Pens season recap podcast: What's next? Discussing Bylsma, Malkin, Fleury and more

Now that Ray Shero has spoken and the Pens have signed Dan Bylsma to a 2-year contract extension, the change that's coming to this team is in personnel only.  On GTOG's official season wrap-up podcast, we talk about Shero's press conference, his support of Bylsma and Fleury, what the Pens should and will do this summer with Malkin and Letang, and all the other choices -- some easy, some hard -- that the team will have to make this offseason. It's the GTOG Podcast.

Listen while you watch the Stanley Cup Finals with Pierre McGuire muted.

You can listen below or on our Spreaker page.  If you want to take the podcast mobile, either click here to subscribe on iTunes, or download the Spreaker app for iPhone or Android.

Pens fall to Bruins, 1-0; Season ends with a whimper

By Finesse (follow me on Twitter)

[Listen to the Game 4 recap podcast below or on our Spreaker page. You can click here to subscribe on iTunes, or download the Spreaker app for iPhone or Android]



If pucks could talk, Jarome Iginla's wrist shot at the final buzzer would have let out a feeble whimper as it landed almost apologetically in the glove of Tukka Rask.  It was a fitting and symbolic end to a series the Pens deserved to lose and the Bruins deserved to win.  Now armed with a body of work that reads like an inventory of a losing team's most-favored excuses -- a hot goalie, injuries, a bad goalie, and no good bounces -- the Pens have another long offseason of soul-searching ahead.

Read on for the burial...

When a team loses in such a spectacularly disappointing manner, the brain can pull you in two opposite directions are the same time.  There's the reactionary "fire everybody, Crosby sucks" approach, and then there's the "I'll just wait a few weeks and let this pain fade away so that when I decide what changes I want to make I will have tricked myself into thinking we were just a few bounces away" method (aka, The Full Leonsis).

The truth for Ray Shero and the Pens is somewhere in between, but he'd be wise to not waste the opportunity that comes with having your team so thoroughly embarrassed for the world to see.  Though the systematic errors are glaring and the individual failures are spectacular, the common thread that binds the last four playoff disappointments was woven at the Herm Edwards School of Simplicity: the Pens don't do the right thing often enough.

It's less important what that right thing is, and much more important that the Pens either can't identify it or can't do it.  The Pens started the Eastern Conference Finals playing the right way, but couldn't sustain it when it turned out that Boston was not going to be like Ottawa and pour the accelerating lubricant for the Pens' glide into the next round.  So the Pens stopped playing the right way for the next 5 periods and instead dug the first three feet of their own grave.  And once the Pens identified the problems in the way they played in games 1 and 2 and tightened up defensively, they could not, shot-differential be damned, consistently generate anything resembling the high quality scoring chances that the Pens would need to beat a locked-in goalie like Rask.  The Pens may spend the next few weeks feeling sorry for themselves for not catching a single break over 8 periods in Boston, but that would obscure the fact that the Pens rolled over when things didn't come easily in games 1 and 2, and couldn't persevere in games 3 and 4 once they finally seemed to grasp the idea that winning playoff games is supposed to be hard.

The Pens would have eventually broken through on Rask had they continued to play the way they did in games 3 and 4, but you don't get an "eventually" in the playoffs.  And, given this team's track record of mixing random slices of inexcusable chaos into their discipline sandwich, what indication is there that the Pens could have sustained their overall solid performances in games 3 and 4 anyway?

It doesn't matter what might have happened in a game 5 or if the Pens had taken the lead at any point in one of these games because they didn't.  It doesn't matter if the Pens were playing the right way when they went out because they went out.  By design, the playoffs require excellence across a small sample size; whether the Pens were trending in the right direction when they went out is irrelevant.  There's already a trophy for trending well over a large amount of time.

Comfort food for GTOG.

It's an indictment of everyone in the organization that the Pens went out this way, so it's hard to pin more blame on any one person than it is on another.  Ray Shero's acquisitions didn't get the team any further than it would have gone without those guys, and it's easy to argue that getting both Morrow and Iginla stagnated a team that simply didn't need both of them.  It's great to have a fancy shoe collection, but you can only wear one pair at a time.  Dan Bylsma added to an ever-growing resume of presiding over inexplicable performances, and when he finally recalibrated his team in one area (defense), he seemed to do it at the expense of another (offense).  Crosby, Malkin, Neal and Letang had no points in 4 games, and while that will almost certainly never happen again over any future 4-game stretch, it still happened.  And the supporting cast, supposedly the deepest in the league, didn't hold the fort while the stars got it together.  It was a total failure by everyone.

