ShareThis Page

Sens have no answer for Pens' gritty guys

Kevin Gorman
| Wednesday, April 21, 2010

OTTAWA — Ottawa tried everything in its arsenal, from checking to chipping to chirping, to keep Penguins superstars Sidney Crosby and Evgeni Malkin from continuing their scoring reign in this series.

But the Senators brought a sword to a gunfight.

And there are a lot more Penguins firing than Crosby and Malkin, who have combined for 16 points in this Eastern Conference quarterfinal series.

"They're the defending Stanley Cup champions, and they didn't do that just riding on one or two guys," Senators defenseman Chris Phillips said. "They've got some depth there. That's playoff hockey: those guys shine."

Consider winger Chris Kunitz, who has scored a goal and recorded five points in addition to hitting every Senator in sight in this series.

Think about forward Max Talbot, with a shorthanded goal in the Penguins' 7-4 Game 4 victory and a couple of assists on Malkin markers in the series.

Winger Pascal Dupuis, who failed to produce a point last postseason, has won countless races for loose pucks and played with purpose.

Even Craig Adams had an assist and a key blocked shot on a penalty kill that prevented the Senators from closing on a two-goal gap in the third period.

The Senators had no answer for Crosby or Malkin, let alone the gritty play of their fellow forwards Tuesday night in Game 4 at Scotiabank Place. As a result, the Penguins have a 3-1 edge in the best-of-seven series, and Ottawa faces elimination in Game 5 Thursday at Mellon Arena.

"They have a lot of depth," said backup goalie Pascal Leclaire, who replaced Brian Elliott at 6:12 of the second period. "They were rolling their four lines and they're all playing well right now. We've got to make sure we're doing the same thing. It just seemed like whenever we were trying to come back, they were able to get a goal and get some momentum back from us."

After splitting the first two games of the series to gain home-ice advantage, the Senators showed they were helpless once the Penguins got going.

Ottawa went a stretch of 12:01 without so much as taking a shot on net while the Penguins were firing off a dozen at Elliott, who was pulled after giving up a 4-0 lead. He allowed eight goals on 43 shots in Games 3 and 4.

By the time Senators Daniel Alfredsson and Jason Spezza rediscovered their scoring touch, it was too late. Both scored their first goal of the playoffs, but only after Ottawa had fallen into a 4-0 hole. Alfredsson had only two shots on net entering Game 4, and finally tallied for the first time at 10:59 of the second period. Spezza scored his first to cut it to 6-4 at 7:37 of the third.

But the play of Adams, Matt Cooke, Dupuis, Kunitz and Talbot made a decided difference. Dupuis had a two-on-one breakaway with Malkin and drew a hooking call on penalty-killing defenseman Anton Volchenkov that led to Malkin's power-play goal. Talbot intercepted a clearing attempt by Elliott and fed Cooke in the slot for his first goal of the playoffs, then scored the momentum-changing short-hander for a 5-2 lead at 12:38 of the second.

"It's important," Crosby said. "Everyone's got to contribute, especially in a shootout like (last) night. That goal from Max was big. We're going to need to see that if we're going to be successful."

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.