Brandy Has Never Tasted So Good: Pittsburgh beats Detroit 4 Games to 3 (Stanley Cup Review)
It's taken a few days for reality to set in: the Pittsburgh Penguins are the 2009 NHL Champions. They became the second team in NHL history to lose the first two games on the road and come back and win the Cup. (Montreal lost the first two at Chicago Stadium in 1971 before winning Game 7 there—thirty other teams have failed to do so.) They were the first team in any professional sport to win a Game 7 on the road, since the 1979 "We Are Family" Pittsburgh Pirates team won the World Series in Baltimore. Most amazingly, they became the first NHL team to win the Stanley Cup after overcoming 2 games to none deficits in two separate series.
Looking back further, on February 16, the Penguins lost then "interim" coach Dan Bylsma's first game on Long Island, 2-1 in a shootout. They were in 10th place in the Eastern Conference, 5 points out of the last playoff spot, and in bad shape. Little did any Penguins fan know, the team would go 18-3-4 in their final 25 games under Coach Bylsma and make the playoffs as the #4 seed.
So, how did that team win the Stanley Cup?
The short answer is that, for four games, they were the better team than Detroit. Abel to Yzerman may be unwilling to say it—but it's the truth. In those four game, the Penguins won with superior goaltending, defense, special teams and depth. That I'm not crediting the Penguins' offense outright is a testament to how well Chris Osgood played in net for Detroit, and how well Detroit shut down Pittsburgh's best players throughout the series.
Let's break down those four factors and see how they won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh.
Goaltending: Marc Andre Fleury (happy Slak?) played exceptionally well in the two biggest games of his career—Games 6 and 7. With Detroit playing exceptional defense against Pittsburgh's top two lines—limiting Evgeni Malkin to one assist in the last two games and keeping Sidney Crosby off the scoresheet altogether, the Penguins were only going to win if Fleury was at his best, and he was, all the way to the last second when he sprawled to stop Nic Lidstrom's wrister that was ticketed for the back of the net.
While Fleury had a rough game in Game 5, and a GAA and Save% that was not spectacular throughout the playoffs, he made every big save when he needed to make it. In Game 2 of the first round against the Philadelphia Flyers, he didn't give up on a play and stopped Mike Richards from scoring into an otherwise open net with what a good friend dubbed the "toe of destiny." In Game 7 of the second round against the Washington Captials, Fleury robbed Alexander Ovechkin, who was on a clean breakaway minutes into the game, blind with his glove. In Game 6 against Detroit, Fleury stopped Dan Cleary, also on a clean breakaway, with a save virtually identical to the one he made on Ovechkin, to preserve a 2-1 lead. And then in Game 7, he stopped Lidstrom's last-second shot.
A lot of people questioned Fleury's ability to "win the big game," to be a "franchise goalie." To those people: if you took a drink out of a fake Stanley Cup—or anything when the Penguins won—I hope there was some bitterness in that drink.
Defense: The Penguins' defense was hardly perfect in the series, but at the same time, you didn't hear "an awful giveaway by Scuderi (or Eaton or Gill, etc.)" the same way you heard "and a giveaway by Stuart." Brad Stuart turning the puck over would've been a great thing to add to the drinking game, now that I think about it. For all of the credit that Detroit's defense rightfully gets for shutting down Crosby and Malkin, the Penguins' defense deserves as much credit for keeping Marian Hossa and Pavel Datsyuk out of the goal-scoring column, and limiting Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzen to two goals each.
Rob Scuderi's inspired play at the end of Game 6, blocking three shots that would've surely tied the game until a down-and-out Fleury could make the save, will go down as the highlight reel footage, representative of the Penguins' defense commitment to winning. The Penguins' defense also did a great job of playing disciplined hockey—even in the disastrous Game 5, only one of Pittsburgh's penalties was attributed to a defenseman. Hal Gill had two penalty minutes the entire series...what else is there to say?
