Click here to submit your question

Q: Are you hearing any talk from the Penguins about how well Ottawa continues to play and losing in five games to them doesn't look all that bad right now? I'm wondering if that could, or should, change what Ray Shero is thinking of doing this summer. Maybe a young team that had over 100 points and got steamrolled by a hot playoff team should only be tweaked instead of getting major overhauls?

Jim Wilson, Annapolis, Md.

MOLINARI: The Penguins, like most people in the industry, have known for a while that Ottawa had the personnel to go on the kind of run it has made this spring (although goalie Ray Emery was a question mark because of his limited track record in high-stakes games). The real issue with the Senators for a number of years has been their mental toughness, because they always seemed to find a way to fizzle in the playoffs when it mattered most.

The first evidence that that was changing came during Game 3 of the opening round. Ottawa had squandered a lead in the third period of Game 2 at Scotiabank Place, allowing the Penguins to even the series, and spotted the Penguins a 1-0 advantage on a Gary Roberts goal in the first minute of Game 3. The Penguins had a chance to seize control of the series at that point -- and Ottawa had a great opportunity to wilt yet again -- but the Senators kept their composure, went on to win the game and haven't looked back since.

How impressive Ottawa has been, or will be, this spring should have no impact on personnel moves the Penguins make, however. The ultimate objective is to be better than the second-best team in the league and if the Senators win the Stanley Cup and, in the process, set the standard for excellence in the NHL, they simply will be the club that sets the bar that the Penguins will be trying to clear.

No one should expect the work-in-progress Penguins to be transformed into a championship-caliber team over the next few months, of course -- especially when most recent indications are that Shero will be fairly restrained when pursuing free agents -- but Shero could to worse than to act on a plan designed to have the Penguins eventually match the Senators' depth and balance.

Q: As a part of the plan for the arena, I understood it was important to get the lease done within 30 days because of interest rates. Also, the casino seems to be running into problems with delays. What's up with the lease? Can this deal fall apart?

Steve Powanda, Philadelphia

MOLINARI: There was talk some months back about getting a lease worked out quickly to take advantage of lower interest rates, but that obviously did not happen. Negotiations are proceeding -- a Penguins executive says "we are working on it daily and all sides are doing so in a very cordial and cooperative manner" -- and apparently have not hit any significant snags. That it is taking so long to get a lease in place, however, invites questions about whether anyone involved actually ever believed it could be done in 30 or fewer days, or whether talk of such a time frame was merely a piece of rhetorical flotsam.

The complications and conflicts surrounding the city's planned slots parlor, meanwhile, apparently will have very little, if any, impact on construction of the new arena. The first contribution from Don Barden, who was awarded the license to operate that slots parlor, is not due until 2009 and Pennsylvania's slots-related contributions will be drawn from revenue generated by all 14 slots operations around the state -- 13 of which are either already in operation or look to be on schedule to open when planned.

Q: During the second period of Game 1 of the Eastern Conference final, Emery came out of the crease and froze the puck while not under any particular duress. I always thought it was clear goalies couldn't do that, since he had time to play the puck. Also, even if he was under pressure, we saw Marc-Andre Fleury called for doing the same thing. Are there any specifics to rules pertaining to goalies playing the puck, did the refs just miss it or did the refs just 'let them play' because it's the playoffs? The whole 'let them play' idea has always bugged me because the game should be called consistently throughout the year, including playoffs.

Mitch Marklow, Erie

MOLINARI: Rule 63, which spells out what constitutes delay-of-game violations, includes a number of provisions that apply specifically to goaltenders, one of which speaks to the incident you mentioned. It reads, in part, that "If a goaltender races out of his crease in an attempt to beat the attacking player to the puck and instead of playing the puck jumps on the puck causing a stoppage in play, this shall be a minor penalty for delay of game."

The catch, of course, is that every referee has to decide how to apply that guideline and all others, and two officials can interpret the same words -- and how they pertain to a situation -- in dramatically different ways, which is why one might see a legal stoppage of play in the same sequence where another would see a delay-of-game infraction.

The "situational officiating" to which you refer has been part of the game -- a bad part -- since the invention of artificial ice, if not before, although there are times when it is not as blatant as others. Why some officials are inclined to make, or not make, calls based on the score, how much time is left in the game or what is at stake in that particular game is baffling, and is at least part of the reason players and coaches complain about the lack of consistency in the performance of some referees.

There are officials who contend they are reluctant to award one team or the other a power play late in a tied game or in overtime because they don't want to have an undue impact on the outcome of the game, but the reality is, allowing a penalty to go unpunished can influence how a game turns out, too. If a player is denied a reasonable opportunity to capitalize on a scoring chance because he is being hooked or held and, after no call is made, the other team scores the game-winning goal, how could anyone argue that the non-call didn't have a profound effect on how the game turned out?

There always will be a human element in officiating and, as mentioned above, two referees won't necessarily view an on-ice sequence or incident the same way, but there is no good reason for a ref to have his judgment affected by the circumstances of the game he is working. Simply put, something that is a violation in the first minute of the opening preseason game should be a penalty in overtime of Game 7 in the Stanley Cup final.

