ShareThis Page

Penguins hoping substance matches style in quest for Cup

| Monday, Sept. 30, 2013, 12:36 p.m.

The Penguins' forwards can dazzle the opposition on most nights, earning style points like perhaps no team during this generation.

But does enough substance exist from this group to propel the Penguins to another Stanley Cup?

“I sure hope so,” left wing Tanner Glass said. “And I think so.”

The Penguins entered the 2012 and '13 postseasons as an offensive juggernaut seemingly capable of winning Stanley Cup titles the way Wayne Gretzky's Oilers and Mario Lemieux's Penguins did, by outscoring teams. This era of NHL hockey, though, requires more than unmatched skill. And the Penguins know it.

All of the Penguins' talent — and they scored a whopping 26 goals in six games against the Flyers — wasn't enough to win that series.

One year later, the Boston Bruins shut down Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin in a remarkable display, holding both players pointless for the series. When the stars didn't perform, it was clear the Penguins were done, as Boston's role players badly outplayed the Penguins' third and fourth liners.

“We learned some lessons from that series,” right wing Pascal Dupuis said.

Entering the 2013-14 campaign, scoring goals doesn't appear a significant problem for these Penguins. They've led the NHL in scoring the past two regular seasons and are a good bet to make it a trifecta.

Crosby is universally regarded as the game's finest player and he will be flanked by wingers Chris Kunitz and Dupuis, both of whom use a simple style that complements the star center seamlessly.

“You could see it after the first day of practice,” defenseman Matt Niskanen said. “Those guys were flying, in midseason form.”

The Penguins' second line likely would be the top line of any other NHL team.

Malkin is healthy after dealing with nagging injuries last season, and right wing James Neal enjoyed a terrific training camp and is coming off two seasons that saw him among the NHL leaders in goals. The duo will be joined either by Jussi Jokinen, who has displayed a penchant for playing well with skilled players, or talented youngster Beau Bennett, whose slick passing has impressed Malkin and Neal.

But what about the third and fourth lines?

Center Brandon Sutter, coming off an adequate if unspectacular season, is a lock to man the third line. Veterans Craig Adams and Joe Vitale figure to see most of their time on the fourth line. Otherwise, the bottom two lines remain a mystery.

Either Bennett or Jokinen will play on the third line when not on Malkin's unit. The likes of Matt D'Agostini, Chuck Kobasew, Glass and Dustin Jeffrey will battle for the other positions.

“I think we have a lot of good players for those lines, guys who can make it work,” assistant coach Tony Granato said.

“But we're still in the process of seeing who the best fits are.”

On paper, the Penguins are exquisitely skilled and not particularly gritty. General manager Ray Shero and coach Dan Bylsma have long maintained that they prefer the Penguins be “difficult to play against,” which means they prefer to employ physical, gritty players.

Time will tell if this lineup is equipped for playoff success. For all of the duo's dominance in the 2009 postseason, Crosby and Malkin were hardly unstoppable against Detroit in the Stanley Cup Final. It took a whole team – and a versatile group of forwards – to win hockey's Holy Grail.

“We've all worked hard to be better this season,” Vitale said. “We're hungry to be better than last year.”

Josh Yohe is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @JoshYohe_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.