When will "pesky" wear off?

[Stylizer1]

Seems like everyone can't wait for the pesky Sens to come rolling into town and keep everyone on the edges of their seats in the final minutes of games. As we know from shortened seasons past, young players can play that type of up tempo game for short stretches and appear to be in every game. It is great for the optimistic fan and great for management to reassure us that it is only a matter of time before this team shuts up all of the "experts" and defy logic.

Last season the reason we weren't pesky was because of Jason Spezza. Everything that has been said leading up to this season is that players are buying into playing a 200 foot game and battling for ice time. 2 seasons ago the pesky Sens, missing most of its vets, defied the odds and made it to the second round of the playoffs. So what happened?

Last season it appeared that no one in the whole organization thought that this was good enough to incorporate as a team philosophy and instead decided on being a hard ass coach as opposed to the one that motivated players and got the most out of them. Putting out top lines with wingers who were terrible with now one not even being part of the active roster(Greening). Management waiting for the very last possible second to make a trade for a top 6 forward that we had needed every season for the last few at least. Rotating Dmen in and out of the lineup to make it appear that we had depth when really they were just biding their time until someone decided to be a top 6 dman. This had scapegoat written all over it.

Today, pesky is back or so we are told it's coming. We have greater depth on the wings but still suck on D and are relying on Turris to score 29 more perfect shots to truly call him a #1 center. The more I watch this team play the more I see a coach stepping away from what made him a Jack Adams winner. This team looks so confused but at least if they try really hard we can still call them pesky.

Versus Nashville we looked like a young team and pesky was great until a squad full of vets started turning up the intensity.


Not sure I care for the term pesky because:

Adj. pesky - causing irritation or annoyance; "tapping an annoying rhythm on his glass with his fork"; "aircraft noise is particularly bothersome near the airport"; "found it galling to have to ask permission"; "an irritating delay"

This doesn't sound like a term synonymous with wining, more like making it hard for the other team to win and maybe, just maybe we do enough to earn a point or two a long the way.

Did it really have to take this long to assemble a team that plays "pesky"? At some point are we going to have solid players who win us games with skill like the other top teams have? Is pesky just the term used instead of saying transitioning AHLers/rookies?

I think this style of play will wear out once we start going on a few losing streaks or a few blowouts.

Yes, it is the beginning of the season and time will tell just how good we can become. I just don't think the term pesky is a label a team full of men should have.

out.

Click to read more...

 

[StefanW]

Don't agree with your discussion of Spezza, which weakens the topic and shifts focus away from you question, but onwards and upwards.

Pesky means nothing by itself. Boston, Chicago, and all of the other good teams are pesky. The team right now is trying to find a way to compete with significant deficits in the lineup, particularly on D. To me pesky means that the team will work hard, and I actually agree that hard working teams are easier to follow and watch.

 

[MainDotC]

Never!

 

[Alex The Loyal]

Well from the looks of last year and the looks of the roster this year, it already has. I wish it'd come back though. The Pesky Sens were the funnest version of the Sens to watch since before the Ducks dismantled them in 07 to no one's surprise.

 

[StefanW]

Well from the looks of last year and the looks of the roster this year, it already has. I wish it'd come back though. The Pesky Sens were the funnest version of the Sens to watch since before the Ducks dismantled them in 07 to no one's surprise.

I keep reading stuff like this, and I never understood any of it. It simply does not match my experience. My memory of the pesky Sens was a team that absolutely could not score if their lives depended on it. They tried to clog up the middle and grind, and they rode sky high save percentages from goaltenders having career years. Then they would pop in a goal late (which actually was exciting) and if Bishop was in net they won the shootout. The games, to me, were 90% like watching paint dry, and 10% excitement.

Before Micklebot comes in to challenge the point, Andy's save % was .941 that season, and Lehner's was .936. Bishop's .922 dragged the team save % down, but he was still valuable as his 8-5 record shows (save % is not a great stat).

 

[Alex The Loyal]

I keep reading stuff like this, and I never understood any of it. It simply does not match my experience. My memory of the pesky Sens was a team that absolutely could not score if their lives depended on it. They tried to clog up the middle and grind, and they rode sky high save percentages from goaltenders having career years. Then they would pop in a goal late (which actually was exciting) and if Bishop was in net they won the shootout. The games, to me, were 90% like watching paint dry, and 10% excitement.

Before Micklebot comes in to challenge the point, Andy's save % was .941 that season, and Lehner's was .936. Bishop's .922 dragged the team save % down, but he was still valuable as his 8-5 record shows (save % is not a great stat).

