ShareThis Page

Neal, Iginla get back on track to lead Penguins

| Wednesday, May 22, 2013, 10:12 p.m.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins' Kris Letang and Jussi Jokinen celebrates with Jerome Iginla after Iginla's third-period goal against the Senators on Wednesday, May 22, 2013, at Scotiabank Place in Ottawa.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins' Jarome Iginla beats Senators goaltender Craig Anderson for a second-period goal Wednesday, May 22, 2013, at Scotiabank Place in Ottawa.

OTTAWA — The wingmen finally delivered, just as their center predicted.

Center Evgeni Malkin was held without a point but deserves credit for prescience following Game 4 as James Neal — Malkin predicted his scoring touch was returning “soon” — and Jarome Iginla ended their respective goal-scoring funks in the Penguins' 7-3 victory over Ottawa on Wednesday at Scotiabank Place.

The Penguins can put the Eastern Conference semifinal series away in Friday's Game 5 at Consol Energy Center.

“I don't think anyone in the room was worried about either of those two,” defenseman Douglas Murray said. “Those guys have scored throughout their whole careers. They haven't disappeared at any point.”

The Penguins appeared to be in trouble in the early going. Neal went to work with the Penguins down, 1-0, after allowing their third shot-handed goal of the postseason. He whipped a shot past goalie Craig Anderson after Iginla had won a faceoff in his direction.

“He is a very confident goal scorer,” Iginla said. “Sometimes you get chances, and a goalie makes better saves, you hit the post or you miss by 2 inches. Nobody really talked about it. He doesn't squeeze his stick. He can put them in in bunches. You can tell when he starts feeling it.”

Iginla was feeling it, too.

Only 40 seconds after left wing Chris Kunitz scored to even the game, Iginla put the Penguins ahead for good by crashing the net. Defenseman Kris Letang, who recorded four assists, fired a bad-angle shot at Anderson. Iginla was there to bury the rebound.

“Nealer just has such a good shot,” Penguins goalie Tomas Vokoun said. “You go through ups and downs. Eventually, with skill like that, it's going to go in. We need (Neal and Iginla) to score.”

The shots kept going in for the Penguins in the third period, when they scored four goals in a 6:36 span. Neal and Iginla notched power-play goals during that outburst.

But it was the even-strength success that most satisfied Neal. Chemistry between him and Malkin has been detectable for two seasons, and Iginla appears to be meshing with them.

“Getting used to each other is the biggest thing. Knowing each other's tendencies,” Neal said. “For me and Geno, obviously we've got that chemistry together. And Iggy is working with us. We're always talking. We talked a lot with him, and he feels like he's getting that chemistry, too. It's big.”

Iginla took a feed from Neal in the first period and found himself with a good scoring chance. He didn't convert, but the chances kept coming.

Malkin didn't register a point, but his wingers got rolling Wednesday and had the Penguins feeling good following Game 4.

The three combined for 17 shots, and there was a feeling among them that this is only the beginning.

“There was no frustration,” Iginla said. “We were getting scoring chances. We got some in bunches as a team and as a line. When you keep getting those, you'll find a way.”

Josh Yohe is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. Reach him at or via Twitter @JoshYohe_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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 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.