I don't think our results have necessarily been embarrassing, though a couple of the series were. I do think we have been underperforming. My post is more related to the above stats.
Which is more important? Results or style? I'm starting to think this board believes the latter.
I think you misunderstand. I said that it could be argued-- that the Pens lone 3rd round appearance was so poor that they rank at the bottom of the 6 teams who have made it to the 3rd round. Hence 6 out of 8 in their class.
Gotcha.
If one's inclined to believe that, then there are 5 teams since '09 who have been more successful than the Pens. If not, then there are only 4. On what planet is that "embarrassing", especially since one of those years was a virtual write-off because of who we were missing?
It has to do with results vs expectations.
Indeed.
Just because you refuse to believe something and choose to endlessly spin the excuse wheel doesn't mean that the Pens haven't been embarrassed in the last 4 years.
The results don't require excuses. It shows the Pens are among the best in the league even when using your most convenient cutoff point.
2009-10:
Pens run into the 8th seed Habs. They win a few close games and go up 3-2. Halak is having a great series, but the Pens keep trying the same dam thing over and over, playing right into the Habs' gameplan. In game six the Pens take a 2-1 lead early in the 2nd period, give up 3 straight to lose the game. Game 7 at home, they gotta come out strong right? Well they give up the first 4 goals and the season's over.
2010-11:
Sid and Geno are hurt so the Pens have something to prove. Come out strong and win game 1 3-0 so this series is gonna be ab breeze. Game 2 Tampa stomps the Pens 5-1. The Pens rally and win the next two games 3-2 to take a 3-1 series lead with game 5 coming back to Pittsburgh. You thought they got stomped in game 2? try an 8-2 ****** in elimination game #1. In game 6 the Pens tye the game 2-2 early in the 3rd period, sweet! Then give up the GWG 67 sec later, ****. Ok, not it's game 7 at home gotta come out strong. We haven't been held to less than 2 goals so if we play good D we'll move on. **** we got shutout, time to hit the links!
2011-12:
No explanation necessary.
2012-13:
Once the MAF excuse is gone, the Pens sleep walk through the first two rounds putting up historic GPG numbers. Well the Bs barely broke a sweat ****ing the Pens in the ass in 4 straight games only to get beat by a skill team in the Hawks.
Again, you ignore the concrete numbers because they don't fit your argument, so you try to cloud the issue with your subjective (and often dubious) take on the
way we lost.
Keep making your excuses if they make you feel better. I'd rather not look at the past 4 years through black and gold colored glasses.
Again, there's no need to make excuses for actual results that put the Pens near the very top of the league. I've never attempted to make excuses. Repeating it like a mindless parrot doesn't make it true.
And it's pretty ****ing convenient that you don't count teams that have missed a PO since 2009 to be allowed in the discussion of PO success when two of the teams that have played in the SCP since then have also missed a PO. Sorry, but the Flyers and Devils have had more PO success than the Pens since then.
There's nothing convenient about it. They missed the playoffs, a fate that would push most fans here to the nearest bridge.
I put the following teams ahead of the Pens PO success since the 2009:
CHI
BOS
LA
PHI
NJ
VAN
SJ
DET
2 teams who haven't even made it to the playoffs each year (on top of which the Devils were ousted in 5 games in Round 1 in 2010, and
the Flyers went out in 4 against the Bruins in Round 2 in 2011 and 5 games in Round 2 in 2012...100% not embarrassing) and another that not only suffered a 5 game rout in Round 1 vs. the Preds but blew a 3-1 series lead last year with a healthy team (which also wasn't embarrassing I'm sure, for some totally not-arbitrary-ad-hoc reason
), but hasn't made Round 3 since '09.
What a joke.
Putting the Pens 9th. And I don't want to hear about how because the Pens made it to the 3rd round last year they're better than the Wings because that's so far outside reality it's laughable. The Pens had zero wins against good teams in last years PO, beating NYI and OTT is not a great accomplishment for this team.