I remember our offense being maybe slightly above average? I dunno, it's been a while. Our defense was awful though, as is Ottawa tradition. Yeah our goalies stood on their heads a lot of the time, hell most of the Pesky moniker probably is thanks to the goalies constantly giving the Sens a chance to finally get that one damn goal they needed

But this current team feels like a shell of its former self, feels like it lost any progress gained, and worst of all feels like the team is trying too hard to hold on to the memories of the 90's and early 2000's when Ottawa was really good, but of course, all those memories end in disappointment and heart ache, so it's kind of annoying that the Sens don't try to create a new identity, really get young, don't just hand out more money then they should because that player has managed to not get traded over the course of several years (Phillips, Neil). I'm happy that they gave Karlsson the C instead of Phillips just because hopefully, that means the team is slowly trying to create a new identity, instead of trying to stay connected to the 90's somehow.

I mean Jesus Christ do you ever see Ottawa trading Phillips and/or Neil? **** no, and not just because they're garbage, I'm sure some sort of deal could be made, even if it was just asset management. But they'll never be rid of them because of some sweet memories from two decades ago

 

[HavlatMach9]

in the first year of pesky Sens, I believe we were like 5th in the league in scoring

 

[StefanW]

in the first year of pesky Sens, I believe we were like 5th in the league in scoring

We are looking at different things them. To me pesky does not refer to the rebuild. The Pesky Sens thing was after the injuries in the lockout season, when we had the platoon of Bingo Boys coming up. We started the year scoring really well, and it dropped off quite a bit after Spezza was hurt early on. When Karlsson went down it fell off even further. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but that is my memory of it.

The year we were near the top in scoring was Mac's first season as coach, which I believe was the year before the Pesky Sens year.

Edit: Just checked, and we finished tied for 26th in scoring and only 5 goals above the league basement in that category.

 

[HavlatMach9]

i think the bingo guys came up the year before Mac's first year as we sold things off like Fisher, then went down to win the Calder Cup. The year after, the Bingo players were up, like Greening scoring 17 goals.

I checked back and saw that pesky Sens was being used full force on this board half way through the 11-12 season. the lockout season continued the use of the pesky name, but the focus was more about injuries

i believe there was a video clip after a Sens win where a bunch of scratched players were shouting pesky (edit: disregard the pesky, it was actually Carkner and a bunch of scratches celebrating normally), and i remember Carkner doing it

 

[StefanW]

i think the bingo guys came up the year before Mac's first year as we sold things off like Fisher, then went down to win the Calder Cup. The year after, the Bingo players were up, like Greening scoring 17 goals.

I checked back and saw that pesky Sens was being used full force on this board half way through the 11-12 season. the lockout season continued the use of the pesky name, but the focus was more about injuries

Ok, then I stand corrected. I have no memory of it before the lockout year, but that doesn't mean anything. Thanks for clearing it up

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

Pesky Sens? More like unsustainable type of hockey with lucky bounces and crazy good goaltending type of Sens.

 

[HavlatMach9]

Ok, then I stand corrected. I have no memory of it before the lockout year, but that doesn't mean anything. Thanks for clearing it up

the lockout year was the height and the ultimate form of pesky Sens though

 

[QuietOnTheFront]

Pesky died when Alfie said, "probably not.."

We haven't been pesky since.

 

[Tap on the Ankle]

You guys just have to think positive. They are totally still the pesky Sens, the only thing that has changed is they pester their own fans with lackluster hockey instead of pestering the opposition by winning.

 

[Stylizer1]

I would describe the Habs as pesky.

 

[Busboy]

I would describe the Habs as pesky.

I would describe the Habs vs. Sens playoff series as pesky. MTL lost their **** because they couldn't handle all the pesky being thrown at them.

 

[Benjamin]

Wore off like 100 games ago.

 

[Stylizer1]

Don't agree with your discussion of Spezza, which weakens the topic and shifts focus away from you question, but onwards and upwards.

Pesky means nothing by itself. Boston, Chicago, and all of the other good teams are pesky. The team right now is trying to find a way to compete with significant deficits in the lineup, particularly on D. To me pesky means that the team will work hard, and I actually agree that hard working teams are easier to follow and watch.

The idea management was giving throughout training camp was that with Spezza gone the whole team can now play different style, or at least that is how I felt it came across. I felt they left Spezza to the wolves by their comments throughout the season and the fact they never made an attempt to put him with good players, just whoever didn't have a real spot on any of the 4 lines. I think the plan was all along to find a way to move Spezza. Spezza made bad players good (Greening) and good players all-stars(Alfie).

