I agree with all of that.
What always gets me, personally, is when pundits (particularly locally) pull out the "quality depth" card. WHAT DEPTH? The kind that you can find on the waiver wire on a good day, you mean? Yeah... really impressive.
You mean all of that awesome defensive depth? Is that why Lovejoy is playing as much as he is? Or are guys that are still at least a year or two away actually considered viable depth on an NHL roster?
You mean the complimentary scoring forwards? The ones that don't exist anywhere in the organization?
That's the biggest myth of the Penguins organization. "Quality depth."
Well... that and they're "well coached" because Disco has a Jack Adams.
I hate to be... well, like this, but here's how this works:
Newspapers are dying. They don't have a working business model and they will (slowly but surely) eventually be extinct. The only advantage Newspapers have over free outlets (ie, blogs) is that they have daily access to the teams personnel and management.
The majority of fans want to hear those quotes, want to see a Crosby interview, want to know what Bylsma and Shero are thinking, etc... even if 99.9% of what they say are meaningless, tired cliches.
The easiest way to keep that access is to sell what the front office is pushing.
Look at the Pittsburgh media on twitter today: if you even say "hey, this seems off" they seem (I haven't tweeted at any of them personally) to respond with some snide, sarcastic comment as if the organization is beyond question.
It sucks, but... not much you can do about it.