Require definition of “historical elite.”

Require less mechanical prose. Jesus, man.

Posted by steve on 06/13/09 at 03:23 AM ET

You’re still a piece of s_h _i_t

Posted by FU on 06/13/09 at 03:24 AM ET

It may have been the finest hour for Maxime Talbot and Rob Scuderi in their careers to date, but neither of them is among the better players in the NHL.

You are absolutely wrong about Rob Scuderi, but let me first say that Max Talbot with 8 goals in the playoffs and many clutch goals in past years has proven to be an unsung hero and a very valuable role player.

Role players… Actually, GOOD role players, are very important, and this notion that Pittsburgh doesn’t have depth is absolutely ridiculous. Did you watch this series? How can you say that Pittsburgh doesn’t have depth? Kennedy had 5 goals in the playoffs. Letang had 4 goals. Staal scored 2 huge goals in the Finals, and he scored the biggest goal in my opinion (the shorthanded goal in Game 6).

So if Detroit has tons of depth, how was it that the Penguins’ depth ended up being the difference? The Pens got 2 goals from 3rd liners in Game 6 (Jordan Staal and Tyler Kennedy), and 2 goals from a role player in Game 7.

And when you consider that they have Crosby, Malkin and Staal down the middle, they don’t really need that much depth in the first place. But they do have depth. And they have a great goalie, and a really good mix of defensemen. Gonchar and Letang obviously must be mentioned as great offensive defensemen, but Brooks Orpik is one of the best hitters in the league and he was stellar in this series. The Pens’ entire defense corps was. Mark Eaton and Hal Gill also were pretty damn good at their roles.

As for Scuderi, he may very well be the most underrated defenseman in the NHL. He was also terrific against Detroit. He is an excellent stay-at-home defenseman and he does everything well. He hardly ever makes mistakes - his giveaway in Game 4 I think it was which led to the Darren Helm goal was an aberration. He always clears the puck. He’s a SUPERB penalty killer. He blocks shots. He breaks up plays with great stick work.

If he had offensive skills, people would think of him as at least a solid #2 defenseman.

Posted by LGP8771 on 06/13/09 at 05:54 AM ET

I have seen nobody give Ray Shero any credit.  He has built the Penguins into a cup finalist in just a few years.
Then, after last year losing Hossa, Malone, and others he rebuilds a championship team.
On top of that, he replaced the coach and hired Bylsma.  That took some courage.
The Pens are in good hands with Shero.

Posted by w2j2 on 06/13/09 at 08:04 AM ET

I have seen nobody give Ray Shero any credit.  He has built the Penguins into a cup finalist in just a few years.

That’s a very good point. He’s been subjected to his share of criticism, and I’ve had my doubts about him, but reaching the final after replacing half the team should tell you something.

The Detroit Red Wings organisation is a role model for an elite organisation and I think Pittsburgh Penguins is moving in that direction. We’re not nearly there yet, but moving gradually in the right direction. I’m really optimistic after far too many chaotic years. In that regard, the Cup means everything.

Posted by Moq from Denmark on 06/13/09 at 08:33 AM ET

Didn’t read the article, but the headline confirms that you are indeed an elite prick.
Then again, it’s easy to be a jerk if you just make the effort.  You get an A for effort.

Posted by TJ Hooker from denver co on 06/13/09 at 08:46 AM ET

by headline i meant first paragraph

Posted by TJ Hooker from denver co on 06/13/09 at 08:49 AM ET

I was wrong in prediction for the Stanley Cup finals.  Pittsburgh won.  That brings my record to 9-6 in my playoff predictions.  It’s a .600 record, which isn’t bad but I have done better in past years.  While I was wrong, the Detroit fans that make up most of the commenters on this blog were even more wrong.  For the last month or more they have been screaming at me how Detroit is an elite team and a dynasty.  Their dynasty didn’t win the Stanley Cup.

You’re proved wrong in your series prediction and instead of being humble about it, you turn around and say “but they were even more wrong”.  You are a complete and utter tool.  Why shouldn’t Detroit fans have been wrong?  They wanted their team to win.  You?  You’re just a worthless douche who hasn’t a clue about professional journalism.  For the past few weeks, I’ve been watching you make a complete fool of yourself with your ill-formed arguments and unjustified rants, all the while treating with disdain the people who called you out for your lack of evidence or reason.  Well, sir, I’m done reading your drivel.  I only wish that Paul had the sensibility to can your ass.

Posted by Riviera on 06/13/09 at 09:35 AM ET

Well, sir, I’m done reading your drivel.  I only wish that Paul had the sensibility to can your ass.