Last night's game was exciting only because it was meaningful -- if that game happens in December, it's a total snooze fest, the kind of game where if you DVR'd it, you'd actually get mad at your roommate for NOT spoiling the score and warning you against spending three hours watching it.  It's admirable (and appreciated because we watch all 82 games of it) that the Pens try to play hockey the way most people want it to be played; you know, with actual goals and excitement.  But the Pens have to be careful not to martyr themselves as the paragon of the way hockey should be played.  Because while it might be nice to enjoy the spoils of the afterlife -- like the MVP and Norris Trophy that could be coming in a couple days -- the bottom line is that you're dead.

Raw Emotion Podcast: The End. Pens lose, 1-0

Pens could have played all weekend. Still wouldn't have scored.

We talk about Game 4, Bylsma's future, the Bruins' defense, late-payment forgiveness, and so much more. It's the GTOG Podcast.

Listen below or click here. And as always, click here to subscribe on iTunes.



**If you're listening on your smartphone, the best ways to make sure that you have an uninterrupted experience are: 1) download the podcast from iTunes OR 2) download the Spreaker app by going to the App store and searching for "Spreaker" then "Get To Our Game"**

Some random follow-up thoughts on the Pens' double-OT loss to Boston

By GTOG Staff

Listen to the below or click here. And as always, click here to subscribe on iTunes.



[If you're listening on your smartphone, the best ways to make sure that you have an uninterrupted experience are: 1) download the podcast from iTunes OR 2) download the Spreaker app by going to the App store and searching for "Spreaker" then "Get To Our Game"]

The more we think about Game 3, the more we end up thinking about games 1 and 2.  The Pens probably win that game last night 53 out of 100 times. Unfortunately, they don't play best-of-100 series. Which is exactly why you can't give away 2 playoff games in a series -- at home, no less -- and expect to win 4 of 5 against a very good team when you're pretty close to dead-even with that team when you're both playing at your best. The Pens played really well last night, but all it does is shine a light on the stinkers in the first two games. We know the Pens can play as well as they did in game 3. We still have no idea why they can't do it more consistently.

No shame in losing Game 3. Great shame in being down 3-0.

Unable to put together any sort of cohesive reaction to last night, here are a bunch of random things we're thinking about, in no particular order.

- Along with the misfortune of having just faced down the barrel of a 3-0 series deficit last spring, we have the advantage of knowing exactly how this could work. Take advantage of Boston's inevitable if slight psychological shift in Game 4, when they cannot possibly match the Pens sense of desperation. Score 10 goals in the game (Note: will settle for 3. OK, 2.).



Come back to Pittsburgh and score a tight 3-2 victory. Suddenly, everything is in play. Even losing 5-1 in Game 6.

- Malkin was the best player on the ice last night, and it wasn't particularly close. He gets an A+ for generating scoring chances. But you don't win games with scoring chances. It's hard to think about the 21 shot attempts without thinking about the fact that none of them went in. It's a distinct talent to generate the types of chances that Malkin generated last night; it's also a distinct talent to finish the chances. Some of last night was just being snake-bit. The rest is him needing to be better at finishing.  If he was a running back, he'd have been taken out at the goal line.

- The Mike Alstott to Geno Malkin should be Jarome Iginla, but you could make a low-light reel of all the juicy rebounds that have bounced over Iggy's stick in the last month.

- Sidney Crosby was terrible early, but got much better as the game went on. A really strong defensive effort. But that's like complimenting your gardener for not tracking mud in the house. It's not what Sid is paid to do.

- The most disappointing part of Sid's game has been the power-play. It's expected that when teams load up to stop a guy at even-strength, they will usually have some success doing that, especially with players as good as Boston has. The power-play is the time to shake loose from those shackles and at least get comfortable having the puck on your stick. Sid hasn't done that at all. Dreadful on the PP.

- The PK was wonderful last night. PP was the real culprit.

