Penguins have been winning by getting to their game
For the Penguins, each Stanley Cup playoff series has been a "race to four," and they've only won three because of finding a way to "get to their game."
Winger Chris Kunitz said Thursday those signature lines - "race..." introduced by Bylsma before the playoffs and "... game" a few days after he replaced former coach Michel Therrien on Feb. 15 - go hand-in-hand.
"You're not going to win the race if you don't play the game you need to play," Kunitz said before Game 4 of the Stanley Cup Final against the Detroit Red Wings.
A team-wide commitment to systematic patience had, at times through three Final games, allowed the Red Wings to keep the Penguins from getting to their game. That success - noticeable most for a 30-minute stretch in Game 3 on Tuesday - had forced Kunitz and linemates Sidney Crosby and Bill Guerin to spend extra hours studying film of the Red Wings' defensive system.
Of that trio, only Crosby has recorded a Final point - a secondary assist Tuesday on the power play.
Yesterday, Kunitz detailed the manner the Red Wings had gone about taking a 2-1 lead in this "race to four."
"They sit three guys back and have good back-pressure, things that make (passes) not look open for you," he said. "You want to make a play and do something different, and that takes you out of your structure. We've talked about just sticking with our game plan, getting pucks behind (Detroit skaters) and going to get them."
To win the big race, the Penguins must start claiming those little ones.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.