+1

Posted by TeamDub from The gratch. on 06/13/09 at 09:56 AM ET

That’s a very good point. He’s been subjected to his share of criticism, and I’ve had my doubts about him, but reaching the final after replacing half the team should tell you something.

Yes.

It tells us the Eastern Conference sucks.  The Ducks and Hawks would have beaten a team as wounded and weary as Detroit in 5 or 6 games, tops.

Pittsburgh had to play one tough series the whole postseason, and that didn’t come until the Finals.  While the Caps series was close, it was a) flag hockey and b) horrifically officiated in the Pens favor.

By the time Detroit got to the Finals they were so beaten, injured and tired that after Bettman got done jamming them with the schedule ‘for television purposes’ they were a team at 75-80%, at best.

But, hey, you beat a Wings team without Datsyuk at all for half the series and at 70% when he did come back, Lidstrom with a busted nut, and a number of other guys with missed games injuries.  Pittsburgh had to deal with losing Crosby for two periods once they already had a 2-0 lead.  Wee.

Fortunately for Pittsburgh, there isn’t another team in the East that’s any good so their path deep into the playoffs is nearly assured for at least the next year or two.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 06/13/09 at 12:21 PM ET

The problem with your statement that niether team is a historical elite team is that it’s way too early to make that claim about the Penguins. Their core players are all very young and who knows what they’ll accomplish in the next decade.

Posted by Lindas1st on 06/13/09 at 12:48 PM ET

HockeyHD, Don’t gimme that injury crap.Datsyuk has played 15 career games in the S.C. Finals and has 1! count ‘em! 1 Career goal in those games. Not to mention he has a history of choking in the playoffs. Look it up. So even being so-called 100% wouldn’t matter. Besides most players have some sort of injury at this point in the playoffs. As far as Lidstrom, let’s be honest the Penguins’ speed made him look like a 39 year-old defencemen at times in this series. Did you see the play in game 7 behind the net in which Crosby just smoked him. That happened alot in this series. Look it up. The better TEAM won, you know the one that didn’t have the depth. LOL! Anyway 2009 Stanley Cup Champions: Pittsburg Penguins. If you don’t beleive me then Lool It Up.

Posted by Lindas1st on 06/13/09 at 01:22 PM ET

You are an idiot.

The Penguins have a ton of depth, and while I agree that their roster is front loaded, You cannot dismiss the excellent job their role players did in these playoffs.

You mention Scuderi and Talbot, but the Pens’ relatively no-name defense was clutch, especially in the final two games against the Wings.  And there was no line that struggled to play the Pens’ defensive system in the last two games.  I mean, there aren’t any flashy mid-level players on the Pens, but there are a lot of dependable lower-level players who are an important part of the team.  That is what “depth” is.

Also, you use the term “Historical Elite” like there is some sort of objective standard by which these things are measured.  By using the term “Historical” you are by definition admitting that the judge of a dynasty is relative.  So are the Wings a dynasty?  Yes!  There is no other team that even compares to the Red Wings’ level of competitiveness, talent, and accomplishment over the last twenty years.

You’re a joke...Paul, save us all and can this douche.

Posted by John from Pittsburgh, PA (Wings fan for life!) on 06/13/09 at 04:12 PM ET

PSH does actually have a definition of Historically Elite that he uses to try to be objective. Apparently it’s derived from similar definitions that baseball historians have used. You can buy into it or not, but there is a definition floating around in older posts. He probably should have linked it in this story and I’m too lazy to go fishing around for it.

I wouldn’t save most Detroit fans from a burning building, but I think I’m a bit weary of this running argument that seems wholly constructed to piss them off: that Detroit doesn’t qualify as a truly elite team because Osgood is less goaltender and more “lucky beneficiary.” There are other things to talk about. Not trying to be a Stars homer here, but what about Crawford’s hiring? There’s got to be some cutting analysis to be done around that whole mess. I can’t imagine the analysis will be favorable towards this move, but hey, surprise me.

What about draft preview?

Posted by Mojo Tooth on 06/13/09 at 10:30 PM ET

I don’t understand how a 3 Western Conference Finals appearances, 2 Stanley Cup appearances, and 1 win in 3 years does not make Detroit an elite team. If you can’t concede that, then you are a moron.

Also, Osgood was 1.87 and .930 throughout the finals. Even in a losing effort, he was damn good, especially considering how many times Pittsburgh out-shot Detroit.

Posted by Justice And Rule on 06/15/09 at 12:58 AM ET