't remember the last time one of our highly paid players were the difference when needed.

It might be wrong to point to the loss to the Flyers the other day...but that's a valid case in point...isn't it?
- icedog97

If you make the right play 80% of the time, that's called skill.

If you make the right play 87% of the time in one game and lose, that's called bad luck. If you make the right play 72% of the time the next game and win? Also luck.

Point is that the performance as a whole over an entire season is way more important than the performance in a 10 minute stretch. That 10 minute bit is mostly just luck. But Everyone remembers it because it looks cool.

OK, Gunner I won't blow up the top 6, except for Perron, not a fan. Would have preferred a bigger forward.

However who in the bottom six would you keep? Winnick? Comeau? Who else? Blow it the F*ck up.
- powerhouse

Winnik, Comeau, Downie. Keeping three out of the 6 bottom 6 guys isn't blowing anything up. Add Dupuis in there if he comes back and thats 4. 4 guys who should be playing in bottom six rolls but have proven the ability to slot up in the top 6 in a pinch. We really are in ok waters. Health has gotten the better of us this season along with an atrocious power play. Fix the power play and have better luck with guys getting long term injury and we're neck and neck with the Rangers for the East.

Ok, the Rangers had a phenomenal season. Maybe not neck and neck, but definitely think we finish second in the Metro no questions asked.

If you make the right play 80% of the time, that's called skill.

If you make the right play 87% of the time in one game and lose, that's called bad luck. If you make the right play 72% of the time the next game and win? Also luck.

Point is that the performance as a whole over an entire season is way more important than the performance in a 10 minute stretch. That 10 minute bit is mostly just luck. But Everyone remembers it because it looks cool.
- BINGO!

Performance on a game to game basis in the playoffs is what's really important.

Winnik and Comeau are career bottom 6er's. You honestly think all GMs knew that they would be top 6 tweeners? It was a crapshoot, same as Spaling.
- znagle

Not at all. I think most GMs that don't rely on data are no more capable at it than random at best.

See this is where people consistently miss the boat on a Malkin trade. The deal wouldn't just be Malkin for, say, Patches and Galch but it would be for Patches, Galch, and what, about $3 mill or so in extra cap space. So, with that $, you could go out and acquire $3 mill more and upgrade one other roster spot.
- 87_71_11_29

Not really, Patches makes 4 for next season and 5 for a few seasons after that. Galchenyuk's cap hit is probably going to be around 3.5-4, maybe more... so we're right back at 9 mil again. Instead of that 3 mill in extra cap space, maybe not wasting it on the Sutters and Spalings and Scuderis of the world would probably serve better, then you can keep Malkin and then some.

Performance on a game to game basis in the playoffs is what's really important.
- rangerdanger94

This is why it's much harder to gauge playoff results. With so many variables involved at all times, a rut in the ice in the wrong spot can determine everything.

It's exciting as hell, but it's not really indicative of the actual abilities of a player as a whole.

This is why you wind up with Crosby and Toews having huge scoring droughts, and guys like Fernando Pisani going on a long tear. It's not that Pisani is better than, or even playing better than those other two, it's just that the puck has bounced his way more often and there's not enough time for things to balance out properly.

The team just needs to trim the rust off the edges. Get rid of the Adams, Lappierre's, and Scuderi's of the roster and fill their spots with actual hockey players.

This is why it's much harder to gauge playoff results. With so many variables involved at all times, a rut in the ice in the wrong spot can determine everything.

It's exciting as hell, but it's not really indicative of the actual abilities of a player as a whole.

This is why you wind up with Crosby and Toews having huge scoring droughts, and guys like Fernando Pisani going on a long tear. It's not that Pisani is better than, or even playing better than those other two, it's just that the puck has bounced his way more often and there's not enough time for things to balance out properly.
- BINGO!

Damn man, you might get banned here soon bringing logic into a Hockey Buzz message board. Best watch out. But kudos none the less.

This is why it's much harder to gauge playoff results. With so many variables involved at all times, a rut in the ice in the wrong spot can determine everything.

It's exciting as hell, but it's not really indicative of the actual abilities of a player as a whole.

This is why you wind up with Crosby and Toews having huge scoring droughts, and guys like Fernando Pisani going on a long tear. It's not that Pisani is better than, or even playing better than those other two, it's just that the puck has bounced his way more often and there's not enough time for things to balance out properly.
- BINGO!

I agree that it takes some luck to do well in the playoffs, but I also don't think that just because a player plays better in the playoffs that the player is just getting lucky or the sample size isn't big enough to balance it out. Some players just elevate their game in the playoffs like Justin Williams or to lesser degrees Brian Boyle and Carl Hagelin. Some people thrive in those high pressure situations like Toews and Kane while others tend to disappear like Nash.

