Sidney Crosby vs. Patrice Bergeron is a bad matchup on ice.
And if I were to all-out Dr. Seuss this, I'd add that that it is a bad matchup in the offensive zone. It is a bad matchup in the defensive zone. It is a bad matchup in the faceoff circle. It is a bad matchup in a box. It is a bad matchup with a fox.
It is a bad matchup here and there. It is a bad matchup everywhere.
Honestly, I haven't got much more to offer toward picking apart the Penguins' 3-1 throttling at the Bruins' hands on this Tuesday night at PPG Paints Arena. Tuukka Rask was tremendous, the home team couldn't poke through the force field around him regardless, and the third-period breakthrough that went the home team's way Sunday didn't in this one.
Also, that bad matchup.
Following that 1-0 positive outcome Sunday, I posited this very thing. But only after I'd asked Mike Sullivan why he clearly prefers this matchup, given that he's got the last change here and could send out ... oh, anyone other than his valued top unit of Crosby, Jake Guentzel and Bryan Rust.
"Well, I've used Sid's line against other teams' top lines my whole tenure here," he began his reply. "We don't get totally locked into it and, sometimes, circumstances in games may change that match, depending on if we're defending a lead, chasing a lead, things of that nature. But I've always believed that Sid and his linemates, whoever they are, can play against anybody. They're a solid defensive line, but they also have the ability to score goals. So there are benefits to it."
Getting specific about the present, he added, "When you look at Sid with Jake and Rusty, both Jake and Rusty are two-way players. They have a good defensive conscience. And they have the ability to score goals. So, like I said, it all depends on circumstances, how the game plays out."
Slight pause.
"I've never been one to shy away from playing Sid against anybody. I just think he's that good."
That's not an opinion. Crosby's met challenges of all scopes throughout his brilliant career. And of course he's that good.
But I didn't hear an actual reason to match him up against Bergeron anywhere in there, did you?
Whereas ...
... yeah, that.
That's Marchand slamming home the winner at 9:11 of the third. Right down Mulberry Street.
Go right ahead and fault Tristan Jarry for the awkward rebound or Cody Ceci for failing to box out Marchand or, not pictured, Guentzel being beaten on the rush in the neutral zone. It's still just one goal and, thus, an immaterial sample size.
But this was the full game of Crosby vs. Bergeron at five-on-five:
• Ice time: 7:12
• Shot attempts: Bruins, 15-3
• Shots on goal: 11-1
• Goals: 1-0
• Faceoffs: Bergeron, 19-11
And wait, this was the full season, now that the teams' eight-game series is complete:
• Ice time: 59:07
• Shot attempts: Bruins, 63-29
• Shots on goal: 44-17
• Goals: 4-0
• Faceoffs: Bergeron, 69-37
I mean ... does any of that require commentary?
If you're recalling that it was Crosby's line that scored the lone goal Sunday, I'll remind that came against Boston's fourth line that'd just gotten stuck on the rink following an icing. And even in that one, the Bruins led in shot attempts, 9-5, when Crosby and Bergeron went head-to-head.
It does not work.
What's more, it does not make sense.
Not against the Bruins, should these teams meet again in the playoffs. Not against the Capitals and Alexander Ovechkin. Not against the Islanders and Mat Barzal. Not against anyone.
Look, I'm not one to second-guess this coach too often. I'm convinced he's among the best and brightest in his business, more and more with each passing year. But my goodness, he can get stubborn about some stuff, and this curious quirk ranks right up there.
Think of it this way: Especially against the Bruins and Islanders, what's generally the toughest task?
Right. Scoring. Both teams are dedicated and diligent when defending. And when it comes to Boston, add in having to face Rask, the East's most talented, most accomplished goaltender by an uncomfortable margin.
So, why have Crosby, Guentzel and Rust wasting both energy and zone time in chasing around what's undoubtedly the most dangerous line in the game these days?
Meaning the one crafting this:
Why not instead pursue matchups like the one that produced Sunday's winner, against a bunch of Whos from Whoville whose names I've already forgotten?
And on top of that, why not trust the people paid to do the checking to earn their checks?
I get that the fourth line loses a lot of its flair without Brandon Tanev. But presuming Tanev's back for the playoffs -- and he's at least back to skating now -- it'd feel a whole lot smarter to send Teddy Blueger, Zach Aston-Reese and Tanev over the boards at every chance against Boston's big boys. Sure, their advanced analytics might wind up looking like those I listed above for the Crosby matchup but, at least in this scenario, the only figure that counts is goals against.
Really, that's it. No one will care if Blueger, Aston-Reese or Tanev so much as sniffs a second in the attacking zone so long as they neutralize the principal threat.
And from there, Crosby, Guentzel and Rust are free to fight through some ham-and-green-eggers to get their goals.
