Penguins Report Card: Sullivan Rips 3rd Period Performance; Another Whiff in Big Game

ELMONT, NY — It wasn’t perfect and not always pretty, but the Penguins were able to take advantage of the decimated New York Islanders lineup for 40 minutes. New York is missing all three of their regular left-side defensemen and called up a 2022 fourth-round pick to plug part of the lineup hole. The Penguins pounced, but didn’t finish the job, and another lead in a big game became another tale missed opportunity.

The Penguins gained a two-goal lead in the third period and then sat back and assumed the game was over.

It’s never over against the Islanders. The Penguins got a point but wasted a golden opportunity for their third straight win, settling for a 4-3 shootout loss to the Islanders.

Read More: Penguins Old Habits Die Hard; Blown Lead & Shootout Loss

“We’ve got to play better. We should have played the way we played in the first two periods, and we would have been fine,” said coach Mike Sullivan. “We played a straight-ahead game (in the first two periods). We weren’t as diligent with the puck (in the third period). We didn’t play as much north-south. Give the Islanders credit. We had opportunities to break the game open, give (Ilya) Sorokin credit.”

The Islanders were their usual plucky, opportunistic self. They converted a couple of Erik Karlsson turnovers into high-danger scoring chances. They did the same when Penguins third-pair defensemen Jack St. Ivany and Ryan Graves each muffed a puck midway through the second period, but bad bounces, bad shots, and good goaltending by Alex Nedeljkovic kept the Penguins advantage.

However, the Penguins otherwise tilted the ice, leading scoring chances 21-10 in the first 40 minutes and a 15-6 high-danger scoring chance advantage overall, according to NaturalStatTrick.com.

“I thought we dominated the first two periods. There was one shift in the second period where we got sloppy with the puck, we turned it over a couple of times, they got four or five shots on goal and maybe a couple of scoring chances,” Sullivan said. “Other than that shift, they didn’t have much, from our vantage point. I thought we controlled most of the game.”

The Penguins were almost goalied by Ilya Sorokin, who stuffed a handful of solid scoring chances in the first period, but in the goalie battle, it was the much more heralded Sorokin who allowed the softy when Evgeni Malkin slapped a one-timer through the five-hole for a second period power-play goal.

Yet, it was the Penguins team that buckled late.

“Maybe we sat back a little bit. I felt like we weren’t really connected on the forecheck,” Rickard Rakell said. “They were fast in transition, and we bumped into speed in the neutral zone. We took it one way, but sometimes, it went back the other way. We didn’t do a good enough job to help people back.”

Penguins Xs and Os

What the Penguins did well: For most of the game, the Penguins worked the walls well. They controlled the puck in the low zone and forced the Islanders to defend. I didn’t feel their breakouts were always crisp. There were plenty of muddy rushes, but they got the puck deep and minimized high-impact mistakes at the top of the zone (their mistakes were in the neutral zone, especially later in the game).

Of course, Sullivan properly noted the aforementioned shift in which Graves and St. Ivany bobbled and the Islanders gained some energy.

What the Penguins Didn’t Do Well: When they make mistakes, they don’t mess around, and they compound it with terrible responses. It’s like everyone loses their position simultaneously, and it’s a chaotic jailbreak.

The power play was far too often flat-footed. If the Penguins’ power play were a wine, it would have been a 2023-24 vintage. They moved around the perimeter, but they also got the puck on their stick and stopped to look around.

While Sullivan believes they dominated the game until the middle of the third period, too many Islanders had free passes to the net in the breakdowns. The Penguins’ defense is a major problem, and it’s about time we start examining it as a (w)hole instead of looking at individual performances.

“We’ve got to play better,” Sullivan deadpanned when questioned about the spate of blown leads this season.

Penguins Grades

Alex Nedeljkovic: A

He was very good. Starting to look like a No. 1 goalie. He made a handful of obvious high-danger saves but another handful of good saves on sneaky good saves.

Malkin-Crosby-Rakell: C

They didn’t dominate as they have. They had good moments, but they also allowed a goal, and they were only even in scoring chances against the patchwork Islanders’ top line. Simon Holmstrom had a game. So did Oliver Wahlstrom. The Penguins’ top line needed to finish the Islanders–that’s the risk of putting all of the eggs in one basket, and that becomes the responsibility of the line; they must win their battle each night.

O’Connor-Eller-Glass: B

O’Connor had a very good game. He was engaged and chased defenseman Noah Dobson around the corners, and he menacingly grabbed hold of him a few times. The line’s shot attempts rate was overwhelmingly in their favor (12-3), but the scoring chance was close, 3-2.

It speaks to the line’s lack of offense. All three players are solid, but they do not have much offensive firepower. The Penguins could have used more offense on a night when the top line didn’t have much.

Graves-St. Ivany: C-

They weren’t as strong as they were against Montreal. I felt they were in a few dangerous spots without much benefit.

Erik Karlsson: C-

After a couple of good games, he, too, had a subpar game. Here’s the skinny on Karlsson that we’ll examine on Wednesday: When he skates, he’s good. He can escape trouble and drive offense. When he gets slow, he’s in deep trouble.