Who decides what a good sample size is? James Tannr was arguing that over the corse of a season the Kings will make the playoffs because Corsi. Now that they're still on the outside looking in, all of a sudden he's arguing 82 games isn't an accurate sample size.

Such as?
- dbell646

Sutter and Spaling absolutely should have been moved. Especially Sutter whose value was never going to be higher after last postseason. In season he could have easily kept Goc and Arcobello. That would have helped the depth and prevented the two worst players on the team (Lapierre and Adams) from playing. The UFA I really wanted was Perreault and he signed for $3m/yr. Every incremental roster improvement makes a difference.

Sutter and Spaling absolutely should have been moved. Especially Sutter whose value was never going to be higher after last postseason. In season he could have easily kept Goc and Arcobello. That would have helped the depth and prevented the two worst players on the team (Lapierre and Adams) from playing. The UFA I really wanted was Perreault and he signed for $3m/yr. Every incremental roster improvement makes a difference.
- jfkst1

Rutherford seems like a guy that buys high and sells low most of the time.

I agree that it takes some luck to do well in the playoffs, but I also don't think that just because a player plays better in the playoffs that the player is just getting lucky or the sample size isn't big enough to balance it out. Some players just elevate their game in the playoffs like Justin Williams or to lesser degrees Brian Boyle and Carl Hagelin. Some people thrive in those high pressure situations like Toews and Kane while others tend to disappear like Nash.

Who decides what a good sample size is? James Tannr was arguing that over the corse of a season the Kings will make the playoffs because Corsi. Now that they're still on the outside looking in, all of a sudden he's arguing 82 games isn't an accurate sample size.
- rangerdanger94

James Tanner wishes he were Matt Barry imo

I agree that it takes some luck to do well in the playoffs, but I also don't think that just because a player plays better in the playoffs that the player is just getting lucky or the sample size isn't big enough to balance it out. Some players just elevate their game in the playoffs like Justin Williams or to lesser degrees Brian Boyle and Carl Hagelin. Some people thrive in those high pressure situations like Toews and Kane while others tend to disappear like Nash.

Who decides what a good sample size is? James Tannr was arguing that over the corse of a season the Kings will make the playoffs because Corsi. Now that they're still on the outside looking in, all of a sudden he's arguing 82 games isn't an accurate sample size.
- rangerdanger94

Isn't that the exact sample size that matters over a season...? hahahahah

This is why it's much harder to gauge playoff results. With so many variables involved at all times, a rut in the ice in the wrong spot can determine everything.

It's exciting as hell, but it's not really indicative of the actual abilities of a player as a whole.

This is why you wind up with Crosby and Toews having huge scoring droughts, and guys like Fernando Pisani going on a long tear. It's not that Pisani is better than, or even playing better than those other two, it's just that the puck has bounced his way more often and there's not enough time for things to balance out properly.
- BINGO!

Wow!

I agree that it takes some luck to do well in the playoffs, but I also don't think that just because a player plays better in the playoffs that the player is just getting lucky or the sample size isn't big enough to balance it out. Some players just elevate their game in the playoffs like Justin Williams or to lesser degrees Brian Boyle and Carl Hagelin. Some people thrive in those high pressure situations like Toews and Kane while others tend to disappear like Nash.

Who decides what a good sample size is? James Tannr was arguing that over the corse of a season the Kings will make the playoffs because Corsi. Now that they're still on the outside looking in, all of a sudden he's arguing 82 games isn't an accurate sample size.
- rangerdanger94

I feel like at 40-50 games you can start to get an accurate interpretation of what a player or team actually is. Hockey is hard to predict. It's really that simple.

I think it boils down to looking at things either over a big picture perspective or a small one. Game to game you're going to notice guys like Williams more in those types of situations, which is important, but big picture you also need to make sure you have guys that are going to consistently do the right things so as to win more than you lose.

Bad teams win hockey games sometimes and good teams lose them. Corsi and such is kind of like trying to get better at poker. You're still going to lose, but if you get good enough at understanding the cards you can find ways to make sure you're winning more than you lose.

Wow!
- stowerkraut

Best reference I could think of.

