2013 NHL Playoffs Discussion

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:The Penguins are not losing because of their trades. You make those deals every time. It's their stars who are not perfoming in this series, and they don't have enough toughness overall. Tangradi and Lovejoy are whatever losses.

But whatever, they will be a compleely different looking team next year I would imagine.

Dan Bylsma is also one of the worst coaches in the NHL right now

Really? Because every time they are made teams lose out... so I would suggest that you don't make those moves every time, at least not that many. You can add without subtracting and that's not what the Pens did... it's what the Bruins did though with Jagr.

Did LA make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star.
Did Boston make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star even if Jagr used to be, playing 3rd line mins right now.
Did Chicago make a move? No.

All 3 of these teams made minor-ish moves, no one was booted out of their roster spot, no one on their current rosters were traded to make room, and the dressing room stayed basically the same.

I didn't like what Pitt did at the deadline and you are now seeing why. I won't say I saw this happened but I absolutely said it could.

What if Tangradi was Malkin's best friend off the ice? Or if Lovejoy was the guy Crosby loved having around, etc, etc, etc. That kind of thing can kill a team, especially if they are glue guys. I am not saying they are or they are not but sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make. If the team is winning, it's winning. How can Iginla make the Pens from 3 months ago better they they already were? They were unbeatable at the time.

I'm sure Shero asks his players about guys and guys they are bringing in before making deals. I'm sure Crosby is in the know.

I don't think they added any stars really. I think all they added were depth guys. Bringing in two captains never hurts your team. But yes, they might have too many cookes in the kitcken

Without those players, the team is the same IMO. But we wouldn't know obviously. Who knows if they get by NYI or OTT without those moves? Not saying there were the reason they won 2 rounds.

The Pens pretty much added without subtracting. Dealing two small pieces, one who was a prospect pretty much, is not the end of the world.

So basically you're saying if they don't win the Cup then those moves were bad? There are way too many factors to say that. Even though I knew you would.

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:How can Iginla make the Pens from 3 months ago better they they already were? They were unbeatable at the time.

I think they were attempting to be unbeatabler.

Anyway, it's always great to see media darlings like the Penguins and Wings fall flat on their faces.

I still think the Wings do things the right way and it's tough for most to dislike them. Pens... ugh, never hear enough from them and about them.

Either way, they didn't need to make the moves they did. There was no logic behind them aside from Boston not being the team that got Iginla... well, looking like the best move Boston made was the one they couldn't.

Boston is the same team with Iginla instead of Jagr. They would have lost Bartkowski, that's it.

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:The Penguins are not losing because of their trades. You make those deals every time. It's their stars who are not perfoming in this series, and they don't have enough toughness overall. Tangradi and Lovejoy are whatever losses.

But whatever, they will be a compleely different looking team next year I would imagine.

Dan Bylsma is also one of the worst coaches in the NHL right now

Really? Because every time they are made teams lose out... so I would suggest that you don't make those moves every time, at least not that many. You can add without subtracting and that's not what the Pens did... it's what the Bruins did though with Jagr.

Did LA make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star.
Did Boston make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star even if Jagr used to be, playing 3rd line mins right now.
Did Chicago make a move? No.

All 3 of these teams made minor-ish moves, no one was booted out of their roster spot, no one on their current rosters were traded to make room, and the dressing room stayed basically the same.

I didn't like what Pitt did at the deadline and you are now seeing why. I won't say I saw this happened but I absolutely said it could.

What if Tangradi was Malkin's best friend off the ice? Or if Lovejoy was the guy Crosby loved having around, etc, etc, etc. That kind of thing can kill a team, especially if they are glue guys. I am not saying they are or they are not but sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make. If the team is winning, it's winning. How can Iginla make the Pens from 3 months ago better they they already were? They were unbeatable at the time.

I'm sure Shero asks his players about guys and guys they are bringing in before making deals. I'm sure Crosby is in the know.

I don't think they added any stars really. I think all they added were depth guys. Bringing in two captains never hurts your team. But yes, they might have too many cookes in the kitcken

Without those players, the team is the same IMO. But we wouldn't know obviously. Who knows if they get by NYI or OTT without those moves? Not saying there were the reason they won 2 rounds.

The Pens pretty much added without subtracting. Dealing two small pieces, one who was a prospect pretty much, is not the end of the world.

So basically you're saying if they don't win the Cup then those moves were bad? There are way too many factors to say that. Even though I knew you would.

Again he traded Armstrong for Hossa... almost worked that time but they still lost in the finals at the end. The next year they added depth, not top 6 players.

Adding 2 captains can also be counter productive because captains have ego's. Now, Morrow and Iginla may very well be the right characters to bring in but not being the go to guys hurts the ego and the pride, don't care what anyone says. They can't slip in the room without being noticed because they actually do take up some air.

Again, I hated toe moves then, hate it now.

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

SeawaySensFan wrote:

NEELY wrote:How can Iginla make the Pens from 3 months ago better they they already were? They were unbeatable at the time.

I think they were attempting to be unbeatabler.

Anyway, it's always great to see media darlings like the Penguins and Wings fall flat on their faces.

I still think the Wings do things the right way and it's tough for most to dislike them. Pens... ugh, never hear enough from them and about them.

Either way, they didn't need to make the moves they did. There was no logic behind them aside from Boston not being the team that got Iginla... well, looking like the best move Boston made was the one they couldn't.

Boston is the same team with Iginla instead of Jagr. They would have lost Bartkowski, that's it.

Not sure I agree with that.

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:

Ev wrote:The Penguins are not losing because of their trades. You make those deals every time. It's their stars who are not perfoming in this series, and they don't have enough toughness overall. Tangradi and Lovejoy are whatever losses.

