Defense steps up as Pens blank Capitals
WASHINGTON — Dan Bylsma used a word Wednesday night not often associated with the Penguins.
Maybe never associated with the Penguins.
“Smothering,” Bylsma said after a 4-0 victory over the Washington Capitals at Verizon Center.
Mario Lemieux's Penguins. Sidney Crosby's Penguins. The Penguins, with their 14 individual scoring championships, a “smothering” defensive team.
Alex Ovechkin's Capitals were held to 18 shots — only 46 attempts compared to 60 from the Penguins.
“Smothering is a word we use,” Bylsma said.
It is an expectation for the way they want to play up to and through the Stanley Cup playoffs, too.
They indeed were smothering in earning a second consecutive victory after losing four of five games.
The Capitals were one of eight clubs to average at least three goals per game. They are one of 15 opponents not to score more than two goals against the Penguins, who are allowing 2.18 goals-against per game.
Bylsma had that kind of suffocating defense in mind when he hired reputable guru Jacques Martin as an assistant coach in the summer. Martin has helped implement a left-wing lock system that, when working, forces turnovers in the neutral zone.
The Penguins (14-8-0, 28 points) have spent much of the season creating those turnovers.
What pleases Crosby is the team's ability to make use of those turnovers in the past two games.
“We've been really good defensively, but our offense has helped,” Crosby said. “We've done a lot better (of a) job holding onto the puck in the offensive zone.”
Crosby's 11th goal — scored late in the second period on a power play — finished a pretty passing sequence from Evgeni Malkin, James Neal and Chris Kunitz.
Neal and defenseman Paul Martin, each with their second, and Beau Bennett, with his first, also scored for the Penguins, who had produced only 28 goals in 13 prior contests.
The offense, usually top-five under Bylsma when Crosby and Malkin have been healthy, will come around, defenseman Brooks Orpik predicted.
This defense, said goalie Marc-Andre Fleury, is “like, really good, right?”
Fleury earned his second shutout, and aside from a “few shots on (the Capitals') three power plays,” barely broke a sweat.
His Capitals counterpart, Braden Holtby, was peppered with 40 shots, including 32 over the opening 40 minutes.
Malkin, whose streak of games without a goal is 15, finished with six attempted shots, three of which found their way on Holtby. Bylsma wanted to see that kind of assertiveness from Malkin, who passed on a couple of prime shot opportunities in the third period of a home win over Anaheim on Monday night.
Malkin, who assisted on goals by Bennett and Neal, looked engaged against the Capitals.
His rival, Ovechkin, looked frustrated — perhaps because Bylsma successfully matched his shutdown pairing of Martin and Orpik against arguably the NHL's dominant offensive weapon.
Ovechkin had scored 37 goals in 42 games dating to last season, but he was held to two shots. He misfired on five attempts and had three blocked.
“You could see their skill guys getting frustrated because when they were coming at us they had to come 200 feet,” Orpik said. “For 60 minutes, that's definitely the best we've played defensively.”
The Penguins have allowed only 29 goals in the last 14 games.
“I know a lot has been made of us not being able to score as much as we've wanted to the last few weeks,” Orpik said. “With the talent we have in our room, I don't think that's going to be a chronic problem.
“Our defense has been overlooked in that goal drought.”
Show commenting policy
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.