Training Camp Thread Part Two - Drozg didn't make the team

Status
Not open for further replies.

Randy Butternubs

Registered User
Mar 15, 2008
29,777
21,311
Morningside
ErEZ6eGXIAc0ce1


jakegtanev-png.382493
 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,335
18,765
Pittsburgh
Are you referring to a particular time period? Because they were a top ten PK last year, which isn't my idea of struggle.

Other thread got closed.

This can fall in line like the team was 7th in the whole league kind of mentality. They certainly struggled towards the end of the year. Call it being beaten down by a long season or whatnot. It certainly didn't help with the injuries magnifying things a little more.

So, in the end, just saying they were a top ten PK or 7th in the standings means absolutely nothing come end of the year when so many dynamics changed through injuries and trades that got/made them those kind of accolades and structure. They were getting hemmed in their own zone for failure of making the the play right the first time around.

Some things that stand out..

1. Just under doing clears forcefully. Call 'em "limp" clears easily cut off. Sometimes more than once in a row.
2. A lot of losing draws in the defensive zone.
3. Just in general making things harder on themselves rushing things when they had no pressure at that particular moment and had the time to make the "easy play." I'm talking like air mailing it ala the "Murphy dump."
4. The PK was scrambling and you do have to give credit to the opposition, that was a lot to ask of one guy who's basically a rookie.

It all falls in line with what JR/Sully said, and I don't expect a repeat of last year being it a lesser season, plus, hopefully -0- injuries to derail things like it did last year. Teams are not going to lighten up in that area of the game.

I don't think they got worse, Jank's reach and range should help tremendously on that front just being there to share the load, alone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Peat

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,335
18,765
Pittsburgh
On the whole 2017 team from the last thread. @cygnus47 @ColePens @Tom Hanks @Honour Over Glory @Scandale du Jour

People need to remember the amount of physicality both CBJ and Caps exacted on the Pens.

CBJ - Very physical punishing team who lost due to depth of the Pens. Games 3 & 4 were battles with one going to OT
WSH - Thought they were the best, but they loaded up on aging slow players for depth, and their exact physicality was how they could cheap shot and try to knock the Pens down a notch or two.
OTT - Got to reap the rewards of the punishment and injuries the Pens absorbed from the fist two rounds and they themselves adopted that physicality play. It almost worked. OTT wasn't really a worthy opponent otherwise, being a wildcard and the only team with a negative differential.
NSH - Was even worse than OTT being the lower wildcard out west. Just two teams that had out worked the top teams. NSH was pretty much built all about their great defense and didn't have the depth to withstand injuries at forward. Their defense was their spearhead to offense.


I think you could say the Pens, with their own injuries, should be thankful "those teams" were the ones left standing. I don't know after the brutality's from the first two rounds that they stave off top teams, like, playing WSH in the ECF's, or Chicago in the finals. Teams the Pens are more evenly matched against or struggle against in CHI.
 
Last edited:

Scandale du Jour

JordanStaal#1Fan
Mar 11, 2002
62,223
28,941
Asbestos, Qc
www.angelfire.com
On the whole 2017 team from the last thread. @cygnus47 @ColePens @Tom Hanks @Honour Over Glory @Scandale du Jour

People need to remember the amount of physicality both CBJ and Caps exacted on the Pens.

CBJ - Very physical punishing team who lost due to depth of the Pens. Games 3 & 4 were battles with one going to OT
WSH - Thought they were the best, but they loaded up on aging slow players for depth, and their exact physicality was how they could cheap shot and try to knock the Pens down a notch or two.
OTT - Got to reap the rewards of the punishment and injuries the Pens absorbed from the fist two rounds and they themselves adopted that physicality play. It almost worked. OTT wasn't really a worthy opponent otherwise, being a wildcard and the only team with a negative differential.
NSH - Was even worse than OTT being the lower wildcard out west. Just two teams that had out worked the top teams. NSH was pretty much built all about their great defense and didn't have the depth to withstand injuries at forward. Their defense was their spearhead to offense.


I think you could say the Pens with their own injuries should be thankful "those teams" were the ones left standing. I don't know after the brutality's from the first two rounds that they stave off top teams, like, playing WSH in the ECF's, or Chicago in the finals. Teams the Pens are more evenly matched against or struggle against in CHI.

