Post-Game Talk: Cole's Plus/Minus: Pens vs. Kings: The 1am poop edition

Status
Not open for further replies.

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
High Risk plays result in higher expected goals for both your team and the other team. If the players are skilled enough, on average it should increase your own team's expected goals more than the other team's - but the other team's will still go up. Looking at the track record of the Penguins powerplay, including #71 and #58 over the last...like, 8 years, it's pretty clear that it has paid off. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

Making the safe play every single time is how you run out a team of Rob Scuderis panicking and throwing the puck up the boards aimlessly. I'm not interested in being that team. We basically became that team in 2017 and won an amazing (and incredibly fluky) Cup that way, but that is not replicable.

You're just cherry picking the parts of my post you disagree with. If you read my whole post you'd see that the player's positives outweigh the negatives.


My point is that if people here want to complain about giving up shorties they should realize that they players who are the guilty of this aren't going to change. It is a waste of time to think or argue otherwise.
 

EightyOne

My posts are jokes. And hockey is just a game.
Nov 23, 2016
12,697
12,034
My point is that if people here want to complain about giving up shorties they should realize that they players who are the guilty of this aren't going to change. It is a waste of time to think or argue otherwise.

Why didn't you say this then?

It's at least somewhat reasonable.

Saying they are low hockey iq and dumb is not.
 

Icarium

Registered User
Feb 16, 2010
3,875
5,486
I don't operate in the short term, I operate in the long term. They done this dumb or I guess "high risk" stuff their whole career.

Yes, like every creative player in the league ever. Personally I think calling it dumb is, well, dumb. Sure, some players take more risks than others but considering what Malkin and Letang have achieved it's hard to argue with results. Players make mistakes. Even Crosby. Instead of counting our blessings because we are spoiled to have such talented players we obsess over every mistake that leads to a turnover and goal. No Malkin is never going to be Kopitar or Bergeron. No, Letang is never going to be Lidstrom. But we don't really need them to be, taking risks is an essential part of their game. These same "low IQ" players set a team record for PP% last year and allowed far fewer shorties. Call me crazy but I think they had it in them to stop the bleeding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightyOne

LOGiK

Registered User
Nov 14, 2007
18,295
9,023
They'd be dumb if they didn't understand the concept of a turnover.

Like. Literally didn't understand why that's bad. Or what it meant.

They know it's bad. But they take the risk to try for something greater than safe and predictable.

The ONLY stupid thing in 15 years they've done was Letang's breakaway line change last playoffs.
That was a level of stupid not seen too often. It still upsets me too.
 

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
Why didn't you say this then?

It's at least somewhat reasonable.

Saying they are low hockey iq and dumb is not.

I did but people couldn't get past the beginning of the post where I said they play with a Low IQ. When you do dumb things over and over again then that's a pattern. Or they're selfish players.

I'm not going to change your opinion if you think they've only done one dumb thing there whole career. Agree to disagree. I'm fine with someone disagreeing with me and realize it is a waste of time to continue to argue about it.
 

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
Yes, like every creative player in the league ever. Personally I think calling it dumb is, well, dumb. Sure, some players take more risks than others but considering what Malkin and Letang have achieved it's hard to argue with results. Players make mistakes. Even Crosby. Instead of counting our blessings because we are spoiled to have such talented players we obsess over every mistake that leads to a turnover and goal. No Malkin is never going to be Kopitar or Bergeron. No, Letang is never going to be Lidstrom. But we don't really need them to be, taking risks is an essential part of their game. These same "low IQ" players set a team record for PP% last year and allowed far fewer shorties. Call me crazy but I think they had it in them to stop the bleeding.

Read my whole post. Don't cherry pick one aspect of it. Cause the end result is we both agree.

Here are my thoughts dumbed down:

The power play and the said player's positives outweigh the negatives. And the negatives aren't going to change. The fans are just going to have to deal with it.
 

ChaosAgent

Registered User
May 8, 2018
17,733
12,092
Yeah, it's like - sometimes it makes sense to gamble.

If you're me it doesn't make sense to plop down $1,000 on a poker game. If you're a professional poker player, it's the HIGH IQ thing to do. Even if you may lose.

Nonetheless, the shorties are becoming kind of a problem for PP1. We will definitely have options at addressing it once Schultz is back.
Option 1: replace Kessel on PP1 with Schultz - probably the most sensible option
Option 2: move Crosby up higher and Malkin down lower
 

EightyOne

My posts are jokes. And hockey is just a game.
Nov 23, 2016
12,697
12,034
Who exactly said that? Strawman much?