As for all good teams being pesky, I don't see it that way. Good teams don't have to play 60 minutes of high intensity hockey just to have a shot at winning. They are positionally sound and let the game come to them. Chicago, Boston, Anahiem, LA can all dictate the pace of the game and make the other team look stupid. It is only skill and good goaltending that can regularly beat those teams.

College basketball is full of wide eyed kids that will run through walls for the coach with its high intensity. Once you get to the NBA that style doesn't work as shown by Rick Pitino and the Celtics in the late 90's.

All these young kids on our team will do just that, skate through walls for the coach where as vets like Spezza are asking to ice lines who can compete with other top lines around the league. Mac, Turris, and Ryan are going to be our top line in scoring but they are not going to match the top half of the league in it.

Pesky can only take you so far. Eventually they are going to load up on tradition top end talent whether from within as the plan has been since the rebuild/retool or go out and finally fill those holes when our young players are good enough to make up the rest of the team.

 

[Stylizer1]

I would describe the Habs vs. Sens playoff series as pesky. MTL lost their **** because they couldn't handle all the pesky being thrown at them.

In a way yes and in a way no. Our goaltending was amazing and Montreal's sucked. Montreal got full of themselves think that they were better than they were. They couldn't match our toughness or our goaltending. I think they matched us in intensity though. Plus their coach was/is a moron.

Pesky only works if you have really good goaltending.

 

[thinkwild]

yeah my memory of pesky was seeing us getting totally out-played, behind late in the game, and some how they managed to tie it up and win late, or somehow hang on with great goaltending for a win. Then after the game we were all like, i cant believe we won that game. It's like we trolled them. As the obvious lesser team, we somehow gutted it out and won. And i would wonder ..



So i guess pesky will wear off when we become good and are no longer under dogs. Then we will be dangerous.

 

[StefanW]

The idea management was giving throughout training camp was that with Spezza gone the whole team can now play different style, or at least that is how I felt it came across. I felt they left Spezza to the wolves by their comments throughout the season and the fact they never made an attempt to put him with good players, just whoever didn't have a real spot on any of the 4 lines. I think the plan was all along to find a way to move Spezza. Spezza made bad players good (Greening) and good players all-stars(Alfie).

As for all good teams being pesky, I don't see it that way. Good teams don't have to play 60 minutes of high intensity hockey just to have a shot at winning. They are positionally sound and let the game come to them. Chicago, Boston, Anahiem, LA can all dictate the pace of the game and make the other team look stupid. It is only skill and good goaltending that can regularly beat those teams.

College basketball is full of wide eyed kids that will run through walls for the coach with its high intensity. Once you get to the NBA that style doesn't work as shown by Rick Pitino and the Celtics in the late 90's.

All these young kids on our team will do just that, skate through walls for the coach where as vets like Spezza are asking to ice lines who can compete with other top lines around the league. Mac, Turris, and Ryan are going to be our top line in scoring but they are not going to match the top half of the league in it.

Pesky can only take you so far. Eventually they are going to load up on tradition top end talent whether from within as the plan has been since the rebuild/retool or go out and finally fill those holes when our young players are good enough to make up the rest of the team.

I see where you are coming from. My memory is just a bit different in some places though. I think management was sending a message going back to the end of last season (exit interview time) that the team needs to compete harder, especially on D. The message sent regarding Spezza was that management preferred to keep him, and that it was Spezza's choice to go. Once Spezza was gone, we had a team with a higher compete level but without the top end scoring that Spezza brought to the table. At that point BM started to mention the Pesky Sens thing returning, which was accurate based on my memory of a pesky Sens team (also without Spezza, due to injury) that worked hard but had a lot of trouble scoring goals.

So my disagreement is with the phrasing "now that Spezza is gone we can play a different style." We were always going to play a different style, and the preference was to keep Spezza. Without Spezza we are forced to really pick up the lunch buckets and try to outwork teams every night.

 

[Ice-Tray]

'Pesky Sens' to me was a label put on an limited-talent team winning well above it's station due to one of the best regular season goalie performances of all time. We were pesky because we were winning games we had no business winning.

Eventually we had a rep with other teams that served to help us get in their heads. But like many have pointed out, that was earned on the back tenacious plodding, and stellar netkeeping.

The players never had the talent level to keep it going, nor did we have it long enough to carry us to the finals, but we did use up a Cinderella song, that would have been better used when we had enough skill to win it all.

