BewareThePenguin

As any of you who remember know, last year before the series I appeared on this board to discuss the upcoming series. Unlike some cocky Pens' fans, I expressed doubt that the young Pens could overcome both a) the lack of knowing what to expect with a championship series, and b) the Red Wings' mix of experience and big-game, big-situation savvy. You have no idea what abuse I took from some Pens' fans over this, but I was proved right, as it took til game 3 for the Pens to even begin competing with Detroit. Last year I had my doubts the Pens could win a 7-game series with Detroit -- this year, I have no doubt the Pittsburgh Penguins can win. Notice I said CAN -- not will. I (unlike some overconfident types who've shown up here lately) know what they're up against with this loaded Wings' squad. Age or no age, banged-up or not, Detroit is the best team in hockey until somebody knocks them off. That won't be any easier to do this year. A lot's been made of the "experience" thing, as in the Pens have now been there and logically are ready to take the next step. Yeah maybe, but that's not the main factor as to why Pittsburgh has a shot. Something that's not been discussed much by the "experts", but to me is the key, is this: Coach Bylsma's system, which is much better suited to the talents of Crosby, Malkin and the rest of the squad. The trap scheme used by Coach's successor was an awful fit for the Pens -- and since Bylsma took over the team in late February, the Pens not surprisingly are a totally superior team. Suddenly the Pens went from being mentioned to almost not making the playoffs, to playing the best hockey in the conference. If Bylsma had coached the whole year, I have little doubt the Pens are the #1 or #2 seed. So it will be a different series than last year. It's up to the Pens, though, to show they belong on the mountaintop -- we all know Detroit does. If the Wings come out and just plain outskate the Pens as they did last year, it'll be another short series. With guys like Datsyuk and Franzen, talent like the Pens have yet to face, that's still possible. But somehow I don't think it'll work out that way. One more thing: Osgood. Why this guy doesn't get more credit outside of Detroit is beyond me. The guy's awesome, yet they rarely mention his name among the top goalies. That's just wrong. I have no doubt he'll be a major pain to score on this series. I wouldn't have the Pens face any other team but yours in the finals. Facing anybody else just wouldn't be the same. Here's to a having a series for the ages to watch... P.S. Doobie doobie doo...

For the life of me I can't understand how you can claim this. Games 1 and 2 could've gone either way, in Game 1 the Wings scored one goal on a fluke bounce off the boards (a dump, not even a shot) and scored another off a puck that flew in the air and right to Applesauce who couldn't have been luckier to be in the right spot, at the right time. Hardly a statement of total domination there. Game 2 the post god was on the Wings side. Wins yes, deserved fine, but as for them being statements of "superiority" I seriously doubt it. Game 3 the Wings outplayed the Pens one period. That was the second. The Pens owned the third, when really it matters more. This "we lost but we're the better team somehow" business never fails to amaze me. The Pens have been the better team for half this series. I think some people have trouble accepting the fact that they're a better team than they'd originally thought.

No question that's a big advantage for your team. I'm heartened that the games in Detroit have been at least as competitive as the ones in Pittsburgh. I'm hoping Crosby finally getting off the schneid will finally open up the gates for him. Malkin's been a bull, but the Pens need Sid as well. My gut feeling is that the winner of the next one takes the series. Letang and Fedotenko have been mosquitoes biting at the Wings all series -- looking for one of them to hit something Saturday. Fleury's outplayed Osgood the last two. I'm not sure how long that can last.

Here is a post of mine from a few days ago: Does that sound like I've given the Wings no credit? Or given the Pens all of it? Heck, sounds pretty balanced to me. You can go through each and every post I've put up here, and you won't find one instance of me claiming either Detroit won because of luck and/or calls, or that the Pens lost for the same reasons. When I DID point out some instances of luck and non-calls going Detroit's way, it was merely to say that these things went both ways. Particularly in regards to some alleged "conspiracy" by the league commissioner to fix the series for the Pens. Now THAT I have a major problem with. Feel free to go through my post history, you'll find similar credit to Detroit for their wins.

Well I certainly couldn't have made the post in the first place if the Wings had won, don't you think? That was more about logic than arrogance. Thanks for understanding.

Noted -- but please allow me to present my side of things. Here's what you said: "Cocky"? That seems to imply at least that I was being smug about the Pens winning from here. That's hardly how I feel. Again, I'm merely only referring to the concept of my original post, where I said it wouldn't be such a walkover for Detroit as it was last year. That the series itself would be different -- not necessarily the outcome. Apologies if I didn't communicate that clearly enough.

Could we agree on one thing though, regardless of your opinion of Crosby's reaction? Fact: Maltby hacked Crosby in the back. Fact: there was no call. So maybe the Pens aren't the only team getting the benefit of the non-calls? Just an opinion.

Whoa! Did I notch the Cup for Pens here? Did I say anywhere the Wings are done? Amazing what you read into things. I'm merely commenting of the quality of the series so far. Not to mention how some posters rode me for even claiming the Pens would have a shot. That is all.

