In every single one of the first five games of the season, Dupuis has started with Malkin, and with it, thousands of Pens fans have felt nothing but pity for superstar Evgeni Malkin. Long forgotten is that Dupuis scored 20 goals during the 02/03 season; instead, what Penguin fans focus on is his hard slap shot which rarely seems to be on net and the memory of his inability to make plays while on Sidney Crosby’s line during his early Penguin career.

Objectively, the Talbot-Dupuis substitution seems a like-for-like switch: both players are speedy grinders with strong defensive skills. However, Talbot’s performances showed glimpses of the forward’s offensive prowess, last witnessed in his junior hockey days. Also, Talbot’s faceoff ability is handy; Malkin still is not strong in the faceoff circle.

Then again, what other option does Disco Dan have besides Dupuis? Tyler Kennedy, for one, who had seen time at that spot in the preseason. However, Kennedy has been pretty much glued to Jordan Staal’s line with Matt Cooke to create a high energy line with a lot of chemisty, one that Bylsma is loathe to break up.

Another option is to bring up one of the Pens’ highly touted winger prospects: Luca Caputi or Eric Tangradi. Both are probably another year away still, but they each showed flashes of potential during the preseason. However, I don’t think the organization wants to bring either up for an extended period of time just yet, and we’ll probably only see them for a game or two, if at all, this season.

The third option is to put new guy Chris Bourque on that line. He’s seen a little action there so far, but it’s hard to assess how he would fit in with so little time under his belt. I’m also not familiar with his play, so I can’t comment one way or the other on how he might slot into that spot.

Of the options, I am with many Penguin fans and believe that Kennedy is the best option on Malkin’s wing for now, with Dupuis sliding into Kennedy’s spot on the Staal line. Kennedy brings a lot of what Talbot brings and seems to be a bit more of a scorer.

Luckily for Malkin, Disco Dan is fond of throwing Malkin on with different players, especially after a penalty kill, so Malkin isn’t stuck with Dupuis the whole game. In the end, Dupuis starting at Malkin’s right wing may not make that much of a difference.

Now, usually when discussing Marian Hossa’s potential impact on what the Penguins could’ve been if he had re-signed, the topic is typically focused on how his long-term contract would have affected the team’s salary cap and the ability to keep other free agents (both that season and this season). A few others talk about Hossa’s disappearing act in the playoffs for Detroit and his likely disappearance if he had played for the Penguins. On the other hand, I’m going to go in a bit of a different direction on this one.

In my eyes, there is one place where Hossa’s presence would’ve had a profound effect: the coaching situation. And why is that so important? Because one of the biggest factors in the Penguins late season turnaround and playoff excellence was the coaching change from Therrien to Bylsma!

I know what you’re thinking at this point: “I’m not sure where you’re going with this.” But stay with me a little bit longer. If you remember, before the coaching change which changed the Pens’ season, the team was mired in a big slump. It was pretty clear to those watching the games that the team had grown tired of Therrien’s antics and he was failing to motivate the players. The biggest problem? Motivation was supposed to be his one strength as a coach!

So where does Hossa fit into this? Well, I believe that with Marian Hossa on this team, there would’ve been no playoff scare (Pens were outside the playoff picture during this slump) and thus, there would not have been the needed coaching change to spur the team to a Cup win. With Hossa, the team ends up in the 5-7 seed and maybe pulls off an upset in round one, but that’s about it.

Why do I think this? The fact that management waited so long to make a change, even with things as bad as they were, which was a money issue. In the end, missing the playoffs would have cost the team more money than changing coaches, which is why the change finally occurred. If the team was going to make the playoffs, which they almost assuredly would have with Hossa playing on a line with Crosby, there was no way Therrien would have been fired, and with Therrien as coach, there was a snowball’s chance in hell that they would have won a Cup.

Now, with Bylsma as coach, the Pens have a bright future, although we will finally see how good of a coach he is. On the bright side for Pens fans, at least Bylsma system plays to the strengths of his team, unlike his predecessor’s system.

Why did these two articles pique my attention? Mostly because last season there was a large, vocal group of Penguin fans that did not believe that Fleury was a good goaltender, let alone capable of leading the Penguins to a Stanley Cup. Would I say that it was a majority of Penguins fans that thought this? No, but this vocal minority were constant in their dislike.

The question I have is this: did Fleury’s performance in helping bring the Cup to Pittsburgh do enough to change the minds of his doubters?

As a Red Wings fan who watched 75+ regular season Pens games and every Penguin playoff game (oh, the sacrifices I have to make for my girlfriend!), I can see that Fleury’s detractors have some good points. Watching him play the puck behind the net is cringe-worthy; his positioning leaves something to be desired, as does his rebound control; he’s still very inconsistent.

In the end, however, one of their biggest complaints was that he did not play well in big occasions. Fleury’s effort in Games 6 and 7 of the Stanley Cup Finals seemed to have shot that one down pretty well, but it makes me wonder if those detractors will still try to use his salary as an issue, as another constant complaint was that he was overpaid for what he had shown so far. This is where Starkey makes an excellent point (emphasis mine):

Like many of his high-profile teammates, Fleury is playing for less than what he could get on the open market.

The Penguins took a risk, too, when they signed Fleury to a seven-year, $35 million deal before last season. But if Fleury had waited a year, he’d be negotiating as Stanley Cup champion Marc-Andre Fleury, with the prospect of unrestricted free agency only a year away.

Think about that. Then, think about the fact that Vancouver’s Roberto Luongo – he of the 11-11 career playoff record — recently signed a 12-year, $64 million deal.

In fact, 18 goalies will earn a higher salary than Fleury’s $3.5 million this season, though part of that is because the bigger annual salaries on Fleury’s deal kick in with the opening of the new arena next season.

Even when the higher salary kicks in next year, I still think that Fleury is going to be a bargain, much as it pains me to say so. He’ll get better as gets older, especially in one area that people tend not to notice: his over-reliance on his natural reflex ability to make saves. I noticed last year, whenever Fleury was struggling with his groin injury, he played better. He put himself in better positions and didn’t twist and contort to make crazy saves that end up leaving him out of position, instead making simple saves and concentrating on his angles and positioning. As he gets older and loses some of that crazy flexibility, it’ll only help him get better.

So, in the end, has Fleury done enough to get the doubters on this side, and if not, what does he have to do?