I basically did. I mean. That was an egregious play.

Every other mistake they've done is just hockey...sometimes puck doesn't do what you tell it.

But...skating to your bench on a breakaway. That....is not hockey. I don't know what that was. Lol.

I've never seen either of them f*** up like that before.
 

Icarium

Registered User
Feb 16, 2010
3,875
5,486
The power play and the said player's positives outweigh the negatives. And the negatives aren't going to change. The fans are just going to have to deal with it.

That's a little different than your previous assertion about the low IQ, don't you think?

And why wouldn't the negatives change, I am pretty sure we allowed fewer shorties last season with the exact same PP1 unit. Unless you think certain players lost IQ since then for some arcane reason, that is.
 

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
Yeah, it's like - sometimes it makes sense to gamble.

If you're me it doesn't make sense to plop down $1,000 on a poker game. If you're a professional poker player, it's the HIGH IQ thing to do. Even if you may lose.

Nonetheless, the shorties are becoming kind of a problem for PP1. We will definitely have options at addressing it once Schultz is back.
Option 1: replace Kessel on PP1 with Schultz - probably the most sensible option
Option 2: move Crosby up higher and Malkin down lower

I don't understand. Who's playing in Kessel's spot in option 1? Shultz? If so he'd be too low in the dot to help the defense anyway.

Regardless if Kessel is not on your powerplay then he probably shouldn't be on your team.
 

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
That's a little different than your previous assertion about the low IQ, don't you think?

And why wouldn't the negatives change, I am pretty sure we allowed fewer shorties last season with the exact same PP1 unit. Unless you think certain players lost IQ since then for some arcane reason, that is.

Perhaps it was because Shultz played more on the powerplay last year. Negatives won't change because I think the said players in question are dumb and/or selfish. You and others disagree and I'm fine with that.
 

Icarium

Registered User
Feb 16, 2010
3,875
5,486
Negatives won't change because I think the said players in question are dumb and/or selfish.

And yet these same players conceded far fewer shorties last season. Not only but Letang is actually a lot better this season than last season. Maybe there is another explanation?
 

ronduguayshair

Registered User
Oct 23, 2017
3,583
1,398
Schultz is worse than Letang defensively on the powerplay.

I disagree but it is not like I have any stats to back up my opinion. I think Shultz is less "high risk" and is better getting pucks to the net. In the past I thought this is was the better option. Not sure I feel the same when considering 2018-2019's Letang. He has always been light years better at zone entries but currently hes been able to get the pucks to the net. The hope passes are his downfall and that's not going to change.

If we substitute Shultz for Letang look for Malkin doing the majority of the zone entries and more short handed goals going the other way. Doing too much syndrome would be rampant.

The power play is what is and shouldn't be changed.
 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,146
18,542
Pittsburgh
And yet these same players conceded far fewer shorties last season. Not only but Letang is actually a lot better this season than last season. Maybe there is another explanation?

Teams are playing them differently and not giving them free passes?

Pens still do Pens things, and don't change, or not enough. You see a pattern, and those are easy to defend. Changing the deck chairs around isn't enough. You can't just move around in the same pattern and place the chairs in the same place. Plus, dependant on players on a given PP should see guys in different places to fit their attributes.

Like Hornqvist is great in front of the goalie, but Jake is better in the slot. Who do you net front with. In the end, mixing it around and having guys all swing in and out of the net front high and low should confuse teams and having their heads spinning like tops. Quick passes/movement is a death sentence provided the box commits to an error. Teams are being a bit more prudent holding that box tight and in formation due to lack thereof on the Pens part. Swinging in and out high or around the perimeter isn't gonna do it.

The team on the PP has all the advantages, they are facing everything while the defenders don't have eyes in the backs of their heads. Deception.
 

Icarium

Registered User
Feb 16, 2010
3,875
5,486
Perhaps it was because Shultz played more on the powerplay last year.

If we substitute Shultz for Letang look for Malkin doing the majority of the zone entries and more short handed goals going the other way.

So the reason we conceded fewer shorties last season was Schultz and yet if he replaces Letang we would concede more shorties? Something doesn't quite add up here.

Anyway, Letang usually is one of the best in the game in making up for his own errors by getting back quickly, this season he doesn't seem to be as good at it as usual which is weird because he has been stellar 5 on 5, on the PK and offensively on the PK. But my bold guess is that it has nothing to do with losing IQ points in the summer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ugene Malkin
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->