- In moment of candor, would Ray Shero admit that he would have traded Brendan Morrow back to Dallas after Iginla fell in Pens' lap? And would he admit that after getting Morrow, he only got Iginla to keep him away from Boston? Because they're largely redundant. The Pens needed one of them. Not both.

- 7:09 on the PK for Craig Adams. What a performance. If he buries that slapper that hit the post in OT, the city probably names a steel mill after him.

- Refs on "let's take 'em both" patrol are the worst.

- Bylsma is deservedly getting a lot of heat. Arguably his worst stat from last night: Joe Vitale played 9:38 and only took 3 face-offs. If that's all you're using him for, why is he playing over Jokinen and TK, when the team's biggest issue against Boston has been an inability to score?

- It's one thing to dress Vitale if you think you need what he brings. It's another thing entirely to dress Vitale and then act like you don't even want him in the lineup. This really confuses us about Bylsma -- he insists on dressing guys in whom he has no confidence giving even a semi-regular shift. It's not like he doesn't have options.

- Speaking of TK, as we discussed on the podcast, he would have been a real asset in OT.  The one thing he never lacks is energy. There's potential for a great match-up against a tired team in OT.

- We've reached the point in the season where we're asking for more Tyler Kennedy. In other news, the Pens are about to get swept.

- Lineup changes for Game 4. Niskanen can't play with Letang. Have to keep Cooke with Geno and Neal. Bennett should stay and get PP time. BB is one definite bright spot heading into next season.

- The Pens scored 10 goals in Game 4 against Philly last year. The Pens also scored 12 in games 1-3. The Pens have 2 goals in 11 periods this series.

- The series isn't over so we're not in the mood to make pronouncements about the off-season. Except for one. Marc-Andre Fleury has got to go. This shouldn't be hard decision, and in light of the decisiveness of Shero's handling of Jordan Staal last year, we expect it will happen quickly. It doesn't matter who else is available. Fleury is not a winning option going forward.

- The way he's played this season, the Pens should feel very fortunate that Vokoun is signed through next season. He can't play 65 games. But the games he plays, he usually plays well.

- For as much talent as Letang has, and as high as his ceiling is, the Pens haven't really accomplished anything with him since he's been the team's best defenseman. Yet he's so gifted that you have to start wondering if a different coach could get him to play the right way more often. Whether here or elsewhere.

So, the Pens got destroyed by Boston last night. Now what?

By Finesse (follow me on Twitter)

Listen to the podcast below or click here.  And click here to subscribe on iTunes.



Last night the Pens were a nerdy 7th grader who got tied to a fence and de-pantsed by the cool kids at the beginning of recess, then had to stand there for the next 40 minutes while everyone laughed and pointed.  There was no facet of the game in which the Pens played well, no redeeming performance by any individual players, and almost nothing to give you confidence the Pens can win a game in this series, let alone the series itself.  All credit to the Bruins, whose stars dominated the Pens' stars, whose grinders dominated the Pens' grinders, and whose coaching staff is making Dan Bylsma look completely out of his league.

You're doing it wrong.

More after the jump...

The good news is that it was only game 2.  At least we hope that's the good news.  The Pens have shown a tendency to lose ugly this year (10 of their 12 losses were by 2 goals or more), and though it is surprising to have been so thoroughly dominated through much of two games, it would be completely unsurprising if the Pens won game 3 in Boston, even by a large margin.  What the Pens haven't done this series is get a lead on Boston and force the Bruins to adapt.  The Bruins have been able to do everything that they're really good at with very little resistance from the Pens; unless the Pens can dictate the terms of the game, even a little bit, the Bruins will win this series and will probably do it easily.

This isn't to say that the Pens need to go all crazy before game 3 and try to change everything.  In fact, it's quite the opposite.  The Pens need to figure out what will make them successful again -- making simple plays defensively, possessing the puck for long enough to allow creativity to take over -- and then do it.  And then keep doing it even if the Bruins are making it hard.  And if the Bruins are still making it hard, then you know what the Pens should do?  Keep doing it.

This is all much easier said that done, mainly because of how good Boston has been. But an almost equal reason for pessimism has to do with the Penguins' own mentality. Every quote after these losses is the same: "We got away from our game."  Well, why?  Why does a team that can be so good play so badly sometimes?  Why does Kris Letang look like a first ballot hall-of-famer some nights and a total scrub on other nights?  Why do Crosby and Malkin, now in their mid to late-twenties, still get so flustered when things aren't coming easily for them?  Why do the Pens either look like the best offensive team since the 80s or outclassed brats playing soccer with the puck because they can't connect on a pass?