Sutter and Spaling absolutely should have been moved. Especially Sutter whose value was never going to be higher after last postseason. In season he could have easily kept Goc and Arcobello. That would have helped the depth and prevented the two worst players on the team (Lapierre and Adams) from playing. The UFA I really wanted was Perreault and he signed for $3m/yr. Every incremental roster improvement makes a difference.
- jfkst1

You're assuming someone wanted Sutter. Spaling was just acquired they weren't going to move him. And Goc sucks not sure if you guys remember that. He did absolutely nothing which is equal to what Lappy does. That trade has no impact on this teams success. Winnik and Despres trades were not good moves IMO. Arcobello played on 4 teams this season alone so I can't really nit pick JR for cutting ties. I like what he has done for the most part.

Lapierre is measurably worse. He is worse at faceoffs, shot suppression, penalties drawn, and penalty kill. Neither produces offensively. One is at least good defensively and that is Goc. Lapierre is bad at everything.
- jfkst1

Even so, if anyone honestly thinks we would be in better position right now with Goc, they need their head examined. He is or was NOT a difference maker in the grand scheme of things.

Isn't that the exact sample size that matters over a season...? hahahahah
- j.boyd919

It was until his favorite team still is on the outside looking in in regards to the playoffs. Now it changes. Typical advanced stats junkie

You're assuming someone wanted Sutter. Spaling was just acquired they weren't going to move him. And Goc sucks not sure if you guys remember that. He did absolutely nothing which is equal to what Lappy does. That trade has no impact on this teams success. Winnik and Despres trades were not good moves IMO. Arcobello played on 4 teams this season alone so I can't really nit pick JR for cutting ties. I like what he has done for the most part.
- dbell646

Someone would absolutely take Sutter, and probably overpay for him too. Spaling was an RFA and could have been flipped easily, or preferably never acquired. And Goc was a boring, unnoticeable player. Which is a lot more than I can say for Lapierre who is probably not even an NHL player. Arcobello can contribute at a much more cost-effective rate than the depth forwards the Pens have now. The mindset that depth moves don't matter is a reason the team is struggling. Keeping non-NHLers like Adams and Lapierre on the 4th line and overpaid depth players like Spaling, Sutter, Scuderi on the roster will keep it that way.

Someone would absolutely take Sutter, and probably overpay for him too. Spaling was an RFA and could have been flipped easily, or preferably never acquired. And Goc was a boring, unnoticeable player. Which is a lot more than I can say for Lapierre who is probably not even an NHL player. Arcobello can contribute at a much more cost-effective rate than the depth forwards the Pens have now. The mindset that depth moves don't matter is a reason the team is struggling. Keeping non-NHLers like Adams and Lapierre on the 4th line and overpaid depth players like Spaling, Sutter, Scuderi on the roster will keep it that way.
- jfkst1

Please provide the details of what the offers where for Spaling and Sutter?

The regular season numbers have looked really good for five seasons. PDO, possession against competition, &c. I agree that the numbers have supported the 'Crosby, Malkin, Letang' era. In the regular season. More on that in a bit.

What has happened in the 'Crosby, Malkin, Letang' era once the playoffs start? What is the trend for PDO? Are there more PIM? Opponent's goalie save%? Pressure games?

I would say that the case against the 'Crosby, Malkin, Letang' era is that the team has been on a plateau for five seasons in their development. The lack of discipline, dynamism, and tendency to prefer shortcuts, perimeter play, and ineffective defense was apparent right away in the playoffs - all against lower seeds with theoretically less talent and ability.

The difference in this regular season is that the teams who know the Penguins the best - their Divisional opponents - have been able to carry the play against the Penguins for exactly the same reasons as the Penguins have struggled in the playoffs. The league has surpassed the Penguins' ability to play really poor team hockey and gamebreak their way through the regular season with two guys.

That doesn't mean he team should trade 87 or 71. Just that their numbers in the regular season have been as good an anyone but their play in the playoffs has been as big a waste of potential as I have ever seen.

Sure injuries are a big deal especially when it takes out 3 of your top 4 dmen, but that's also no excuse to take stupid penalties and blow 2 goal leads constantly.

If you make the right play 80% of the time, that's called skill.

If you make the right play 87% of the time in one game and lose, that's called bad luck. If you make the right play 72% of the time the next game and win? Also luck.

Point is that the performance as a whole over an entire season is way more important than the performance in a 10 minute stretch. That 10 minute bit is mostly just luck. But Everyone remembers it because it looks cool.
- BINGO!

I want to see the guys who make the big bucks rise to the occasion.

Please provide the details of what the offers where for Spaling and Sutter?
- dbell646

I get to laughing when I hear people assume there were many suitors for Sutter, who people think like is the next coming of Alex Stoyanov ... another crappy player. Got to be honest, people female dog about Sutter, but many are still giving Perron a pass for his last 1.5 months that has provided NOTHING.