Special Teams: The Penguins converted 4/12 power plays, and tallied a shorthanded goal—a goal that turned Game 4, and perhaps the series. Detroit was 4/23 on the power play, with no shorthanded goals. Of course, Abel to Yzerman (link above) would have you believe that the Penguins won—not because they were the better team in four games and had the superior special teams—but because Detroit was disadvantaged by "injuries and officiating."
The injury reports will be interesting in the next few days, but we know that the Penguins' Sergei Gonchar was playing with a partially torn MCL, courtesy of Alex Ovechkin's dirty, total lack of regard for anyone he plays against. Rumor is that Nic Lidstrom was feeling the ill effects of a Patrick Sharp ball tap. The Penguins' Kris Letang was apparently dealing with a "serious" injury as well. It might have been a different series had some players been healthier than they were, but expecting key players to be healthy in the Stanley Cup Finals isn't realistic in a game that is as grueling, as physical, and demanding as hockey.
As for the officiating—it's good to know that I was right, that Red Wings fans have a European (or perhaps, now even American/Michigan-ian?) sense of entitlement when it comes to officiating. Apparently, 9 more power plays in a series isn't enough welfare from the NHL officials to placate a fan base that, anymore, must expect anyone with power to bail them out. I can't imagine how disempowering that feeling of helplessness is—but I think it's something akin to what Marian Hossa must be feeling, having skated on the wrong side of a handshake line for two seasons in a row.
If only the Red Wings could have bailed themselves out on the penalty kill—a 67% kill rate is hardly the work of Stanley Cup Champions. Detroit should be fortunate that more penalties weren't called on them—there were plenty of whistles, and two penalty shots, that could've been blown, that weren't. If 9 more power plays than the other team aren't enough to win the Stanley Cup, then you don't deserve the Stanley Cup, and you sure as hell weren't the "better team."
Depth: In the first two games of the series, Detroit's Justin Abdelkader provided key goals to extend Detroit's lead to two, late in the game. The storyline ran that Detroit was the deeper team—getting scoring from its depth while the Penguins couldn't even get scoring from its top lines.
As the series progressed, the Penguins got key goals in Games 4 and 6 from Jordan Staal and Tyler Kennedy, and in Games 3 and 7, Max Talbot scored twice. By the end of the series, it was not Hossa, or Zetterberg, or Datsyuk, or Malkin or Crosby that decided it—it was the depth of the Penguins that outplayed the depth of Detroit.
The deeper team—the better team—won the Stanley Cup.
Looking back further, on February 16, the Penguins lost then "interim" coach Dan Bylsma's first game on Long Island, 2-1 in a shootout. They were in 10th place in the Eastern Conference, 5 points out of the last playoff spot, and in bad shape. Little did any Penguins fan know, the team would go 18-3-4 in their final 25 games under Coach Bylsma and make the playoffs as the #4 seed.
So, how did that team win the Stanley Cup?
The short answer is that, for four games, they were the better team than Detroit. Abel to Yzerman may be unwilling to say it—but it's the truth. In those four game, the Penguins won with superior goaltending, defense, special teams and depth. That I'm not crediting the Penguins' offense outright is a testament to how well Chris Osgood played in net for Detroit, and how well Detroit shut down Pittsburgh's best players throughout the series.
Let's break down those four factors and see how they won the Stanley Cup for Pittsburgh.
Goaltending: Marc Andre Fleury (happy Slak?) played exceptionally well in the two biggest games of his career—Games 6 and 7. With Detroit playing exceptional defense against Pittsburgh's top two lines—limiting Evgeni Malkin to one assist in the last two games and keeping Sidney Crosby off the scoresheet altogether, the Penguins were only going to win if Fleury was at his best, and he was, all the way to the last second when he sprawled to stop Nic Lidstrom's wrister that was ticketed for the back of the net.
While Fleury had a rough game in Game 5, and a GAA and Save% that was not spectacular throughout the playoffs, he made every big save when he needed to make it. In Game 2 of the first round against the Philadelphia Flyers, he didn't give up on a play and stopped Mike Richards from scoring into an otherwise open net with what a good friend dubbed the "toe of destiny." In Game 7 of the second round against the Washington Captials, Fleury robbed Alexander Ovechkin, who was on a clean breakaway minutes into the game, blind with his glove. In Game 6 against Detroit, Fleury stopped Dan Cleary, also on a clean breakaway, with a save virtually identical to the one he made on Ovechkin, to preserve a 2-1 lead. And then in Game 7, he stopped Lidstrom's last-second shot.
