Islanders notebook: Nabokov pulled in second period
By Josh Yohe| Wednesday, May 1, 2013, 9:18 p.m.
Nabokov has rough night
Goalie Evgeni Nabokov, one of the few New York Islanders players with postseason experience, was rudely welcomed back by the Penguins on Wednesday night at Consol Energy Center.
In fact, the situation was so bad for the 37-year-old Russian that he was pulled in favor of Kevin Poulin early in the second period of the Penguins' 5-0 victory in Game 1 of an Eastern Conference first-round series. Nabokov allowed four goals before the second period was two minutes old.
His misfortune began early in the first period during a Penguins power play when the Islanders left Jarome Iginla open for consecutive one-timers. The second was a vicious blast that struck Nabokov directly in the head.
After making the save, Nabokov fell to the ice and, a moment later, officials stopped play.
Nabokov stayed down for close to a minute while being assisted by Islanders trainers but opted to remain in the game. He allowed the Penguins' first goal two shots later.
Nabokov is a veteran of nine unsuccessful Stanley Cup playoff stints with the San Jose Sharks.
This marks the first Stanley Cup playoff game for 16 Islanders players and coach Jack Capuano. Many of them shrugged off the lack of experience, but Capuano was a little more direct. He explained that, in every hockey player's youth, big games happen in which lessons can be learned.
Veteran center Marty Reasoner is often a healthy scratch, but the Islanders started him on their fourth line. Capuano acknowledged before the game that having a veteran presence was crucial.
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.