The truth is, we are a team with a little high end talent, and a dozen question marks. Expectations should be low as we watch and see which guys move towards their potential, and which guys don't have it. The youngsters should ALL be playing tenaciously, with an intensity as if their careers depend on it, because it does.

We are not a bubble team, we are not a playoff team, we are a question mark team. We are a team that is heavily relying on our young guys to break out and be the players they see potential for them to be. Most will not, and will be jettisoned, but some will, and they will be come fixtures on the team. Then it will be time to focus on the remaining prospects, and remaining roster spots, rinse and repeat until we have reliable NHL talent on all lines.

When we're close, the team will get vets and make deadline deals, but this team is all about learning, growing together, and for the dozen or so young players, a time to earn a spot in the NHL.

I would suggest shifting focus on enjoying the development of our young players, and look for hints of what may be in the future, because if you're looking for success now, you'll racking up the negative posts on the daily.

 

[Back in Black]

Consider this.

1) Same Goalies as last year,
2) just about the same Defence as last year (just hopefully a little more mature).
3) Spezza & Hemsky gone for Legwand & Chiasson (Lazar & Hoffman & Stone) sprinkled in.

Once the dust settles and Murray is forced to make a trade, we will become the Pesky Sens again and will make the Playoffs!

 

[Stylizer1]

I see where you are coming from. My memory is just a bit different in some places though. I think management was sending a message going back to the end of last season (exit interview time) that the team needs to compete harder, especially on D. The message sent regarding Spezza was that management preferred to keep him, and that it was Spezza's choice to go. Once Spezza was gone, we had a team with a higher compete level but without the top end scoring that Spezza brought to the table. At that point BM started to mention the Pesky Sens thing returning, which was accurate based on my memory of a pesky Sens team (also without Spezza, due to injury) that worked hard but had a lot of trouble scoring goals.

So my disagreement is with the phrasing "now that Spezza is gone we can play a different style." We were always going to play a different style, and the preference was to keep Spezza. Without Spezza we are forced to really pick up the lunch buckets and try to outwork teams every night.

I think management made it clear that they were not seeing the style of play the way Spezza would've liked. All season Spezza was expecting a trade or at least some chemistry and probably was willing to stay and be the captain. Management made it clear that they were not going to improve the team dramatically which lead to them offering Hemsky a ridiculous offer knowing he would not sign and Spezza asking out. I'm sure If Spezza was going to stick around they would have offered Hemsky fair market value. I think I am in the majority here saying that we would rather have Hemsky for 4 million than Michalek for 4, especially if he was going to be on Spezza's wing moving forward.

Spezza can't play pesky. Spezza wanted to play a skill game with skilled players. Ryan was supposed to be that guy and was given all but maybe 5 games in a season where the coach seemed to have different line combinations night by night.

The reason we were bad last season was more due to managements lack of getting the rights players on this team and saving a buck. The pesky Sens were running on mere adrenaline.

 

[Stylizer1]

'Pesky Sens' to me was a label put on an limited-talent team winning well above it's station due to one of the best regular season goalie performances of all time. We were pesky because we were winning games we had no business winning.

Eventually we had a rep with other teams that served to help us get in their heads. But like many have pointed out, that was earned on the back tenacious plodding, and stellar netkeeping.

The players never had the talent level to keep it going, nor did we have it long enough to carry us to the finals, but we did use up a Cinderella song, that would have been better used when we had enough skill to win it all.

The truth is, we are a team with a little high end talent, and a dozen question marks. Expectations should be low as we watch and see which guys move towards their potential, and which guys don't have it. The youngsters should ALL be playing tenaciously, with an intensity as if their careers depend on it, because it does.

We are not a bubble team, we are not a playoff team, we are a question mark team. We are a team that is heavily relying on our young guys to break out and be the players they see potential for them to be. Most will not, and will be jettisoned, but some will, and they will be come fixtures on the team. Then it will be time to focus on the remaining prospects, and remaining roster spots, rinse and repeat until we have reliable NHL talent on all lines.

When we're close, the team will get vets and make deadline deals, but this team is all about learning, growing together, and for the dozen or so young players, a time to earn a spot in the NHL.

I would suggest shifting focus on enjoying the development of our young players, and look for hints of what may be in the future, because if you're looking for success now, you'll racking up the negative posts on the daily.

Completely agree. I just think going into this season with Spezza and Hemsky made us more solid. Putting either Stone or Puempel on Spezza's other wing could of made for 2 very good top lines. If Spezza's injury problems are behind him it is going to hurt man. Move out Greening and not re-sign Michalek would have made room for Hoffman/Lazar/or one of the other 2 rookies.