You don't want to hear anything that deals with facts.
I do enjoy that despite the Sens soundly waxing the #2 seed Habs in 5 games last year (coached by the retroactively beloved Michel "Defensive Accountability" Therrien), the fact that we annihilated those Sens in 5 counts for nothing because they were a 7th seed.
Boy, every WC team must've been embarrassed when the Kings won in 2012. Don't they know #8 seeds are no good?
Your whole "3 is better than 2" argument reminds me of a child trying to argue that 2 dollar bills are better than a 5 dollar bill, because two is more than one. Well once you look a bit more close at the bills you'll realize that one $5 bill is actually better than two $1 bills. But don't try to tell the child that, because they have it in their mind that every bill is the same so 2 bills has to be better than 1 bill.
That is a terrible analogy.
if you take away the teams most embarrassing player, the team isnt embarrassing.
logic, not even once.
If you take away subjective opinions on the "embarrassment quotient" of the '12 and '13 losses and look at the actual results vs. the league since '09, there's nothing to be remotely embarrassed about.
Acknowledging actual data, not even once.
Far be it from me to disagree with the great Bobby Orr, but this is absolutely horrible advice/life motto. You absolutely judge yourself on the process/decisions.
You can make the wrong decisions/choices and still have a positive outcome x% of the time. Make those decisions/choices often enough, and you'll pay for it.
Tell me how you can boil down the rightness or wrongness of an organization's decisions to a net positive/negative, outside of actual results. How do you weight opinion?
Also in that video was a discussion about Andrew Ference, which went like this, "Andy's been a warrior for us. He's great. I really don't want to lose him, but we have to play the younger kids at some point. We have to get younger, we have to get them into the lineup."
Isn't that pretty much exactly what we did with Cooke?
The Boston Bruins have had more success than the Pittsburgh Penguins since 2009. They just went to the Stanley Cup Finals after blanking the Pittsburgh Penguins in the Conference Finals. They are able to make time for younger players. They aren't beholden to a vet simply because he's a vet.
We're talking about the same Bruins who sat Dougie Hamilton in the playoffs, and only "made time for" Bartkowski and Krug after injuries hit their blueline, right?
The same Pens who are incorporating Bennett onto the 2nd or 3rd line and likely putting Bortuzzo on the 3rd pairing, with Despres' fate yet TBD?
You guys are so in love with context-less stats. Dan Bylsma is a great coach, look at his record! Never mind that Bylsma's only playoff success came in a half-year. He didn't fully implement his "system." How much of that year's success is because of Bylsma and how much of it is because of luck, of getting hot at the right time, and of "we no longer have MT!!!!" ? For half of this board, it's 100% Bylsma. For the other half, it's 100% the other factors. The further we get from 2009 without success, the more you have to believe it wasn't about Bylsma.
Oh, is that what the data in this thread suggests?
The Penguins will not win the Stanley Cup as long as Pascal Dupuis is on the Crosby line. I will be happy to put my money where my mouth is, let me know, I'm your biggest fan, this is Flo.
Betting on the field against one team. Bold.
RRP.. it comes down to one thing. Being the favorite pretty much every year and falling short. Montreal, Philly, Boston. I would say each of those are pretty sloppy. Also blowing a 3-1 lead in any series is tough.
Cole, I don't think there was anything sloppy about the 2010 Montreal series. We had a ****** goalie and played against a red-hot one. The Boston series wasn't sloppy outside of Game 2 and the gong-show 3rd period of Game 1.
The Bruins blew a 3-0 series lead with a 3-0 lead in Game 4 back in 2010. The Wings have blown a 3-1 series lead (with a full contingent of players). Philly's been sloppy as hell when they've been in the playoffs. Montreal got destroyed by the team we "cakewalked" through and apparently deserve no credit for soundly beating.
Every team has "embarrassments", which is why we should take emotion out of the equation and focus on the actual results over the 4 year sample size vs. the league.