Post-Game Talk: Ooooh, DreamBeaut.... Pens - 2, Canes -1

[steveg]

I went back and re-read your post, Will...and you are right. As I read it now, it is fairly clear that you were talking about RIGHT NOW, and not projecting into the future. So, the problem was NOT with your English, but with my hasty read of your post. My apologies!

 

[Will Hunting]

I went back and re-read your post, Will...and you are right. As I read it now, it is fairly clear that you were talking about RIGHT NOW, and not projecting into the future. So, the problem was NOT with your English, but with my hasty read of your post. My apologies!

Thanks, no problem my friend

 

[Fordy]

i don't really have a point, but, "mj knows more about this team/these players than anyone on this board" is exactly what everyone said about bylsma. were they right?. i guess in a way. but in another way, no, not at all

 

[jmelm]

One thing I will add -- I thought Megna has had two decent games the past two. LOTS of hustle, super effort on the backcheck, and actually showed a few flashes of playmaking; he also looked like the game "slowed down" a bit for him, in that it looked like he was able to anticipate just a little, instead of looking lost. He has looked serviceable as a bottom-six forward to me the past couple of games -- anyone else see a little improvement from him the past two?

Yes, I have also noticed improvement in his game. The biggest thing for me is that he's always going into traffic, is going to the net and really being a net-front presence, and working hard.


He's got such high natural skills which are never going to go away. He's skilled enough that I truly believe we can slowly build him up from a 4th line guy. Give him a chance to become an effective PKer, defensive forward and momentum guy. Just solid, two way play. After a year or two of that, with some chances to move up here and there in the event of injuries, he should have a very decent chance to work his way up to a RWer who might just be a fit on one of the top 2 lines (as a 3rd wheel, of course), or a guy who could play meaningful minutes and contribute offensively on the 3rd line.


In short, there's enough upside there for me to want to keep him around and give him a longer leash. He could be a real late bloomer. Ideally, however, and regardless of how well he plays or not over the next little while, he would be best served by being a top-line guy in WBS for the balance of this season & playoffs.

 

[steveg]

Yes, I have also noticed improvement in his game. The biggest thing for me is that he's always going into traffic, is going to the net and really being a net-front presence, and working hard.


He's got such high natural skills which are never going to go away. He's skilled enough that I truly believe we can slowly build him up from a 4th line guy. Give him a chance to become an effective PKer, defensive forward and momentum guy. Just solid, two way play. After a year or two of that, with some chances to move up here and there in the event of injuries, he should have a very decent chance to work his way up to a RWer who might just be a fit on one of the top 2 lines (as a 3rd wheel, of course), or a guy who could play meaningful minutes and contribute offensively on the 3rd line.


In short, there's enough upside there for me to want to keep him around and give him a longer leash. He could be a real late bloomer. Ideally, however, and regardless of how well he plays or not over the next little while, he would be best served by being a top-line guy in WBS for the balance of this season & playoffs.

I am glad to hear that you also see a little better play coming from Megna recently, and you too sound cautiously optimistic that he might eventually become a decent player for us. I agree that he is best served for now getting bigger minutes and a more prominent role at the AHL level, but am encouraged that you too see what I believe I see -- a guy that deserves to be given some patience and time to develop, as it appears he has some tools that can't be taught...

 

[Pancakes]

i don't really have a point, but, "mj knows more about this team/these players than anyone on this board" is exactly what everyone said about bylsma. were they right?. i guess in a way. but in another way, no, not at all

What you describe is called the appeal to authority fallacy. In other words, like you said, just because Mike Johnston is a hockey authority figure with more experience than any of us doesn't necessarily mean that any decision he makes is automatically correct.

It does mean he is very qualified and we probably shouldn't claim any decision he makes is definitely wrong unless we have our own evidence, but it's more than fair to question his reasons, especially if we have concrete evidence to back up our assertions.

For example, with Bylsma, we all questioned his usage of Despres and said it was foolish and we had statistical proof of that - namely that Despres was an exceptionally positive puck possession player every time he played.

 

[Ogrezilla]

What you describe is called the appeal to authority fallacy. In other words, like you said, just because Mike Johnston is a hockey authority figure with more experience than any of us doesn't necessarily mean that any decision he makes is automatically correct.

It does mean he is very qualified and we probably shouldn't claim any decision he makes is definitely wrong unless we have our own evidence, but it's more than fair to question his reasons, especially if we have concrete evidence to back up our assertions.

For example, with Bylsma, we all questioned his usage of Despres and said it was foolish and we had statistical proof of that - namely that Despres was an exceptionally positive puck possession player every time he played.

Its not, though. If I said Scotty Bowman knew more about these players than you do, that would be an appeal to authority. He isn't with the team, he just knows more than we do about hockey. He is working with the same information as we are. Johnston doesn't just know more than we do about hockey, but he is privy to a LOT more information than we are when it comes to current Penguins players. His opinion IS more valid than ours because it is based on a lot more information than the opinion of anyone on this board. Does that mean it's always going to be correct? No. But is it purely an appeal to authority to say he knows more than us? No. If you were with the team every day for practice and games, you would likely know more than the rest of us too.