The most vexing part of this team is that you have no idea what the expect from one night to the next. Game 3 in Boston could be exactly like game 3 in Philly last year where the Pens started running people and acting like babies when things weren't going their way.  Or the Pens could have a 4-goals-in-5-minutes spurt and win 6-2. Or they could play a tight-checking and disciplined 2-1 game. (That last one seems highly unlikely, but with this team, who knows).

As hard as it is to predict how the players will play, it can be equally hard to discern what the coaching staff is doing.  There's a balance between being reactive and being proactive, and Bylsma (and Shero) have failed miserably at striking that balance.  It's been 12 hours since the puck dropped and I still haven't come up with one good reason (other than possible injuries) why Derek Engelland dressed.  It's not that Engelland was any worse last night than anyone else, or even worse than Eaton would have been, but what was this move trying to accomplish?  Get grittier?  Tougher?  Why?  It's not like the Bruins' won game 1 by physically dominating the Pens -- they won game 1 because they weathered the storm and then smartly and skillfully took advantage when the Pens started chasing the game.  This move was reactionary, which on its face is disappointing from a team that went 36-12.  Even worse, it was reactionary to a non-existent problem.  Bylsma was reacting to a myth about this Bruins team -- that they're the "big, bad Bruins" -- when it's the Bruins skill and positioning that has been the major problem.

Scratching Kennedy was equally, if not more, confusing.  Yeah, Boston had won a lot of face-offs in game 1, but that "problem" didn't really tilt game 1 that much in favor of Boston -- the Pens were only outshot by 1 and the so-called "advanced stats" (which involve counting, then adding) were fairly even given this allegedly crippling discrepancy.  The problem in game 1 was that the Pens couldn't finish.  So Byslma's solution was to sit the best scorer and puck possession guy the Pens have in their bottom 6 for a guy who may be able to win the face-off ... but to what end?  Vitale wins the offensive zone draw to Niskanen, who shoots it into the corner ... who is getting it and then doing anything with it?  Brenden Morrow?  An overreaction to a real, but hardly fatal, problem.

Both of these moves were marginal in the sense that they didn't in any way cost the Pens this game.  The Pens are a unique team.  No one plays like the Pens, but the Pens don't -- and can't -- play like anyone else.  So why try?  Why let the Bruins dictate your lineup?  At home, no less.  Coupled with his inability to extract any consistency from his best players, Dan Bylsma has as much to answer for as anyone.

One thing that Bylsma can and should answer immediately is the goaltending question, although there really shouldn't be a question. Vokoun has to be the starter.  Neither goalie was responsible for this loss, but to anyone who has watched Fleury over the course of his career, it's obvious that this guy is gone mentally.  We saw the goal from Marchand almost immediately after the Sutter goal.  We don't need to see more.  He's so horrible right now that you could easily make the case that he shouldn't even dress as the backup.  Fleury looked like he wanted to cry ... when the Pens put him IN the game.

The series is not lost, though when the Pens finally get it together it may be too late to salvage given how well the Bruins are playing.  It certainly looks bleak heading back to Boston down 2-0.  If the Pens were a normal team, you could look at the results from the first two games and figure that Boston is simply a better team and the Pens would be lucky to win a game. That very well might be the case. But the Pens aren't a normal team.  So, really, who the fuck knows what's going to happen?

Podcast: Pens dominated by Bruins in Game 2, 6-1

Well that was terrible. The Pens were completely dominated by a terrific game from Boston and then compounded it with an all-time stink-bomb. We chronicle it all, LIVE on the GTOG Podcast, after the final whistle.

Listen below or click here.

The Prime Minister's face.

5 thoughts on the Pens' game 1 loss to Boston, including a new team motto

By Finesse (follow me on Twitter)

A few leftover thoughts about last night's 3-0 loss to Boston.  But first, check out the podcast.

Listen below or click here. And as always, click here to subscribe on iTunes.



