Comparing the 2009 Cup Champ to the 2008 Runner-Up

Matt Bodenschatz | Pittsburgh Penguins

Jul 15, 12:21 PM | Hype this story!
With more than a move removed from the Stanley Cup Finals, news in the world of hockey is a bit scarce.  So I’ve decided to do a roster comparison (excluding scratched players) of the 2009 Stanley Cup Champion Penguins and the 2008 Stanley Cup runner-up Penguins.  Please feel free too add your own comparisons or comments below.

And now on to the analysis.
 
Offense
 
Kunitz – Crosby – Guerin VS. Dupuis – Crosby – Hossa
Winner: Kunitz – Crosby – Guerin

Sure, Marian Hossa is a superstar and Bill Guerin is on the decline, but there was just something about the 2009 first line that brought out the best in Sidney Crosby.  Maybe it was the physical barrage initiated by Kunitz and mimicked by Guerin.  Maybe it was the big-brother personality of Guerin and his relationship with Crosby.  Maybe it was Crosby not wanting to be in "that picture" again.  Or maybe it was a combination of all three.  And the exciting part is that all three will return for another season.
 
Fedotenko – Malkin – Talbot VS. Malone – Malkin – Sykora
Winner: Malone – Malkin – Sykora

Both versions of the second line came up big when the team needed it.  But there was something special about the Malone-Malkin-Sykora line that just wasn’t replicated. Ryan Malone brought a front-net presence that remains non-existent in Pittsburgh, while Petr Sykora’s abilities as a true sniper aren’t matched by either of Ruslan Fedotenko or Max Talbot.  No offense to Fedotenko, who had a strong playoff performance, or Talbot, who scored both goals in Game Seven, but the Malone-Malkin-Sykora line simply was better. 
 
Cooke – Staal – Kennedy VS. Ruutu – Staal – Kennedy
Winner: Cooke – Staal – Kennedy

When Jarkko Ruutu left via free agency, a gaping hole was left on the third line.  It was a hole few thought would be easily replaced.  Matt Cooke stepped in and not only matched Ruutu’s contributions, but surpassed them, adding a level of physicality the team badly needed.  With the growth of Jordan Staal and Tyler Kennedy, this line went from being considered a third unit to performing as well as many teams’ second lines.  And, just like the first line, all three players will be back for another year, though the line may be broken up if one of the players should get a promotion to the second line.
 
Dupuis – Adams – Satan VS. Hall – Talbot – Laraque
Winner: Tie

At first glance, the 2009 version of the fourth line may seem significantly better, as both wingers started the season on the first line, flanking Crosby.  But, while they were an effective group — oftentimes, surprisingly — they lacked the physicality and puck control skills possessed by the 2008 version of the line.  Neither version of the line was counted on to score goals, but both found ways to do so on occasion, while still filling a defensive role.  These lines compare quite nicely, despite a complete contrast in styles: grinding physicality in 2008 and speed in 2009.
 
Defense
 
Orpik – Gonchar VS. Orpik – Gonchar
Winner: Orpik – Gonchar (circa 2008)

This one is pretty simple.  In 2008, Sergei Gonchar and Brooks Orpik had career years.  For Gonchar, he shed the tag of being an offense-only defender.  For Orpik, he climbed out of a regular season doghouse that saw him play wing on one occasion and became a top-pairing defender.  In 2009, Gonchar suffered two major injuries, one that sidelined him for more than half of the regular season, and another that left him far less than 100 percent in the playoffs, while Orpik’s defensive play dipped slightly.  Had Gonchar been healthy for a full season, I suspect we would have seen a comparable, if not better, top pairing than 2008.
 
Gill – Scuderi VS. Gill – Scuderi
Winner: Gill – Scuderi (circa 2009)

This is a pretty difficult comparison, as both versions of this pairing were solid.  What tips the scales, though, is the way Hal Gill and Rob Scuderi were used in 2009.  In the first round of the playoffs, Gill and Scuderi matched up against Flyers star Jeff Carter and shut him down.  They then focused on Capitals sniper Alex Ovechkin, limiting his effectiveness in many situations.  Against the Hurricanes in the Conference Finals, this duo crossed out Eric Staal.  And, in the Finals, Marian Hossa was rendered useless by means of shadowing.  Gill and Scuderi were trusted with the heavy responsibility of shutting down the oppositions’ top players.  And they did it well.  They will be missed.
 
Letang – Eaton VS. Whitney – Letang
Winner: Letang – Eaton

Ryan Whitney never really lived up to his hype in Pittsburgh as a solid defenseman.  In fact, he often brought down his defensive partner.  Mark Eaton, on the other hand, complimented Kris Letang quite well, forming a pairing that not only played strong defense, but also contributed heavily to the team’s smooth transition game and to the offense. 
 
