I don't know why all the hate for JJ. He is not that bad. I though he was defensively sounds d and had some big hits last night.

I think y'all all been brainwashed by Wilson and fancy stats

I don't know why all the hate for JJ. He is not that bad. I though he was defensively sounds d and had some big hits last night.

I think y'all all been brainwashed by Wilson and fancy stats
- pensfan024

No... he is not good. And for over 3 mil, 'not that bad' is a laughable notion of what to expect from him.

I agree JJ had a good game. He was the only defender playing physical last night. Two of hits totally knocked to the ice two defenders. He was nominated for hit of the game. I never post anything, but read other posts. I just don't understand the hate for JJ. At least give the guy an atta boy when he plays well...

I don't know why all the hate for JJ. He is not that bad. I though he was defensively sounds d and had some big hits last night.

I think y'all all been brainwashed by Wilson and fancy stats
- pensfan024

Johnson drives me up a wall because he’s basically the hockey equivalent of my least favorite type of center in basketball. Those that are all about highlight real blocks and are easily goaded out of position to go chase down a potential block and leave the paint and rim unprotected in the process. Johnson is like that with his puck chasing. He doesn’t really play defense as a unit with his partner and instead follows the puck around where ever it goes in an attempt to generate turnovers. As a result he usually ends up behind the net, which takes him out of the play and leaves his partner out on an island and the crease unprotected.

But Johnson has always been like that. This isn’t new and the tape’s been out on him for a while. His saving grace was supposed to be his ability to facilitate zone exits with a good first pass, but so far that part of his game has been mediocre at best as a Penguin. That’s not good. If you play defense in your own zone like a (frank)ing cowboy that sacrifices the slot for a chance at a TO, you damn well be making sure that those TOs are leading to good opportunities the other way when you actually manage to generate them.

That being said, I have no complaints about how anyone played last night. It was a purely dominant effort from start to finish.

Johnson drives me up a wall because he’s basically the hockey equivalent of my least favorite type of center in basketball. Those that are all about highlight real blocks and are easily goaded out of position to go chase down a potential block and leave the paint and rim unprotected in the process. Johnson is like that with his puck chasing. He doesn’t really play defense as a unit with his partner and instead follows the puck around where ever it goes in an attempt to generate turnovers. As a result he usually ends up behind the net, which takes him out of the play and leaves his partner out on an island and the crease unprotected.

But Johnson has always been like that. This isn’t new and the tape’s been out on him for a while. His saving grace was supposed to be his ability to facilitate zone exits with a good first pass, but so far that part of his game has been mediocre at best as a Penguin. That’s not good. If you play defense in your own zone like a (frank)ing cowboy that sacrifices the slot for a chance at a TO, you damn well be making sure that those TOs are leading to good opportunities the other way when you actually manage to generate them.

That being said, I have no complaints about how anyone played last night. It was a purely dominant effort from start to finish.
- Victoro311

This is funny because I keep thinking he's forgetting he's playing the right side 'cause you'll see him all over the ice. It's not quite as bad as Hunwick, but it's pretty damn bad. Personally I think he's tragically bad playing the right. If I could make one adjustment to Sullivan's roster, I'd never have JJ on the right side of the ice.

Look.... He's had some decent games. Unfortunately, when he's bad, it's almost comical how bad it looks. What annoyed me was all the focus on JJ when the team was struggling. There was blame at every position, but JJ seemed to be the guy everybody focused on.

This is funny because I keep thinking he's forgetting he's playing the right side 'cause you'll see him all over the ice. It's not quite as bad as Hunwick, but it's pretty damn bad. Personally I think he's tragically bad playing the right. If I could make one adjustment to Sullivan's roster, I'd never have JJ on the right side of the ice.

Look.... He's had some decent games. Unfortunately, when he's bad, it's almost comical how bad it looks. What annoyed me was all the focus on JJ when the team was struggling. There was blame at every position, but JJ seemed to be the guy everybody focused on.
- madmike71

Yeah the construction of our defense is really tragically bad and that goes well beyond Johnson himself not being a good hockey player. That’s on Rutherford for acquiring way too many bottom pairing LDs and trying to build out a blue line out of them. When you have a player that’s not that good to begin with like Johnson, Oleksiak, or Riikola and force them to play out position they’re going to be even worse. Johnson’s not good, I’m sure he could at least be better if he were playing his natural position.