But whatever, they will be a compleely different looking team next year I would imagine.

Dan Bylsma is also one of the worst coaches in the NHL right now

Really? Because every time they are made teams lose out... so I would suggest that you don't make those moves every time, at least not that many. You can add without subtracting and that's not what the Pens did... it's what the Bruins did though with Jagr.

Did LA make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star.
Did Boston make a move? Yes. Something to add depth, not a star even if Jagr used to be, playing 3rd line mins right now.
Did Chicago make a move? No.

All 3 of these teams made minor-ish moves, no one was booted out of their roster spot, no one on their current rosters were traded to make room, and the dressing room stayed basically the same.

I didn't like what Pitt did at the deadline and you are now seeing why. I won't say I saw this happened but I absolutely said it could.

What if Tangradi was Malkin's best friend off the ice? Or if Lovejoy was the guy Crosby loved having around, etc, etc, etc. That kind of thing can kill a team, especially if they are glue guys. I am not saying they are or they are not but sometimes the best moves are the ones you don't make. If the team is winning, it's winning. How can Iginla make the Pens from 3 months ago better they they already were? They were unbeatable at the time.

I'm sure Shero asks his players about guys and guys they are bringing in before making deals. I'm sure Crosby is in the know.

I don't think they added any stars really. I think all they added were depth guys. Bringing in two captains never hurts your team. But yes, they might have too many cookes in the kitcken

Without those players, the team is the same IMO. But we wouldn't know obviously. Who knows if they get by NYI or OTT without those moves? Not saying there were the reason they won 2 rounds.

The Pens pretty much added without subtracting. Dealing two small pieces, one who was a prospect pretty much, is not the end of the world.

So basically you're saying if they don't win the Cup then those moves were bad? There are way too many factors to say that. Even though I knew you would.

Again he traded Armstrong for Hossa... almost worked that time but they still lost in the finals at the end. The next year they added depth, not top 6 players.

Adding 2 captains can also be counter productive because captains have ego's. Now, Morrow and Iginla may very well be the right characters to bring in but not being the go to guys hurts the ego and the pride, don't care what anyone says. They can't slip in the room without being noticed because they actually do take up some air.

Again, I hated toe moves then, hate it now.

I agree with you, I'm just saying that the moves shouldn't be considered bad (not by you since you always considered them bad), just because they hypothetically don't win the Cup, unless we go back in time and don't make the moves and see that the Penguins win the Cup.

NEELY wrote:Jagr has done what the coaches have asked him to do and is fitting into the team system... that's never been Iginla's MO, always done what he wanted on the ice even in Calgary.

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:Jagr has done what the coaches have asked him to do and is fitting into the team system... that's never been Iginla's MO, always done what he wanted on the ice even in Calgary.

are you questioning Iginla's character?

Ev wrote:
are you questioning Iginla's character?

tim1_2 wrote:When you make the moves Shero made, you're making them to win the Cup. If you fail to win the Cup, you made bad moves. Maybe they should've made different moves, maybe they shouldn't have made any moves.

Perhaps the Penguins' biggest need was in goal, but I don't think there was a realistic way to get a significant upgrade.

Maybe Pittsburgh comes back in this series (stranger things have happened), and this discussion becomes something we bring back up and laugh about...but yeah, it seems for now that Shero Cussed something up.

Ev wrote:

NEELY wrote:Jagr has done what the coaches have asked him to do and is fitting into the team system... that's never been Iginla's MO, always done what he wanted on the ice even in Calgary.

are you questioning Iginla's character?

Ev wrote:
No it's not black and white like that. If you're losing basically NOTHING in the process, the moves were neutral.

They are not losing because of deadline moves made. Like any team, they go as their stars go. If Sidney Crosby is on his game, they win.

Ev wrote:
No it's not black and white like that. If you're losing basically NOTHING in the process, the moves were neutral.

They are not losing because of deadline moves made. Like any team, they go as their stars go. If Sidney Crosby is on his game, they win.

Ev wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:When you make the moves Shero made, you're making them to win the Cup. If you fail to win the Cup, you made bad moves. Maybe they should've made different moves, maybe they shouldn't have made any moves.

Perhaps the Penguins' biggest need was in goal, but I don't think there was a realistic way to get a significant upgrade.

Maybe Pittsburgh comes back in this series (stranger things have happened), and this discussion becomes something we bring back up and laugh about...but yeah, it seems for now that Shero Cussed something up.

No it's not black and white like that. If you're losing basically NOTHING in the process, the moves were neutral.

They are not losing because of deadline moves made. Like any team, they go as their stars go. If Sidney Crosby is on his game, they win.

tim1_2 wrote:When you make the moves Shero made, you're making them to win the Cup. If you fail to win the Cup, you made bad moves. Maybe they should've made different moves, maybe they shouldn't have made any moves.

Perhaps the Penguins' biggest need was in goal, but I don't think there was a realistic way to get a significant upgrade.

Maybe Pittsburgh comes back in this series (stranger things have happened), and this discussion becomes something we bring back up and laugh about...but yeah, it seems for now that Shero Cussed something up.

Number Twenty Nine wrote:
The moves stink of ownership meddling. And we know a little about that, don't we.....

Hoags wrote:

Number Twenty Nine wrote:
The moves stink of ownership meddling. And we know a little about that, don't we.....

More like Crosby meddling, he is the one who pushed for Iginla and convinced him to waive for the Pens and not Boston.

Shero's moves are typical deadline moves. They won't lose because of them but they sure aren't winning because of them either. Iginla and Morrow are supposed to make a difference when guys like Crosby, Malkin, Dupuis, Kunitz etc. are held off the scoresheet.

Once again Pittsburgh defence and goaltending is letting them down. That looks bad on Bylsma and Shero respectively.