Goalies
 
Fleury – Garon VS. Fleury – Conklin
Winner: Fleury – Conklin

It may seem strange to reason that the goaltending duo that won the Stanley Cup isn’t as good as the duo that lost the Stanley Cup one year earlier.  But it’s the truth.  Marc-Andre Fleury had an epic season in 2008, often carrying the Penguins in the playoffs with big saves and consistent play.  That wasn’t necessarily the case in 2009, when he found himself riding the pine in Game Five of the Stanley Cup Finals after giving up a slew of goals.  He rebounded nicely in Games Six and Seven, but his body of work just didn’t compare to that of 2008.

Comments

  1. REBEL

    Jul 15, 12:53 PM

    Matt, I agree with most of your analysis. However, I think that Orpik continued to play very strongly. He had to shoulder much more responsibility due to the injuries to Gonchar, and did so admirably. He continues to evolve and improve his overall game in my view.

    While it is true that Fleury is at times inconsistent, he responds with a more determined effort the next game. Let’s be fair concerning game 5—yes, he was not that good, but the entire team was terrible. Patrick Roy, Martin Brodeur, or some combination thereof could not have won that game. Finally, Fleury stole game 7 in the last few seconds. His save as time expired was just incredible—what do you think would have happened if that had gone to overtime? Great players come up big when they need to, and I think Fleury has taken a step forward, and for me that makes him better than last year.

  2. Albert

    Jul 15, 01:01 PM

    Excellent analysis, MB.

    Esp. agree on your 2nd line assessment, and that the Penguins are STILL lacking the net-front presence that Malone provided.

    Hopefully, Tangradi or someone else in the system can provide that in 2010-11 OR Shero can pull one more rabbit out of the hat at this year’s trade deadline.

  3. Matt Bodenschatz

    Jul 15, 01:04 PM

    @Rebel, my view of Orpik may well be skewed by Gonchar’s injury, which forced Orpik to shoulder more of the load, as you said. Very good point.

    Regarding Fleury, you won’t find a stronger supporter than I am of him. But Fleury’s overall game wasn’t as strong as it was one year ago. He came up bigger in the clutch, yes. But he wasn’t the stone wall we saw in 2008. Regardless, the Cup win should and hopefully will erase the negative labels that often have followed him. He’s a gamer, for sure, and one of the youngest goalies ever to win the Cup.

    @Albert, Tangradi or Caputi may well develop into a Malone-type player, and your timeframe is very realistic for such development.

  4. Dabich

    Jul 15, 02:08 PM

    You did it aggain, made me miss Bugsy and Scuds… :(

  5. Mr. Colby

    Jul 15, 03:55 PM

    Wasn’t the 4th line for the majority of the 2008 playoffs Talbot-Hall-Roberts? Laraque was usually scratched.

    Anyway, I’d say the 4th line was better in 2008. They were a lot more physical and better defensively.

    I think the major differences between seasons were the upgrade of the 1st line, the EXTREME upgrade of the 3rd line, and the upgrade of the 2nd and 3rd D-pairings. Scuderi-Gill was a major major component as we know, but Letang-Eaton came up very big for us in the playoffs, both ends of the ice.

  6. Matt Bodenschatz

    Jul 15, 04:32 PM

    @Mr. Colby, yes, he was, but I went with the lineups used during the Finals as comparisons, as they are the combinations the coaches settled with on the biggest stage.

    I guess the fourth line comparison depends on how you look at it. This year’s version wasn’t nearly as physical or defensive, but the fleet-footed skaters allowed the m to focus on an offensive approach rather than a cycling/defensive approach. I prefer the physical style of last year’s fourth line, but this year’s combination certainly wasn’t bad.

    I think, in general, the upgrade came in that the young players had one more year of experience and had been through a losing situation in the Cup Finals. The determination was there all that much more than it was just a year earlier.

  7. Kel Varnsen

    Jul 15, 05:36 PM

    First line was better this year but not by much. Hossa-Crosby was awesome in last year’s playoffs. But despite that, I agree that the line overall was more balanced this year and able to do a little more and thus a better line.

    I’m going to disagree on the second line in that the improvement of Malkin (and Fedotenko’s outstanding playoff performance) trumps the line from last year. In writing, last year’s line was better, but whereas the line disappeared as a whole last year in the finals because Malkin disappeared, this year, the line remained strong to the end because of his stellar (and Conn Smythe worthy) performance. So on paper, last year’s line but in actuality, this years.