As for your point about whipping boys, such is life in sports fandom unfortunately. But honestly I think with Johnson it was pretty mild. We all got frustrated with Johnson on a night to night basis because, well, he sucks, but I don’t think anyone was saying that we sucked because of Johnson. Most of us acknowledged that the blue line issues were owned by Rutherford, not JJ, and that our goaltending and third line were also playing a huge part in our struggles. I think Sutter, Reaves, and Adams all got the whipping boy treatment much worse than Johnson has gotten, and I’d say in Sutter’s case it was pretty well deserved. Reaves and Adams got it because, like Johnson, they were a symptom of a bigger issue that was holding us back. In Johnson’s case it’s poopty personnel moves on the blue line. In their cases it was blocking prospects.

Yeah the construction of our defense is really tragically bad and that goes well beyond Johnson himself not being a good hockey player. That’s on Rutherford for acquiring way too many bottom pairing LDs and trying to build out a blue line out of them. When you have a player that’s not that good to begin with like Johnson, Oleksiak, or Riikola and force them to play out position they’re going to be even worse. Johnson’s not good, I’m sure he could at least be better if he were playing his natural position.

As for your point about whipping boys, such is life in sports fandom unfortunately. But honestly I think with Johnson it was pretty mild. We all got frustrated with Johnson on a night to night basis because, well, he sucks, but I don’t think anyone was saying that we sucked because of Johnson. Most of us acknowledged that the blue line issues were owned by Rutherford, not JJ, and that our goaltending and third line were also playing a huge part in our struggles. I think Sutter, Reaves, and Adams all got the whipping boy treatment much worse than Johnson has gotten, and I’d say in Sutter’s case it was pretty well deserved. Reaves and Adams got it because, like Johnson, they were a symptom of a bigger issue that was holding us back. In Johnson’s case it’s poopty personnel moves on the blue line. In their cases it was blocking prospects.
- Victoro311

I think our defense is fine. They were solid last night and of course will be that much better when Shultz comes back.

And of course if Malkin can get going like he was the first handful of games this season I think we certainly have a shot at another cup.

I think our defense is fine. They were solid last night and of course will be that much better when Shultz comes back.

And of course if Malkin can get going like he was the first handful of games this season I think we certainly have a shot at another cup.
- pensfan024

Schultz coming back is gonna be huge for us. Murray getting back on track really outed goaltending as our major problem. Now that our tending is back, we’re looking like a really formidable team even with our third line not clicking and our defense being subpar. Bringing Schultz back will add a guy that can handle facilating breakouts and generate more offense while Letang isn’t on the ice, which should take us to another level.

I was looking at it last night and I think we’re like sixth or seventh in the league in goal differential. Doing that while Schultz is out is really encouraging. Not sure if we’ll get up to elite contender status with TB and TOR, but we’ll be firmly in the “anything can happen in a seven game series between two good teams” category with Schultz back.

I don't know why all the hate for JJ. He is not that bad. I though he was defensively sounds d and had some big hits last night.

I think y'all all been brainwashed by Wilson and fancy stats
- pensfan024

He’s been on the ice for 31 goals against st 5v5. That’s not a fancy stat. It’s a fact. The most of any defenseman. He’s the only regular to be on the negative side of GF% (-9 at 5v5). Rikolla is as well with a -2. Outside of stats, he leaves his partner on an island all the time. He goes for big hits that take him out of position and (frank) his partner. He chases guys behind the net where only Sid can score from. He does not play positionally sound hockey. He is not good.

Yeah the construction of our defense is really tragically bad and that goes well beyond Johnson himself not being a good hockey player. That’s on Rutherford for acquiring way too many bottom pairing LDs and trying to build out a blue line out of them. When you have a player that’s not that good to begin with like Johnson, Oleksiak, or Riikola and force them to play out position they’re going to be even worse. Johnson’s not good, I’m sure he could at least be better if he were playing his natural position.

As for your point about whipping boys, such is life in sports fandom unfortunately. But honestly I think with Johnson it was pretty mild. We all got frustrated with Johnson on a night to night basis because, well, he sucks, but I don’t think anyone was saying that we sucked because of Johnson. Most of us acknowledged that the blue line issues were owned by Rutherford, not JJ, and that our goaltending and third line were also playing a huge part in our struggles. I think Sutter, Reaves, and Adams all got the whipping boy treatment much worse than Johnson has gotten, and I’d say in Sutter’s case it was pretty well deserved. Reaves and Adams got it because, like Johnson, they were a symptom of a bigger issue that was holding us back. In Johnson’s case it’s poopty personnel moves on the blue line. In their cases it was blocking prospects.
- Victoro311

I think Johnson’s whipping boy status is equally as deserved as Sutter. Dude is terrible and has been for 12 years.

