Penguins notebook: Sutter: We're not going to quit
BOSTON — The Penguins will attempt to pull off one of the greatest comebacks in sports history beginning Friday in Game 4 against the Boston Bruins.
If the Penguins are looking for inspiration, it's all around them.
Their minor league affiliate in Wilkes-Barre rallied from three games down to win a series earlier this spring.
Also, the 2010 Bruins — most of the core from that team remains — blew a 3-0 series lead against the Philadelphia Flyers.
The Penguins defiantly promised that they believe they can come back, even though such a feat has been orchestrated only three times in NHL history.
“If you're betting right now, you're not betting on the Penguins,” center Brandon Sutter said. “But we're not going to quit. By no means are we going to break down and quit now.”
Penguins coach Dan Bylsma said he believes center Evgeni Malkin was illegally hooked by right wing Jaromir Jagr moments before center Patrice Bergeron's game-winning goal in Game 3.
“Just looking at the play, there's no question — it's a battle along the boards right in front of our bench with Jagr — there's a hook,” Bylsma said. “But I'm not sure, at that point in the game, I thought for one second with how the game was being called, did I expect a call at all on the play.”
Orpik OK after hit
Defenseman Brooks Orpik's head was knocked into the glass by Boston left wing Milan Lucic in double overtime during Game 3. Orpik was stunned from the impact, standing for a few moments by the boards before slowly skating to the bench. Bylsma said Orpik is not dealing with any medical issues from the hit.
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 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.