    Third line was much better this year. All three components were better than last year with Cooke rather than Ruutu and Staal and Kennedy improving.

    And again, I’ll take this year’s fourth line because of the style of play was superior to last years. Last year’s line may have been “more physical” but this year’s line put more pressure on the other team. Combine this with the fact that the “4th” line sometimes included Crosby or Malkin (Therrien never really did that) and you’ve got a better line. It’s close, but I’ll take 09 line any day over a line featuring Laraque.

    D-Pairing assessment was spot on except I thought Orpik still played well but it wasn’t as apparent because Gonchar was hobbled.

    This year’s “shutdown” pair was better

    and with letang’s improvement and the defensive presence of eaton, this year’s 3rd pairing was better than the Whitney-Sydor* pair last year…remember letang got yanked in the finals last year.

    On another note, I think our D this year will be better then either of the two because of the puck moving dman on each pair and the up-tempo system.

    Fleury was close, but i’d agree he was a little better last year although the big saves this year stand out more because we won the cup (on carter round 1, Ovechkin round 2, and Cleary on the breakaway and lidstrom at the end in the finals). But overall, he was “stronger” last year, perhaps because the teams we faced up until detroit were not as offensively gifted as this years Flyers, Caps, and Canes.

    Anyways, good stuff!

  8. REBEL

    Jul 15, 08:54 PM

    Kel, I agree completely with your assessment. I think Malkin’s growth as a player was apparent and made his line a bit better than last year’s 2nd line. I posted this before, but I think he will have a “break out” year this year. Yeah, I know he won the Art Ross and Conn Smythe, but he is just beginning to figure out what it takes to bring his “A” game every night. We watched that process with Ryan Malone—he could be maddeningly ineffective one night and a monster the next. But his last year here he really put it all together and came to play every game.

    I agree Fleury was a bit more unpredictable in his level of play, but he never had two bad games in a row, and he did NOT let the pressure of the playoffs get to him. He was mentally stronger, and therefore I feel he was better this year than last. As you so aptly put it, he looked better on paper last year, but in truth he was better this year. That save on Lidstrom was phenomenal—“the Immaculate Rejection” as some have said. It would have been easy to fold while the rest of the team “turtled” the last 10 minutes.

  9. Matt Bodenschatz

    Jul 15, 11:02 PM

    @Kel, strong assesment. It’s great how we all watch the same game, yet get different outlooks. That’s what makes these discussions fun!

    @Rebel, I wouldn’t be surprised to see both Malkin and Crosby have career years. The confidence will be oozing from both of them.

  10. DS

    Jul 16, 04:07 AM

    re: Gill and Scuderi, all I can remember is when MT put them together for the Rangers series in 2008, I think we all kind of cringed and went “wait, what?? why?!?“ and it just amused me that despite all the upheaval between last year’s playoffs and this time, it proved to be a valid enough assessment to work even better this year.

    I’m thrilled for Fleury, and there’s no question that he deserves, was critically integral to, and will benefit immensely from winning this Cup, but the simplest way to frame it is:

    Was he a Conn Smythe candidate last year?: Yes.

    Was he a Conn Smythe candidate this year?: No.

    Did he have the worst stats for a Cup-winning goalie since 1992?...Yes.

    There was an absolute solidity and sureness to his game last year that (Game 4 in Philly excepted, and that was *all* 29 vs. the Flyers) I never felt this year. I kept expecting other teams to score this year, when I never did last year. And say what you want about facing improved offensive teams this time, but there are stats showing that the quality of shots MAF faced this season was still mostly easier, not harder. Even he wasn’t happy with the Caps series, robbing Ovechkin blind or not. (and the puckhandling is its own topic.)

    I’m hoping we see a little bit more of 2008 Fleury in 2010.

  11. DS

    Jul 16, 07:22 PM

    Tom, I hate to break it to you, but I specifically remember that when Gill and Scuderi were originally paired, the specific reasoning given was that it would basically force Whitney and Letang to focus on their defense.

    I don’t think it was Whitney and Letang who were intended to be the shutdown pair. Whitney’s finest defensive moment was undoubtedly the ~approx. 50 minutes he had to play when the Pens only had 5 D after Gonch was hurt in the marathon Game 5, but that was when Letang wasn’t even there.

  12. Bruce Hollingdrake

    Jul 17, 10:29 PM

    Terrific comparison – I’ve not really seen this done before. Might be an idea for a piece next mid-season for each team. Think I’ll ask the writers on our site if their up to it? I’ll Tweet this post a little later tonight!

Commenting is closed for this article.