ShareThis Page

Penguins looking to keep their emotions in check this season

| Sunday, Dec. 1, 2013, 8:18 p.m.
The Penguins' Matt Niskanen poke checks the puck away from the Bruins' Reilly Smith in the second period Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2013, at Consol Energy Center.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins' Matt Niskanen poke checks the puck away from the Bruins' Reilly Smith in the second period Wednesday, Oct. 30, 2013, at Consol Energy Center.

SUNRISE, Fla. — Maybe it was a myth, maybe it was reality.

Whatever it was, the Penguins have taken strides to banish it.

There is a perception — it started during the 2012 Stanley Cup playoffs against Philadelphia — that the Penguins can be a temperamental, fragile team, everyone from their superstars to their fourth-liners easily snapping if even moderately incited.

This season's numbers indicate this is changing. The Penguins say it is, and so do their opponents.

“We beat them in the playoffs last year because we played them tough and beat them fair and square,” Boston winger Shawn Thornton said. “We're a big, tough team.

“But we didn't try to annoy them. And they didn't get annoyed. We just beat them.”

The Penguins have acknowledged that other teams, namely the Flyers, previously have agitated them so much that they became distracted. In fact, the Penguins let their emotions get the best of them in 2012 to the point they had three players suspended in Game 3 against the Flyers during the first round of the playoffs.

This season hasn't been without moments of frustration, but lately, the Penguins appear to have adopted a more poised approach. More players are turning away from post-whistle scrums.

“We haven't gotten into those wild games where we feel we've got to beat our chests and prove how tough we are,” defenseman Matt Niskanen said. “We've done a good job of staying away from that.”

The numbers prove Niskanen's claim.

Through 28 games, the Penguins have been shorthanded five or more times in a game only three times.

At the same stage in last year's regular season, the Penguins already had been shorthanded five or more times on seven occasions.

Coach Dan Bylsma is pleased with the poise his team has displayed.

His team has the NHL's seventh-ranked penalty kill after a rough start, and he credits that to his penalty killers being fresh.

“Originally, the number on the penalty kill wasn't strong,” Bylsma said. “But with the discipline that we've shown, it's allowed the PK to be stronger.”

Florida forward Jesse Winchester played for the Ottawa Senators in a hotly-contested first-round playoff series against the Penguins in 2010. He said the Senators never planned to knock the Penguins off their game with after-whistle altercations.

“I never wanted to make guys like Crosby and Malkin mad,” he said. “I mean, if you get under their skin a little bit, and if that throws them off their game, more power to you.

“But from what I've seen over the years, and especially now, they don't really care what you say to them or what's going on after the whistle.”

The Penguins believe this mindset will suit them well moving forward.

“It's good for the penalty kill, and really, it's good for everyone,” Niskanen said.

Mt. Lebanon native Matt Bartkowski, whose Bruins know about beating the Penguins, said attempting to annoy them never was part of the plan last spring.

Perhaps these Penguins have outgrown such talk.

“Of course, you need to be physical with them,” Bartkowski said. “That's a given. But if it used to be easy to get under their skin — maybe it was, maybe it wasn't — it doesn't work anymore.”

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.