Penguins Post Mortem, Toughness and Discipline Needed

I read an absolutely stunning statistics in Dejan Kovacevic’s column in the Pittsburgh Tribune Review last Friday.  He pointed out that through the first three games of the series against Boston; a span including nearly 11 full periods of hockey, the Penguins generated THREE rebound shots on Tuukka Rask. 

That’s not a misprint...THREE rebound shots.  And one of those came off the stick of noted sniper Craig Adams.

I sensed that this was the case just watching the first three games so I focused in on it in game 4.  Other than the Penguins' desperation flurry at the end of the game, I do not recall a single rebound shot the entire game.

There will be an infinite amount of post mortem analysis this summer on the Penguins latest post season melt down.  Multiple theories will be posited, multiple scapegoats served up.  All will have some measure of validity but to my way of thinking, you need not look beyond that mind numbing rebound statistic as the starting point. 

From a micro standpoint it tells you that the Penguins had basically zero net front presence in this series and that the Boston defense, specifically Zdeno Chara dominated the Pittsburgh forwards.  I think that’s a pretty fair assessment when you consider the Penguins scored just 2 goals the series, after potting 47 in the first two rounds. 

It’s also a good explanation for why Rask appears to have suddenly morphed in to the greatest goaltender in NHL history.  Some will suggest the Pens once again got beat again by a hot goaltender, a theory I categorically dismiss.  Pretty much any top line NHL goalie is going to look that way when they are not dealing with screens, deflections and second chances.  Quite simply, the Penguins made Rask’s job far too easy.

From a macro standpoint, it tells you the biggest problem the Pittsburgh Penguins have as a team.  Namely, they are not tough enough.

Let me be clear on this, every member of that team is tougher than 99.9% of society at large.  I’m not questioning their heart or manhood.  Most people would not survive one day of what these warriors go through in the Stanley Cup playoffs. 

That does not change the fact that relative to the other ELITE teams in the NHL, the Penguins are simply not tough enough.  They play too much of a finesse game, in a league that no longer tolerates finesse.  We can argue until the end of time whether that’s the makes sense; I personally find it astounding how hard the NHL works to prevent its stars from being stars.  Regardless, we have to deal in reality.

Toughness has always been a prerequisite for post season success.  With the possible exception of Carolina in 2006, speedy perimeter skill teams do not win Stanley Cups.  As talented as the 2008-09 Penguins were what always stands out in my mind is how hard they battled in the finals against Detroit, especially in the last two games.

But in today’s NHL, toughness it’s more important than ever.  Even with all the changes introduced to maintain speed and flow in the game, the teams that succeed in the post season are the toughest to play against.  Defensive systems are more advanced than ever and talent and strategy is simply not enough to beat them.  You have to flat out work or better yet, out battle teams to beat them.

I simply did not see that compete level from the Penguins in this series, even in games 3 and 4.

Such commitment is absolutely possible from a high end skill hockey team.  It’s why the Chicago Blackhawks are in the Stanley Cup finals in spite of playing arguably the NHL’s toughest defensive team in the 3^rd round.  The LA Kings makes you work for every inch of open ice.  You cannot beat a team like that without talent but that talent must be willing to sell out 100% every night to do so.  Chicago matched LA’s work ethic, physicality and defensive presence throughout the series.  Ultimately their high end talent came to the forefront and made the difference in games 4 and 5.

The Penguins superior offensive talent makes them nearly invincible in the regular season; because most teams on most nights do not raise their work ethic to the same level they do in April and May.  They looked just as invincible in the first two rounds thanks to fortuitous match-ups with teams that gave their super skilled players an abundance of open ice to work with.  The problem was that when Boston forced them to earn their ice, they came up woefully short.

It took the Pens two embarrassing home losses before they realized how tough they would have to play in the conference finals.  And even when they figured in out in game three, they still demonstrated an alarming lack of net front presence and/or ability to win battles.  I’ve heard a lot of talk about Jarome Iginla being used improperly by Dan Bylsma.  What I have not heard enough of is how many times Iginla was knocked off the puck and/or lost a one on one battle in the offensive zone.

I also have not heard nearly enough about the frequent net front fly byes from Neal, Kunitz, and Morrow that were far too often the norm in this series.  For all the criticism of Evgeni Malkin, he fired 21 shots in 4 games and created numerous grade A scoring opportunities.  How many times did a Pittsburgh player skate right past a rebound Malkin created?  The Penguins simply had zero net front presence to finish it off. 

To that end, I put as much if not more blame on the Penguins power forwards and grinders than I do on the Crosby, Letang, and Malkin.  If you think I’m off base on this, consider that the Blackhawks are going to the Stanley Cup finals even though Jonathan Toews has just one goal in the post season.  Consider how critical Max Talbot, Matt Cooke, Tyler Kennedy, and even Miro Satan were to the Pens cup run in 2009.

Physicality was not the only issue; lack of discipline was every bit the concern.  Going back to the Islanders’ series I was bothered by the mind boggling number of defensive zone turnovers by the Penguins, especially Kris Letang.  I heard the Pens talk over and over about making smarter simpler plays.  And yet there was Letang in game 2, right after a critical penalty kill, making a horrendous and amateurish turnover that lead to a game changing goal.  The play was awful enough at face value; even worse when you consider the payoff for success was a potential Brooks Orpik breakaway.

That kind of mental error, which we saw over and over again, is inexcusable at this level.  I blame the players for failure to execute but also the coaching staff for not getting the message through.  Again, I concentrated on how the Blackhawks defense played game 5 against Los Angeles.  The Chicago backline is every bit as skilled as the Penguins and yet time after time after time they made smart simple clearing plays off the boards.  Credit the players but also credit Coach Joel Quenneville for getting the message through on how the team had to play.

If Bylsma is unemployed before next season, the lack of discipline repeatedly demonstrated by his players will be the primary reason.  What Ray Shero has to decide is did Bylsma fail to get the message across or does he have players who are unwilling to accept it?  That decision will determine whether Bylsma returns and/or Kris Letang gets the monster contract extension required to keep him in the Burgh.

Either way, it will make for a long and difficult offseason.  I refuse to call a final four appearance a complete failure but it’s unquestionably a disappointment.  As a result, the franchise is at a critical cross road.  Their problems are eminently fixable.  The question is how…and with whom.