I've got to get his minutes up; I've got to get his conditioning up so that he can handle those minutes at high intensity and that's hard to do right now with the schedule and playing every second day but I think down the road that we're going to see a good player in that sense.... I don't think it's a matter of the wind. I think he's a heavier guy than what he should be. He's a big body, and I'd like to get him to be a little bit leaner and I think that's going to really improve his hockey game with a greater level of intensity and keeping the pace and tempo of play.
That's Terry Murray talking about Dustin Penner. Shocking news: Dustin Penner's new coach thinks he's fat and lazy! Okay, that might be exaggerating, but the above did make me chuckle. For what it's worth, Penner's played 16:12 per game with the Kings after playing 18:27 per game with the Oilers.
about 1 year ago
Scott Reynolds
11 comments
0 recs |
Comments
There were often two trains of thought regarding Penner in Edmonton.
1. Penner was a bit of a slacker
2. Penner was a great player who made his line mates better.
I think there needs to be a recognition that both could be true. These comments by Murry as well as similar comments by MacT suggest that to be the case.
I have always been a fan of Penner (even when others were not) and yet I supported the trade (Good return for a year on a contract), but I have always felt that Penner was a much better player in games that were meaningful. Once the Oilers were clearly diving (this year and last), Penner pulled up and slowed down. He was a powerful player with the Ducks when he was in the playoffs. I expected him to tear it up in LA given that he was playing in a playoff race. He has done OK thus far and it will be interesting to see if he ramps it up as the team moves forwards and he gets more comfortable.
Not to mention similar comments from Randy Carlyle too. Penner seems to be a pretty laid back guy and a bit of a joker, which no doubt helps him to get along with teammates, but it could probably frustrate coaches. There may well be something there.
I don’t whether or not you and I have discussed the trade return before, but it’s safe to say that the two us disagree on whether or not it was adequate. I will say that framing it as “a year on a contract” is something of a stretch. If you’d like to talk about it further, I’m happy to, if not, we can let that one go.
In terms of the man’s actual play, I haven’t noticed the “clutch” pattern. Sure, he was good in the playoffs in 2005-06, but he wasn’t any hell in 2006-07, and even took a couple of healthy scratches IIRC. And with the Oilers, he really hasn’t been playing meaningful games at all over the last two years unless you’re referring to the very early parts of the season when “everyone has a chance”, and yet his last two seasons have been his best in Edmonton (IMO). I’m not saying that the man is “unclutch”, just that I haven’t really noticed a pattern either way.
The biggest fanana of the Havana Bananas.
by Scott Reynolds on Mar 19, 2011 9:54 AM MDT up reply actions
I think we should just agree to disagree on the return – saves us both a lot of time.
Yep, I was talking about the early in the season every team has a hope mentality. Last year when the Oilers didn’t pick up a goalie and pretty much announced that they were going to tank the season, Penner’s play took a dive. This season he started reasonably strong only to look disinterested as time passed and the losses mounted.
With that said, its just some speculation and not an opinion I hold strongly about Penner. I guess we will see what happens on the Kings over the next few weeks and playoffs. I don’t really believe in clutch, but I do believe that some players lag a bit when games don’t count at all.
I think Penner has proved the coaches wrong. Frank Mahovlich syndrome. The coaches just have never had a player like Penner. He is somewhat unique, especially in terms of size and personality and hockey origin, a self-made gentle giant. And some coaches automatically want to turn him into what he isn’t, rather than accept him for what he is.
Quinn just let Penner be. Took the player that was there and accepted the oddly sized pegged, and didn’t try polishing it into a conventional round or square peg.
Penner found a way that works for him against all the odds. I think coaches were be better off not fighting the big gift from God when it lands in their lap.
I like the square/round peg reference, however…
Penner is not a “Gift from god” by any means.
by One_Roy_Save_On_The_Calendar on Mar 20, 2011 3:22 AM MDT up reply actions
Quinn let him be because he came flying out of the gate.
I like Penner but I think there’s lots of ways he can get better. I don’t think anyone will argue that when he’s got possession of the puck and is taking it to the net he can be a dominant player.
Despite the fact that he’s still a good player when he doesn’t do it all the time, I think he’d be an even better player if he did it more often.
I think that’s what coaches get on him for. They see what he can do at his very best and they want it from him all the time.
In theory, there is little difference between practice and theory, but in practice there is!
Sam Gagner tried being bigger, putting on more muscle, to satisfy the “experts”, and it made him slower and less effective.
Penner is an odd body, a giant, and the “experts” look at that body and want him to lean down, thinking it will make him better. But they are wrong. Mike Keenan would solve the “Penner” problem by just playing him 25 minutes a game. I think Sather would have done much the same. You change a player like Penner by “breaking” him on the ice, not off the ice. Coaches have been telling Penner his entire life that he wasn’t good enough to play hockey, and yet he is playing hockey. A smart coach like Keenan or Sather would find a way for Penner to find his own way to be better, like he has found his own way his entire life. Some players don’t need “coaching”. They just need challenges.

