Q: If Evgeni Malkin was supposedly run down by the long NHL season, why is he still playing hockey? Do the Pens have any say in this and, if not, were they OK with his decision to continue to play instead of resting?

Bob Boscia, Ross

MOLINARI: "Supposedly" had nothing to do with it. Anyone who watched Malkin during the stretch drive and playoffs could see that he didn't have the energy and drive that marked his game earlier in the season. And that shouldn't have been a great surprise, since Malkin never had experienced anything close to the 82-game grind that is the NHL regular season, which is the case with most guys who come to the NHL from Europe or college hockey.

The Penguins could have discouraged Malkin from participating in the recently concluded world championships, if not flat-out ordered him to skip the tournament, but that probably would have been short-sighted. Malkin obviously enjoys representing his country and this spring's championships had particular significance for him because they were held in Moscow.

Demanding that he sit out the competition, or even prodding him to do so, might have alienated a player who, from all indications, will play a pretty significant role in the future of the franchise. It could be that the day will come when the Penguins have to sever their ties to Malkin for financial reasons, but they don't want to poison the relationship so that he looks to go elsewhere at the earliest opportunity. (That doesn't mean Malkin, or any other high-profile player, should be allowed to operate under his own rules. Just that teams should be judicious about when and how they impose their will on valuable personnel.)

Finally, it will be nearly four months before training camp opens. Even though the start of Malkin's off-season was delayed by several weeks, he still will have ample time to rest -- and to train, so that he's better-prepared for the demands of the NHL -- before returning to North America.

Q: Don't you think Cory Sarich from Tampa Bay would be a nice addition to the Penguins' blue line? He is big, strong, mobile and has a nasty side.

Regis Hopper, Pittsburgh

MOLINARI: At least in part because of salary-cap/payroll issues, the Lightning is expected to allow Sarich to hit the market as an unrestricted free agent July 1. He earned $1.9 million in 2006-07 and might be in line for a significant raise. Whether the Penguins plan to pursue him aggressively -- and how much they'd be willing to spend to get him -- isn't clear.

Sarich doesn't put up many points, no one will confuse his puckhandling with that of, say, Scott Niedermayer, and a case could be made that his game is more tailored to the pre-lockout NHL, although he does skate pretty well.

His limitations, however, are countered by his physical play, which is why he figures to attract a lot of interest from teams looking to add toughness to their blue line. Sarich is 6 foot 4, 210 pounds and plays at least that big. His intangibles are excellent and he doesn't turn 29 until Aug. 18, so teams aren't likely to balk at giving him a multi-year contract.

Q: Ryan Malone was not on the U.S. team for the world championships, while a bunch of guys who have little or no NHL experience were. With Ray Shero playing such a big role in USA Hockey, why wasn't Malone included?

Sean Pieszak, Mars

MOLINARI: Malone was invited to play for the U.S., but apparently declined because of a sore knee that bothered him for the final month or so of the season. Whether the people who put the national team together tried to lobby him to reconsider isn't known, although very little about Malone's performance during the 2006-07 season suggested that getting him onto the roster should have been a priority for them.

Having Shero in a position of authority with USA Hockey is a plus for any U.S.-born players on the Penguins who are interested in playing for their country, but only in the sense that Shero will be aware of their assets and abilities and thus would be able to lobby effectively for their inclusion on a national team -- assuming they actually warrant it. For Shero (or any other GM) to use the national program solely, or even primarily, to benefit his NHL team would be a horrible abuse of power.

Q: It seems like scoring is down more in this year's playoffs than in the ones last year. Do you think anything should be done to correct this, or do we just need to wait to see how things play out? There is more hooking, holding, etc. going on than there was at the beginning of the year. Should the officials crack down more? Reduce the size of the offensive zone so the players don't bunch up in front of the net? Reduce the size of the padding the Michelin Man can wear in net?

Eric Howard, Baldwin

MOLINARI: Actual goal production isn't really the issue; quality scoring chances are what matter most. After all, a spectacular save can be at least as entertaining as a goal. The problem comes when there are very few of either.

While some people support the idea of further shrinking goalie equipment, the moderator of this forum is not among them. Goalies used to abuse the latitude they were given -- a family of five could have lived comfortably inside of Patrick Roy's sweater, and there were multi-national expeditions mounted to scale the leg pads of Garth Snow -- but the league revised its equipment guidelines a couple of years ago, and with composite sticks enabling so many players to launch pucks with so much velocity, goaltenders have to be given a reasonable amount of protection from injury. Further tinkering with the dimensions of the offensive zones seems unnecessary, too.

The easiest, and most obvious, solution to increasing the number of scoring chances is the same as it has been for years: Enforce the rules the way they are written. It really is that simple. If a player hooks or holds or trips an opponent, call it. If a chronic violator costs his team enough power-play goals, he'll probably lose his job, or at least some ice time. That's a pretty good deterrent. And when players get out of the habit of taking obstruction-related penalties, the quantity -- and quality -- of scoring chances should rise.