5. The Showdown

The Crosby/Chara and Malkin/Bergeron showdowns at the end of the second period are getting a lot of attention, and rightfully so.  It's too soon to tell whether this was a good or a bad thing, but there's a lot not to like about it.

Very little good can come from this.

It's admirable in a lot of ways that Crosby and Malkin are willing to mix it up more than most superstars are, but it's also not that smart for them to do it for the simple fact that when they fight or jaw at people, they aren't better at it than anyone else.  They make themselves ordinary.  Rather than staying on a higher plane than other players because of their superior talent, they can be brought down to the level of their competition.  Give the Bruins credit for getting Sid and Geno to do it.

The other potential problem with their "standing up for themselves" response is that it's not very logical.  Whatever Boston did to get Crosby and Malkin that upset (and maybe it was simply frustration with not scoring), does anyone think that Boston is going to stop messing with 87 and 71 because they fight back?  Does anyone really think any of the Bruins are going to be afraid of getting their asses kicked by Crosby and Malkin?  If Crosby and Malkin are reacting like that, then it means that they're at least somewhat rattled emotionally and obviously Boston will try to keep doing that if that's the response they can get from those two guys.  Boston is only going to stop with that stuff when the scoreboard dictates that they have to stop.

New motto: Ignore and Score.

Four more thoughts after the jump...

4. The bottom 6 has become necessary

As we discussed on our podcast, the Pens are going to need contributions from the bottom 6 to win this series.  Our initial thought was that scoring from the bottom 6 would be sufficient to beat Boston, but not necessary.  After game 1, it looks more necessary than ever.  Boston is going to load up, as they should, to stop the Pens' top 6, and they're good enough that they might be able to.  If the bottom 6 doesn't contribute offensively, the Pens could easily lose this series.  It's not enough that the bottom 6 wasn't on the ice for any of Boston's goals.  They need to be on the ice for Pittsburgh's goals.

Some numbers so far in the playoffs:

Good: Kennedy (5 points in 8 games)
OK: Morrow (4 points in 11 games)
We're seeing some things, but need to see more: Cooke (3 points in 12 games); Jokinen (3 points in 7 games)
We know not to expect much, but it would be nice every once in a while: Adams (1 point in 12 games); Glass (1 point in 5 games); Vitale (1 point in 4 games); Bennett (1 point in 4 games)
Really disappointing: Sutter (2 points in 12 games)

There are 132 action shots from game 1 on the Pens' website. Brandon Sutter is in 1 of them.

You don't win Stanley Cups with passengers.

3. Hit the net

As Dejan Kovacevic pointed out in his column this morning, the Pens need to focus on hitting the net, not necessarily picking corners.  The Pens got a lot of good looks, especially early, but channeled their inner-Alex Semin and airmailed them way over the net.  When the Pens missed the net off the rush, these misses started Boston's breakouts at least a handful of times in the first period.  And even though we're pretty close to being done worrying about the PP combinations, because all of the combinations are good, the emphasis needs to be on more traffic.  Doesn't matter who.

2. Easy on the pinching 

Letang wasn't at his worst, but also wasn't at his best.  He seemed dedicated to pinching on almost every opportunity last night -- great if it works, nightmare when it doesn't.  Boston isn't Ottawa -- not only can they get the puck past Letang when he pinches, they can score when they do.  This certainly didn't cost the Pens the game, but it's something to watch going forward.

Textbook?

1. Video review on 5-minute majors 

Refereeing is our least favorite topic.  The Pens didn't lose the game last night because of officials -- the Pens PK was perfect, and they had 4 power-plays.  No complaints on that front.

But the 5-minute major on Cooke was ridiculous.  It's such a difficult call for the refs to make at full speed, and it's such an impactful decision to give a guy 5 and a game, why not let this be subject to video review?  I hate anything that slows the game down, but if the ref believes in his decision to give 5 and a game, let's take away the excuse that things happen quickly.  Make him look at it again, and then decide.  If he makes the wrong decision after video review, then the league should discipline him.  Or just let the league review it.

Bottom line: No panic heading into Game 2. The Pens know what they have to do to win, they just have to do it. And not stop doing it if it isn't working right away.