He doesn’t really play defense as a unit with his partner and instead follows the puck around where ever it goes in an attempt to generate turnovers. As a result he usually ends up behind the net, which takes him out of the play and leaves his partner out on an island and the crease unprotected.

- Victoro311

This is all you really need to point out. Even bad dmen can make solid individual plays from time to time, but this pretty much sums it up.

I think Johnson’s whipping boy status is equally as deserved as Sutter. Dude is terrible and has been for 12 years.
- j.boyd919

I wasn't on this board at the time, but the other board I was on? It took them a loooong time to come around on Sutter. It was very frustrating.

EK stating the Pens may have interest in Ferland. I have mixed feelings on that. I think Ferland is a very solid player who'd actually fit in well, but is he really any better than what they have? I don't think so.

I still maintain if they add a forward it should be for a major upgrade, oh, and also an upgrade at 3C.

I wasn't on this board at the time, but the other board I was on? It took them a loooong time to come around on Sutter. It was very frustrating.
- Rinosaur

The Sutter Wars were pretty bad over here. Bartley was still a regular back then and boy did he adgitate the pro-Sutter faction bad. That was about when Aussie popped up. Shockingly he was a Sutter guy.

To this day I will never understand how someone could watch Sutter play and be like “Yup, that guy’s pretty good.”

EK stating the Pens may have interest in Ferland. I have mixed feelings on that. I think Ferland is a very solid player who'd actually fit in well, but is he really any better than what they have? I don't think so.

I still maintain if they add a forward it should be for a major upgrade, oh, and also an upgrade at 3C.
- Rinosaur

EK rumors are fake... if he says we are going for a player, we will not go for him.

The Sutter Wars were pretty bad over here. Bartley was still a regular back then and boy did he adgitate the pro-Sutter faction bad. That was about when Aussie popped up. Shockingly he was a Sutter guy.

To this day I will never understand how someone could watch Sutter play and be like “Yup, that guy’s pretty good.”
- Victoro311

I still insist the Sutter slept with Bartley's sister and never called her. His hatred for the player was more than him being bad.

Also, Sutter did have a freaking GREAT wrist shot when coming from the right side... was near Kessel level. Everything else bad, but I don't get why we never tried him a bit at wing.

The Sutter Wars were pretty bad over here. Bartley was still a regular back then and boy did he adgitate the pro-Sutter faction bad. That was about when Aussie popped up. Shockingly he was a Sutter guy.

To this day I will never understand how someone could watch Sutter play and be like “Yup, that guy’s pretty good.”
- Victoro311

Possession stats weren't really around then so attempting to argue his defensive abilities were very hard. Everyone swore he was soooo good defensively. lol

I think Johnson’s whipping boy status is equally as deserved as Sutter. Dude is terrible and has been for 12 years.
- j.boyd919

I’m talking about in the grand scheme of things a 3C can sink your team wayyyy worse than one bottom 4 blue liner. Sutter’s negative impact on the team was way bigger than Johnson’s. Johnson sucks but I wouldn’t say we suck because of Johnson where as I would say Sutter specifically was a big part of the reason why we sucked back when he was on the team. Same really goes for Brassard. I think his poor proformance this season has had a bigger negative impact on the team than Johnson’s general suckatude despite the fact that Brassard is a much better hockey player than Johnson.

Possession stats weren't really around then so attempting to argue his defensive abilities were very hard. Everyone swore he was soooo good defensively. lol
- Rinosaur

At least here, the Sutter Wars came hand in hand with the introduction of Corsi/Fenwick into the comment section. I think that’s why it was so bad. It was the first real battleground for the stats vs eye test debate.

I’m talking about in the grand scheme of things a 3C can sink your team wayyyy worse than one bottom 4 blue liner. Sutter’s negative impact on the team was way bigger than Johnson’s. Johnson sucks but I wouldn’t say we suck because of Johnson where as I would say Sutter specifically was a big part of the reason why we sucked back when he was on the team. Same really goes for Brassard. I think his poor proformance this season has had a bigger negative impact on the team than Johnson’s general suckatude despite the fact that Brassard is a much better hockey player than Johnson.
- Victoro311

I would disagree because your forwards have to play with him 15 minutes a game in a top 2nd pairing role.

I can't really get behind that, JJ is on the ice for 2.84 GA/60, and Brass is at 2.14 GA/60. Don't get me wrong, they've both been trash, but I also think some of Brass's worst performances have been with JJ on the ice, dude gets swamped in his own zone when JJ is on the ice. Well, in reality, who doesn't?