Fair point.

However, the logicial conclusion to that was not to change our identity after winning TWO CUPS in a row including one WITHOUT our #1 defenseman (who had a CS worthy run the year before) because we got bullied around a little.

We could have tweaked a few things, sure. But the whole "let's go bigger" thing was stupid. Did not help us get passed the Caps the following year in the REAL Cup finals (that series was the real finals in 16-17-18).
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,358
79,390
Redmond, WA
The thing that sucks for every rookie for the Penguins for the next few years is that they're going to be compared to John Marino:

Is Drew O’Connor on track to be the 2021 version of John Marino?

The Penguins have had at most 3 rookies outside of Crosby and Malkin in the last 20 years who have had the impact that Marino has had as a rookie. Staal, Maatta and Marino are the only 3 that jump to mind. But every rookie going forward is going to be compared to him.
 

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,493
25,354
I'd add that beating Ottawa involved a lot of heavy physical forechecking to slow down their defence and finally get some zone time.

I dunno. We clearly travelled too far from our identity. But equally - as said by many at the time - expecting to be successful in an identity that everyone in the league was hell bent on stopping was asking a little much. The teams that ended up winning got faster but also stayed heavy. Increasingly I think Rutherford had the right idea but executed it in a very stupid way.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,539
18,708
The thing that sucks for every rookie for the Penguins for the next few years is that they're going to be compared to John Marino:

Is Drew O’Connor on track to be the 2021 version of John Marino?

The Penguins have had at most 3 rookies outside of Crosby and Malkin in the last 20 years who have had the impact that Marino has had as a rookie. Staal, Maatta and Marino are the only 3 that jump to mind. But every rookie going forward is going to be compared to him.

Yeah I think Staal was the one that really ruined it for this team. We had those expectations for Geno and Sid already. Staal coming and performing as he did at a blossoming time for the team but the icing on the cake and the new expectation. I think after that people's expectations got warped, especially when you saw it happening around the league seemingly every season with other teams. People failed to remember that there's about 210 to 220 "new" players for the league every year and they focus on the rare success of a handful. The exception becomes the expectation regardless of logic, reason, and context.

We could easily add ZAR and Sheary to that mix as both proved to be quality players in their first "year". Sheary more so than ZAR.
 

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,335
18,765
Pittsburgh
Fair point.

However, the logicial conclusion to that was not to change our identity after winning TWO CUPS in a row including one WITHOUT our #1 defenseman (who had a CS worthy run the year before) because we got bullied around a little.

We could have tweaked a few things, sure. But the whole "let's go bigger" thing was stupid. Did not help us get passed the Caps the following year in the REAL Cup finals (that series was the real finals in 16-17-18).

Agree.

What set the Pens back was weakening their defense, otherwise, I doubt the Pens barely lose against the Caps in 7 games, where again, cheap shots and the usual, had they kept some key players.

Bonino, Daley mainly for 2018.

Edit: Forgot about Cole.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scandale du Jour

Scandale du Jour

JordanStaal#1Fan
Mar 11, 2002
62,223
28,941
Asbestos, Qc
www.angelfire.com
I'd add that beating Ottawa involved a lot of heavy physical forechecking to slow down their defence and finally get some zone time.

I dunno. We clearly travelled too far from our identity. But equally - as said by many at the time - expecting to be successful in an identity that everyone in the league was hell bent on stopping was asking a little much. The teams that ended up winning got faster but also stayed heavy. Increasingly I think Rutherford had the right idea but executed it in a very stupid way.

You are 100% right. You need to constantly evolve to remain at the top. I know people here won't like that example, but that's what the Patriots did; time and time again. When Brady first become the starter, they were a defense first, smash mouth team. In 2007, they became a pass first, high-octane team. In 2010, the re-invented themselves again and switched the a 2-TE offense. After 2014, they slowly rebuilt their defense and when they won last in 2018 they were back to being a run first/defense team (the second half against the Chiefs turned into a shootout... but it is the Chiefs. They smacked Mahomes for 2 and a half quarters).

