Share This Page

Senators notebook: MacLean puts onus on veterans

| Friday, May 24, 2013, 9:30 p.m.

Coach calls on veterans

Coach Paul MacLean opened Game 5 of the Eastern Conference semifinal Friday night at Consol Energy Center with the veteran line of center Jason Spezza, left wing Milan Michalek and right wing Daniel Alfredsson.

His aim was to stock the ice with veterans. Before Friday, the trio had combined to play in 229 career playoff games, with a total of 81 goals. Michalek and Spezza are former first-round draft choices and Alfredsson, 40, is the team's respected captain.

“Maybe if we put our veteran guys together and get them on the ice early in the game, it will have a calming effect for the rest of the group,” MacLean said.

Initially, MacLean's strategy didn't work. While Spezza had the second-most ice time among Ottawa forwards in the first period, his line had none of the Senators' 10 shots.

Michalek scored on a power play late in the second period after the Penguins had seized a 3-0 lead. Spezza and Kyle Turris assisted.

MacLean speaks

MacLean, who took no questions and cut short his news conference Wednesday night, stayed as long as anyone wanted Friday afternoon after his team's game-day skate.

But reporters threw only two questions at him and he sat on stage for a total of 76 seconds. He did offer a bit of news everyone expected when he said goalie Craig Anderson, who was pulled before the end of Games 1 and 4, would start Game 5 on Friday night.

He also said right winger Mark Stone, who was injured in Game 4, did not make the trip to Pittsburgh.

— Jerry DiPaola

TribLIVE commenting policy

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 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.