So guys... different enough for you this time? Just wondering.

Oh COME ON -- adding "oh that's hockey it happens" is like saying "oh that's gunplay, it happens" after accusing a guy of shooting you. Nothing more than trying to disguise a complaint. Who makes or doesn't make the calls -- the Zamboni driver? Of course he's targeting the refs. I'd rather hear him come outright and scream it rather than try to sound all nonchalant and stuff. At least that'd be honest.

Btw that was "Jake." Don't you think I was OK for just a wee bit of fun after the arrogant stuff that guy posted? I like to think I post like the best play hockey. Honest, aggressive and hard-hitting. Pulling no punches, giving props where due, checking hard when I think someone's full o' crap. If that makes me a troll in some eyes, so be it. Speaking of Jake, where is he now anyway? Seems to have disappeared like vapor.

See, now there's objectivity for you. And yes, both teams got some ref breaks. But they had no more to do with the outcome than the same kind of goofs in the first two games. This time, unlike the other two games, the Pens dominated from the get-go off face-offs. Go look at Crosby's win percentage. THERE'S your NHL conspiracy. And like he said, the last interference was from a player badly out of position.

Like I said, it's your choice. You can have a "discussion forum" as this says, or you can have a collection of cheerleaders who say nothing but sunny things about the team. Call it the "Wings Cheerleading Squad" or better yet, the "Red Wings Roses and Gummy Bears Doll House." It's your choice.

Is that any different from the refs missing the laughably obvious pick Detroit set on the PP, in front of everyone, including the announcers who called them out for it? Talk about blinders. You want to believe the theory, fine, but don't just think it's because one team's getting all the calls. That's just a sneaky way of whining about losing -- oh, it's the LEAGUE that's to blame for my team losing, not my precious team! They never lose fair and square!

If you're referring to Malkin I'm afraid you're a little off course. Most superstars do get different treatment "above" the rules. A lot of people who screaming for Ovechkin to pay the price when he kneed Gonchar. Yeah, fat chance. Last I looked Ovechkin didn't play for the Pens. Believe me, had Franzen been in Malkin's place, he'd have suited up last night too. This conspiracy thing is what's REALLY nutty here.

What's so hard to understand here? His "clutchness" is exactly the point -- his blow-up was uncharacteristic for a guy who's been seemingly unflappable vs. the Pens in the past. That, combined with him allowing what I felt was the first weak goal I can remember. And did you not note my phrasing of this as a QUESTION? As in, "is he?" not "he is." It was only a stepping-off point for debate. Or is this not a "discussion" forum any longer?

Why hate? The experience advantage is something I've awarded to Detroit long ago. That basically decided the series last year, this year... not as much, but still no comparison between the teams. Just IMHO -- the first game, the loss of cool was bad for the team. The second, not so much -- I believe Malkin's blow-up was needed to get the team going for game 3.

Read the last sentence of my post again, and you'll see I'm well aware of this possibility.

Shame you feel that way. To me the word "troll" is overdone, usually meaning "somebody who doesn't get all butt-kissy about my team when he visits and dares to have an opposing point of view." I've paid your team plenty of compliments, but let me ask you -- have I ever tried to hide which side I'm on? I'm no more here to express my opinions than I am to blow smoke up your behinds. I congratulate the opponent when I feel it's justified, just as I don't hesitate to attack when I feel that's warranted. Do I want Osgood and the Wings to fail miserably? Of course. Do I hide or disguise the fact -- no. Just as you hope the same for the opposition. What's the prob? If your mods decide to ban me eventually, as some have been calling for, that speaks more poorly for your forum than anything I can ever say. And fine, get upset with me, boot me -- but if you do, please don't call this a "discussion forum". Be honest and call it what it is -- a cheerleading forum, an admiration society, anything but discussion -- because discussion says debate, and debate says opposing viewpoints allowed. There -- I've had my words on the issue too. Thanks for stating your case. P.S. If this bit about Osgood and the grounds worker does come out in the media, will you admit I've contributed something mightily to this forum?

Touché.

You know that's an excellent point. Fleury (whom I hope can join the ranks of the above someday) is a little eccentric too. Seems to go wit the territory. And no, no pattern yet -- can you blame me for hoping though?

Osgood has as much chance of being suspended as Malkin. Yes, even the best allow a bad one now and then. It just seems especially rare with Osgood in playoff situations. Or do I not watch enough Wings' hockey?

What's ridiculous is your banning of free speech suggestion, for "erroneousnous." Did you catch Babcock's conference? First he called out a Pens' "unnamed" player he claimed committed the same infraction 4 times. That's not complaining about not getting calls? Then he sneaked in some dig about how the Wings should've gotten more PP opportunites in the final period. His post-game remarks were basically all about the calls. Frankly I found it beneath him.

It's a matter of body position. If Gill's meeting him chest on chest, as happened, he's entitled to hold his space. The Detroit interference, on the other hand, involved a player clearly beaten to a SIDE, grabbing out to stop the player. That's your difference. Regards, Professor Penguin Rulesmaster