You adapt and build around your strenghts/the weakness you want to exploit that your opponents have. We did not do that in 2017-18. We went retro because Sid was tired of being bullied. That's essentially all they did and it failed.

Finding guys like Tom Wilson is not easy, but that's the modern day tough guy. Trading for Reaves was dumb as f***. As we saw in the Cup finals between Vegas and Washington... Wilson still did his thing and ignored Reaves... as he should have.

If we want to get nastier, you need to find talented players with an edge. Not easy to find, sure, but that's what you spend assets on... not Ryan f***ing Reaves.
 

SEALBound

Fancy Gina Carano
Sponsor
Jun 13, 2010
40,539
18,708
Agree.

What set the Pens back was weakening their defense, otherwise, I doubt the Pens barely lose against the Caps in 7 games, where again, cheap shots and the usual, had they kept some key players.

Bonino, Daley mainly for 2018.

I don't think this was intentional though. Cole was leaving. One way or another, he was out. There's more to being on a roster than purely on ice performance. You get into a pissing match with the coach, you are gonna get the boot. Cole wasn't Sid or Geno. Not to mention, Cole was a 2nd pairing capable dman playing on our 3rd pairing. He then got paid like a top 4 which we couldn't have afforded anyway. Hunwick was brought in after a great playoffs for Toronto. Before the concussion, he outplayed Cole on a nightly basis but no one ever seems to remember or acknowledge that. But he came back crap after the concussion and with the emergence of Jake, we sent Hunwick and Sheary away to open up space and money. The mistake was Johnson and then playing catch up to cover. But in theory, JJ brought what he needed...a semi-mobile physical dman. That just did not pan out. We all know. Gudbranson was a wash IMHO. Pearson wasn't doing squat and we needed a dman. Then he was sent out for nothing. Whatever.

Oleksiak was an interesting addition and subtraction. I think he could have worked out well here if given more time. What an odd blurb in our roster history...

Maatta regressed unfortunately and after peaking in 2017, Schultz began to regress too, especially after the devastating ankle injury.

So while we had several guys regressing, we didn't bring in a guy that could reboost the pairings. Daley wanted more money, Cole wasn't staying, Maatta and Schultz were getting worse, no one from the prospect ranks were available. It was a tough spot to be in. Sometimes you have the guys you have and you need to make it work for better or for worse. The lynchpin in 2018 for the defense, IMHO, was Letang being absolute trash for most of the Caps series.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ugene Malkin

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,335
18,765
Pittsburgh
You are 100% right. You need to constantly evolve to remain at the top. I know people here won't like that example, but that's what the Patriots did; time and time again. When Brady first become the starter, they were a defense first, smash mouth team. In 2007, they became a pass first, high-octane team. In 2010, the re-invented themselves again and switched the a 2-TE offense. After 2014, they slowly rebuilt their defense and when they won last in 2018 they were back to being a run first/defense team (the second half against the Chiefs turned into a shootout... but it is the Chiefs. They smacked Mahomes for 2 and a half quarters).

You adapt and build around your strenghts/the weakness you want to exploit that your opponents have. We did not do that in 2017-18. We went retro because Sid was tired of being bullied. That's essentially all they did and it failed.

Finding guys like Tom Wilson is not easy, but that's the modern day tough guy. Trading for Reaves was dumb as f***. As we saw in the Cup finals between Vegas and Washington... Wilson still did his thing and ignored Reaves... as he should have.

If we want to get nastier, you need to find talented players with an edge. Not easy to find, sure, but that's what you spend assets on... not Ryan f***ing Reaves.

Tom Wilson should never had been able to keep playing after the ZAR instance. After all he had been suspended for leading up to that. It was a joke and that's a huge loss the Caps probably get knocked down a peg because of it. That means AO would need to revert back to his old cheap ways.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scandale du Jour

Darren McCord

Registered User
Dec 15, 2015
9,465
7,770
The thing that sucks for every rookie for the Penguins for the next few years is that they're going to be compared to John Marino:

Is Drew O’Connor on track to be the 2021 version of John Marino?

The Penguins have had at most 3 rookies outside of Crosby and Malkin in the last 20 years who have had the impact that Marino has had as a rookie. Staal, Maatta and Marino are the only 3 that jump to mind. But every rookie going forward is going to be compared to him.