A lot of people questioned Fleury's ability to "win the big game," to be a "franchise goalie." To those people: if you took a drink out of a fake Stanley Cup—or anything when the Penguins won—I hope there was some bitterness in that drink.
Defense: The Penguins' defense was hardly perfect in the series, but at the same time, you didn't hear "an awful giveaway by Scuderi (or Eaton or Gill, etc.)" the same way you heard "and a giveaway by Stuart." Brad Stuart turning the puck over would've been a great thing to add to the drinking game, now that I think about it. For all of the credit that Detroit's defense rightfully gets for shutting down Crosby and Malkin, the Penguins' defense deserves as much credit for keeping Marian Hossa and Pavel Datsyuk out of the goal-scoring column, and limiting Henrik Zetterberg and Johan Franzen to two goals each.
Rob Scuderi's inspired play at the end of Game 6, blocking three shots that would've surely tied the game until a down-and-out Fleury could make the save, will go down as the highlight reel footage, representative of the Penguins' defense commitment to winning. The Penguins' defense also did a great job of playing disciplined hockey—even in the disastrous Game 5, only one of Pittsburgh's penalties was attributed to a defenseman. Hal Gill had two penalty minutes the entire series...what else is there to say?
Special Teams: The Penguins converted 4/12 power plays, and tallied a shorthanded goal—a goal that turned Game 4, and perhaps the series. Detroit was 4/23 on the power play, with no shorthanded goals. Of course, Abel to Yzerman (link above) would have you believe that the Penguins won—not because they were the better team in four games and had the superior special teams—but because Detroit was disadvantaged by "injuries and officiating."
The injury reports will be interesting in the next few days, but we know that the Penguins' Sergei Gonchar was playing with a partially torn MCL, courtesy of Alex Ovechkin's dirty, total lack of regard for anyone he plays against. Rumor is that Nic Lidstrom was feeling the ill effects of a Patrick Sharp ball tap. The Penguins' Kris Letang was apparently dealing with a "serious" injury as well. It might have been a different series had some players been healthier than they were, but expecting key players to be healthy in the Stanley Cup Finals isn't realistic in a game that is as grueling, as physical, and demanding as hockey.
As for the officiating—it's good to know that I was right, that Red Wings fans have a European (or perhaps, now even American/Michigan-ian?) sense of entitlement when it comes to officiating. Apparently, 9 more power plays in a series isn't enough welfare from the NHL officials to placate a fan base that, anymore, must expect anyone with power to bail them out. I can't imagine how disempowering that feeling of helplessness is—but I think it's something akin to what Marian Hossa must be feeling, having skated on the wrong side of a handshake line for two seasons in a row.
If only the Red Wings could have bailed themselves out on the penalty kill—a 67% kill rate is hardly the work of Stanley Cup Champions. Detroit should be fortunate that more penalties weren't called on them—there were plenty of whistles, and two penalty shots, that could've been blown, that weren't. If 9 more power plays than the other team aren't enough to win the Stanley Cup, then you don't deserve the Stanley Cup, and you sure as hell weren't the "better team."
Depth: In the first two games of the series, Detroit's Justin Abdelkader provided key goals to extend Detroit's lead to two, late in the game. The storyline ran that Detroit was the deeper team—getting scoring from its depth while the Penguins couldn't even get scoring from its top lines.
As the series progressed, the Penguins got key goals in Games 4 and 6 from Jordan Staal and Tyler Kennedy, and in Games 3 and 7, Max Talbot scored twice. By the end of the series, it was not Hossa, or Zetterberg, or Datsyuk, or Malkin or Crosby that decided it—it was the depth of the Penguins that outplayed the depth of Detroit.
The deeper team—the better team—won the Stanley Cup.
Ahh - so much better.
Reply to this