Penguins vs. Bruins: Tale of the Tape

By GTOG Staff

[You can find the preview podcast here]

It's Eastern Conference Finals Eve, Boston vs. Pittsburgh, when thoughts of Mario Lemieux torturing Ray Bourque swirl in our heads, somewhere Andy Moog is waking up in a cold sweat, and the Tale of the Tape between these two titans becomes urgent and required reading. Our thoughts and prayers are with Ulf Samuelsson's right thigh, which is to this day still traumatized by Cam Neely's carelessness. And we wish Vladimir Ruzicka the best in his quest to forget everything that happened after his 5-point performance in Game 2 in 1991. Let's break this down.

Obstacle Overcomability

This is always our most important category, because it defines the NHL playoffs. If you can play, you can play, but if you can't overcome adversity, you can't win. The Bruins had that historic comeback against the Leafs when they were down three goals in the third period of Game 7, and down two goals with 1:22 left in regulation. Amazing, unprecedented stuff from the Bruins. But you know what else is amazing? The fact that the Toronto Maple Leafs took a 4-1 lead in Game 7 against Boston in Boston. You don't give Bill Clinton credit for still being married to Hillary because no one gets obstacle overcomeability points for overcoming themselves.

The Penguins saw Marc-Andre Fleury - arguably their most important piece of the playoff puzzle heading into round 1 - melt down against the Islanders. They're still meshing as team and figuring out who belongs in the lineup. Their captain and best player is only now setting aside a face shield that - believe it or not - limited his effectiveness. They face enormous external pressure to win and win going away. And all the Penguins are doing is getting better.

EDGE: Pens.

Read on for the rest of the categories ...

Emergeability

The bad news for the Pens is that this is one Tale of the Tape category that they can never win, at least as currently constituted.  Unless like 8 guys get hurt, we're not seeing anyone play whose ceiling we don't already know, or at least have a pretty good idea.

"Brian Dumoulin is not walking through that door!"

Torey Krug redefined emergeability in the Bruins' series, scoring 4 goals in 5 games.  But it may not even be the right kind of emergeability.  Claude Giroux showed great emergeability in 2008-09 against the Pens, then blew the doors off emergeability in '09-'10 when the Flyers went to the Cup.  That was the right kind of emergeability -- he emerged into a much better player than anyone thought he was.  What Krug did was so unexpected that it raises the question: was this emergeability or flashinthepanability?  Regardless, the Bruins may use three rookie defensemen at any point in this series.  Pretty sure everyone on the Pens has been in the league for a dozen years.

EDGE: Bruins.

Coiffability

Hair is about appearance, but it's also about trust. And if you can't trust your captain's hair, how can you trust your captain?

Here's Bruins' captain Zdeno Chara winning the Stanley Cup.

He looks like any other 6'9" man struggling with hair loss, probably figuring that no one will see the top of his head.  But here he is at the parade a few days later.

Are we really supposed to believe that it's natural for a 30+ year-old-man to magically patch-up his male pattern baldness in a few days?  Get real.

Zdeno made a deal with the devil to win that Cup. Now the debt has come due.

EDGE: Pens. 

Sex Appealability

Time to check in with the Women of GTOG for their thoughts on this always crucial factor.

Mrs. Artistry: Edge, Penguins.

Artistry's Mom: Edge, Penguins.

EDGE: Pens.

Legacyability 

This is a forward looking category -- think 10 or 15 years in the future and ask yourself whose legacy is more positively or negatively impacted by winning or losing this series.

In the upside department, the Pens have more to gain, if only because they have two players who will be far more memorable than anyone on the Bruins.  If the Pens go on to win the Cup, Crosby and Malkin each get a second Cup and become, without any further question, the two defining players of the salary cap era, which would instantly come to be known as the Sid and Geno Era.  And because of their popularity and excellence, the Penguins become the defining post-lockout team.  Fair or not, that's how life works.  If Boston wins, then they can make a better argument for having the best team post-lockout, though there will still be plenty of other teams making a case in what would be an ongoing debate.  From an individual perspective, outside of Chara, the Bruins aren't really defined as individuals -- if  they win the Cup, they'll basically have 6 or 7 guys who will be remembered like Patrick Elias is remembered.  (I mean that as a compliment).

Such a memorable face.

If the Pens lose, it won't put any sort of choker label on them, but it will be devastating.  A total wasted opportunity.  And if the Bruins lose, does their 2011 Stanley Cup deserve an asterisk because they didn't have to go through Crosby and Malkin to get there?