Jake???

I would argue Jake had much more impact than Maatta and Marino.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CheckingLineCenter

Ugene Magic

EVIL LAUGH
Oct 17, 2008
54,335
18,765
Pittsburgh
I don't think this was intentional though. Cole was leaving. One way or another, he was out. There's more to being on a roster than purely on ice performance. You get into a pissing match with the coach, you are gonna get the boot. Cole wasn't Sid or Geno. Not to mention, Cole was a 2nd pairing capable dman playing on our 3rd pairing. He then got paid like a top 4 which we couldn't have afforded anyway. Hunwick was brought in after a great playoffs for Toronto. Before the concussion, he outplayed Cole on a nightly basis but no one ever seems to remember or acknowledge that. But he came back crap after the concussion and with the emergence of Jake, we sent Hunwick and Sheary away to open up space and money. The mistake was Johnson and then playing catch up to cover. But in theory, JJ brought what he needed...a semi-mobile physical dman. That just did not pan out. We all know. Gudbranson was a wash IMHO. Pearson wasn't doing squat and we needed a dman. Then he was sent out for nothing. Whatever.

Oleksiak was an interesting addition and subtraction. I think he could have worked out well here if given more time. What an odd blurb in our roster history...

Maatta regressed unfortunately and after peaking in 2017, Schultz began to regress too, especially after the devastating ankle injury.

So while we had several guys regressing, we didn't bring in a guy that could reboost the pairings. Daley wanted more money, Cole wasn't staying, Maatta and Schultz were getting worse, no one from the prospect ranks were available. It was a tough spot to be in. Sometimes you have the guys you have and you need to make it work for better or for worse. The lynchpin in 2018 for the defense, IMHO, was Letang being absolute trash for most of the Caps series.

I think Letang was trying to do too much considering the lack of depth on the backend. Cole leaving didn't have to happen at all, at least not then. You don't keep dismantling a defense if you are clamoring for a 3 peat. That whole Brassard thing was BS. The Pens could survive having Reaves around. They screwed up in many ways where you can get whiplash looking back at all the things that transpired.
 

AlphaMikeFoxtrots

The Sounds of Silence
Sponsor
Oct 17, 2014
3,015
3,228
You are 100% right. You need to constantly evolve to remain at the top. I know people here won't like that example, but that's what the Patriots did; time and time again. When Brady first become the starter, they were a defense first, smash mouth team. In 2007, they became a pass first, high-octane team. In 2010, the re-invented themselves again and switched the a 2-TE offense. After 2014, they slowly rebuilt their defense and when they won last in 2018 they were back to being a run first/defense team (the second half against the Chiefs turned into a shootout... but it is the Chiefs. They smacked Mahomes for 2 and a half quarters).

You adapt and build around your strenghts/the weakness you want to exploit that your opponents have. We did not do that in 2017-18. We went retro because Sid was tired of being bullied. That's essentially all they did and it failed.

Finding guys like Tom Wilson is not easy, but that's the modern day tough guy. Trading for Reaves was dumb as f***. As we saw in the Cup finals between Vegas and Washington... Wilson still did his thing and ignored Reaves... as he should have.

If we want to get nastier, you need to find talented players with an edge. Not easy to find, sure, but that's what you spend assets on... not Ryan f***ing Reaves.

Reaves was who was more or less available at the time. I think the expense - in retrospect, 20/20 vision, etc - was too great and it was an experiment doomed to fail since Sully clearly had no use for him. I'm not willing to fully throw that at Reaves' feet. Vegas had a number of other problems come to a head in that series.
 

Darren McCord

Registered User
Dec 15, 2015
9,465
7,770
Jake wasn't right out of camp though.

Jake still bounced around a bit. He had a cup of coffee in the AHL in 15-16 and about half the season there the year after before making the jump for good.

I think Empo is more talking about players who came right outta junior or whatever and made the team and stuck for good.

Was not clear on that. I thought he was talking about rookies in general. Still Jake only had 11 games in 15-16. He was a rookie in the AHL in 16-17 too.

He lit the AHL up just as much too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad