ShareThis Page

Pair of wins to break skid haven't satisfied Penguins' quest for better play

Chris Adamski
| Tuesday, March 6, 2018, 7:42 p.m.

The Penguins' losing streak is over. But a pair of wins over the past four days hasn't satiated coach Mike Sullivan's desire for better play from his team.

"We were certainly pleased with the result we got (Monday)," Sullivan said after practice Tuesday, "but certainly not satisfied with the type of game we played. And that was the message to our team (Tuesday) morning – let's not be fooled by the score."

Monday's 4-3 victory against the Flames happened despite Calgary a 64-46 advantage in even-strength shot attempts. It also occurred in overtime, just like Saturday's 3-2 victory against the New York Islanders.

Hey, each still sure beats allowing 17 goals over the three-game losing streak that preceded those wins. But the Penguins are wise not to let earning two points – nice as that is – cloud the prism through which they evaluate their play.

"We are probably giving up more (chances) than we would like," captain Sidney Crosby said. "We gave up some odd-man rushes, and defensively we think we can tighten things up a bit. And I think if we do that, the goals will come.

"The most important thing this time of year is urgency and details. That's the stuff that really shows that's what separates you down the stretch here."

Sullivan said the message for the Tuesday morning film study of Monday's game centered around the abundance of scoring chances Calgary got.

The Penguins have allowed an average of 34 shots on goal against over their past 16 games, allowing at least 32 shots in 12 of those games.

"It's about attention to detail, it's about commitment to playing the game the right way," Sullivan said. "I know that this group is capable of playing that way, and when this group does, we get consistent results."

Chris Adamski is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach him at or via Twitter @C_AdamskiTrib.

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.

click me