All of this is a long way of saying that it will be awesome if the Pens win so that we can make fun of the Bruins' Cup in 2011.

EDGE: Pens.

Spurnability 

We've made our thoughts on Jaromir Jagr clear this week, but to summarize: we're basically out of thoughts on Jagr.  It is the classic it-is-what-it-is situation.  He didn't want to play for the Pens last year.  We're over it.

"I ain't over it."

Iginla's spurning of Boston is much fresher, though unlike Jagr and unlike Marian Hossa in 2008, the Bruins never really had Iginla.  They wanted him; he wanted someone else.  There's a big difference between your rival stealing away a girl you just met at the bar and stealing away your girlfriend.

Nevertheless, this will be made into a story all while being downplayed by the Bruins' players.  If Boston loses the series, they will continue to downplay it.  But if they win?  Boy, did we show him!

EDGE: Bruins.

Annoyability

The Islanders were annoying in the way that it's annoying to play pickup basketball against a guy who hustles and sets a lot of screens.  He's not doing anything wrong, but who wants the hassle?  The only annoying thing the Senators did was make you feel guilty for beating them so badly.

The Bruins are a whole different animal in this department. Brad Marchand and Milan Lucic are this year's Wayne Simmonds and Scott Hartnell -- you want to laugh at them like you do to a Chris Neil, but they're actually good players.  Nathan Horton's face when he scores is Cammalleri-esque.  Gregory Campbell's dad works for the NHL -- not his fault, but also not our fault for hating him.  Pierre McGuire will verbally fellate Patricie Bergeron the first time he makes a good defensive play on Crosby.  Tyler Seguin has 1 goal in 12 games, so he will probably score a hat trick Game 1, and then you'll read stories about him being part of  the Phil Kessel trade and then you'll be like, "I'm already disgusted and now I'm being forced to read about Phil Kessel?"  David Krejci is going to make some sick pass that embarrasses Matt Niskanen, and then McGuire will scream, "KREJCI'S IN HIS HEAD, DOC! DAVY KREJCI IS IN MATTY NISKANEN'S HEAD, DOC!"  Jaromir Jagr will make a diving motion at Crosby while we furiously Google "Paul Pierce wheelchair."  And you know at least one of their rookie defensemen is going to goad Evgeni Malkin into a bad penalty.

You will see this face. Just be ready for it.

The Pens have their share of annoying tendencies, but there's a huge difference between the two teams.  The Bruins can win by getting under your skin.  The Pens can get under your skin by winning.

EDGE: Bruins.

Stalwartability 

Dejan Kovacevic wrote about the Letang-Chara "match-up" the other day and figured that whoever outplayed the other one would win the series.  But in reality, it's not quite that simple.  Letang doesn't need to outperform Chara -- he needs to prove that he can do for the Pens what Chara can do for Boston.  As great of a player as Letang is and can be, he hasn't anchored a defense to a Stanley Cup the way Chara did for Boston in 2011.  When the Pens won the Cup in 2009, Letang averaged 19:18 of ice time per game in the playoffs, the fifth most among Pens' defensemen, and finished with a +1 rating. When the Bruins won the Cup in 2011, Chara averaged 27:39 per game and was a +16.

This isn't to say that Letang can't do it, just that he hasn't.  Yet.  So far this post-season, Letang is averaing 27 minutes per game and could realistically end up leading the playoffs in scoring by the time it's over.  He's been that good.  But it also isn't getting any easier.

Chara isn't a target for Letang to beat. He's a measuring stick.

EDGE: Bruins.

Leadability

"I'll take this one, guys."

I like to look at life as a fraternity. Right now the fraternity is me, Tom, Drew, Aar, Joe, Eli, and Pey. I see a lot of that fraternity within these teams. You got Sid, who I'm close with, I feel comfortable just saying to him, 'hey, you know, Sid, if you ever need to shoot some ideas around or pick my brain, me and Ash will have you over any time.' Geno, too. Now they bring in Brend' and 'Rome. Boston is full of great leaders, too. It started with John. Then you had John Quincy. Bill. Larry. Now Tom. I look at their team and I see Looch and March and Kre and 'Deno and it looks a lot like a brotherhood to me. So I just keep doing what I'm doing, controlling what I'm controlling, whether it's going 8-8 with the dink-n-dunk or winning 2 Super Bowls with me throwing deep to 'Twan, 'Tone, and 'Tonio. You know, whatever the team needs. And I see a lot of myself in Sid. This one's for 'Rome.

