Starkey: Malkin-stein on a tear
TribLIVE Sports Videos
Evgeni Malkin has created a monster.
Call him Young Malkin-stein.
People see what he did to the Washington Capitals in Game 3 and what he did to the Carolina Hurricanes in Game 2, and they want to see it — or something close to it — every night.
Which is patently ludicrous.
The kind of performance Malkin delivered Thursday at Mellon Arena comes around about as often as a Pirates playoff game, even for the greats.
It might have been the finest postseason performance by a Penguins' player (non-goaltender) since the Cup years of 1991 and '92.
From this vantage point, it was the best since an injured Jaromir Jagr willed the eighth-seeded Penguins past top-seeded New Jersey in Game 6 of a first-round series in 1999 (the Penguins completed the upset in Game 7).
Malkin didn't just register the 10th playoff hat trick in Penguins' history. He also made a maniacal dash into the defensive zone to help kill a second-period penalty — stripping defenseman Joe Corvo of the puck — and delivered a subtle yet incredibly skilled pass to set up Max Talbot's second-period goal (just as Malkin absorbed a heavy check at center ice, he turned himself into a pool-table bumper, letting the puck carom off his stick for a one-time pass that hit Talbot in stride).
Ed Johnston, the Penguins' 74-year-old senior advisor and walking encyclopedia of franchise history, had a familiar gleam in his eye as he strolled through the dressing room after the 7-4 victory.
Malkin remind you of anyone, E.J.?
"Oh, geez, that 66 guy," Johnston said, referring, of course, to Mario Lemieux. "Wasn't that something• How'd you like that third goal• Very few guys in this league will ever score a goal like that."
Like Lemieux, Malkin doesn't so much skate as swoop . He sees the ice as if he is sitting 100 rows up and comes down on defenders like a Pterodactyl.
"Scary," Johnston said. "He just controls the game. He doesn't give up the puck. That's what Mario would do. He would hold onto it and find somebody open or make a play himself."
With that, E.J. giddily moved along but not before adding, "God, he was unbelievable."
I didn't know if he meant Mario or Malkin-stein, but what did it matter?
If Malkin records multiple points in Game 3 tonight, he will be the first player to do so in six straight games since the modern playoff format was adopted in 1994.
Though the playoffs don't allow much time for reflection, it seems only right to go back, one more time, to Malkin's three goals. Each was a thing of beauty, wondrous to behold in person and even better on television replay later that night.
Several looks were required to reveal the detailed brilliance of each goal:
• On the first, Malkin jumped off the bench to replace Jordan Staal while the Penguins controlled the puck in Carolina's end. He sped past Jordan's brother, Eric, who tried to slow him with a stick to the gut, then split Chad LaRose and Ray Whitney like a sprinter crossing the finish line. Tyler Kennedy made sure his stuff-in attempt turned into a rebound, and Malkin bounced in to bat it home.
• On the second, Malkin worked past some interference to keep the puck alive in the corner. He then made defenseman Tim Gleason look like Jackie Gleason, using a strong and quick stick to whack in his own rebound for a 5-4 lead.
• The coup de grace was goal No. 3, when Malkin pushed the puck forward on a faceoff against Matt Cullen, retrieved it in the corner and raced around the net before whipping a no-look backhander past goalie Cam Ward's left shoulder and under the crossbar.
It was rated the No. 1 play on ESPN's Top 10 that night.
It might well have been a top-10 goal in Penguins' playoff history.
"Oh, he shoots and scores!" Mike Lange bellowed on the Penguins' radio broadcast. "And Cam Ward just lost his liquor license!"
Drink it in, Penguins fans. Drink it in.
Just don't expect it every night.
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.