EDGE: Pens.

Intangibility

This category is less about the more commonly discussed intangibles like leadership, toughness, want-to, really-want-do, sorta-want-to, and definitely-want-to than it is about the ultimate intangible -- whether the invisible hand of destiny will decide to intervene.  The Pens don't really have anything in this department; for Boston, the question is whether the whole Boston Strong movement in the wake of the marathon bombings is going to be an emotional factor in this series.  It's hard to imagine that it's still going to be, given the amount of tributes, anthems, Sweet Carolines, and all of the other sports-related ceremonies and memorials that have been done already and, of course, the fact that the Pens have already played there in the immediate aftermath (and won).  If anything, the emotional toll and the toll on convenience from the manhunt was a negative for Boston: they closed the regular season by going 2-5 and then nearly (and probably should have) lost to Toronto.  Now things have returned to normal and the Bruins are rested.  That's a scarier thought than destiny intervening.

EDGE: Bruins

FINAL SCORE: 5-5

Predictions

Boston can and might win this series.  They are a really good team without a lot of weaknesses the Pens can exploit. But if the Pens are who we all think they are, the Pens will win this series.  An eight day break leaves a lot of time for breaking down specific match-ups, but it all comes back to the most basic match-up: who has better players?  Unless something weird starts happening, the Pens don't have any glaring weaknesses that Boston can exploit to overcome the simple fact that the Pens have more better players.  Not much better. But better.

Pens in 6.

Pens-Bruins preview podcast: Oozing with analysis, emotion, and predictions

It's our Pens-Bruins Eastern Conference Finals preview podcast.  How does the long delay affect the series? Which Bruin do you fear the most? What's the deal with the Tortorella firing? All that, our predictions, and so much more. It's the GTOG Podcast.

Click here to subscribe on iTunes

**If you're listening on your smartphone, the best ways to make sure that you have an uninterrupted experience are: 1) download the podcast from iTunes OR 2) download the Spreaker app by going to the App store and searching for "Spreaker" then "Get To Our Game"**

TWITTER: Follow Artistry. Follow Finesse. Follow GTOG.

Patrice Bergeron shutting down Sidney Crosby? Don't hold your breath.

By Finesse (follow me on Twitter)

There's no question that the Patrice Bergeron vs. Sidney Crosby matchup is one of the top story lines of the Eastern Conference Finals.  Bergeron is a really good player, he's clutch, and he's exceptional on face-offs.  As Puck Daddy pointed out, "Bergeron has given Crosby fits in the face-off circle in the past" (and it linked to this old story).

But other than in the face-off circle, has Bergeron ever given Crosby fits in anything else?  We decided to take a look at their head-to-head history ... and we found that one guy has a decided advantage.  A very decided advantage.

Read on to find out who...

Crosby and Bergeron have matched up 18 times.  The results are pretty clear.

For the image impaired, here are the highlights:

- Crosby is 10-8 overall against Bergeron, but 10-3 in the last 13.

- Crosby has more than twice as many points as Bergeron (27 to 13).  We know Bergeron isn't the offensive dynamo that Sid is, but for a guy who is going to be tasked with "shutting down" Crosby, he's allowed Sid to put up 1.5 points per game in their head-to-head match-ups.  That's a 123-point pace.  Or another way to put it, that would be more points than Crosby has ever scored in the regular season.

- Crosby is a +12.  Bergeron is a -8.

- Crosby has been a minus player 4 times in the 18 games. Bergeron has been a plus player 4 times in the 18 games.

- Crosby has put up three points 7 times.

This is not to take anything away from Bergeron.  As we said, he's a very good player and seems like one of those guys who will be better in the playoffs than in the regular season.  But Crosby is an exceptional player.

So the real question about this match-up is not be whether Sidney Crosby can overcome the Bergeron line.  It's whether Patrice Bergeron can live up to his billing as the top defensive forward in hockey, or will Sidney Crosby continue to dominate him?*

*JINX Disclaimer: We accept no responsibility if this post jinxes everything.