ShareThis Page

Penguins believe their offensive play will result in wins

| Friday, May 8, 2009

As it turns out, "better" is in the eye of the beholder as well as the scoreboard in the Eastern Conference semifinals.

Asked Thursday if he thought the Penguins were the better team despite their two-games-to-one deficit to the Washington Capitals, captain Sidney Crosby responded in the affirmative.

"Yeah, I feel like we've outchanced them over the three games," Crosby said. "We're still down, 2-1, but the belief in what we need to do is there, and we see some good results."

The Penguins have indeed outchanced the Capitals, as well as outshot them (114-82) through three games. In Wednesday night's 3-2 overtime win, the Penguins fired wide 19 times and had an additional 15 shots blocked on the way to ringing up a 42-23 advantage in shots on goal.

Their 76-43 edge in attempts and the long stretches of territorial dominance that accompanied all that blasting away in Game 3 have the Penguins feeling in control, if not in the lead, in the series, which resumes tonight at Mellon Arena.

"We're confident that if we play this way, we give ourselves a great chance to win," Cosby said.

The Capitals, though, are just as confident.

"I'd much rather be where I am right now than where they are," coach Bruce Boudreau said of the two victories his team possesses.

Forward David Steckel said it was only a matter of time before the Penguins started capitalizing on their opportunities.

"They've played a full 60 minutes each game," Steckel said. "At time we haven't, and we haven't matched their intensity. We're not disappointed that we're up, we're just disappointed in how we've played."

Keeping the Capitals ahead in the series has been the brilliant play of rookie goaltender Simeon Varlamov. If the Penguins can start cashing in on some more of their chances, they might finally crack Varlamov as well as even the series.

They had Varlamov seemingly down and out on a number of occasions in Game 3, but forwards Bill Guerin and Chris Kunitz were among those who wasted golden opportunities by missing the net.

Winger Pascal Dupuis managed a shot on goal, but somehow found Varlamov rather than a mostly open cage from close range.

And then there was defenseman Kris Letang, who became a hero in overtime but not before repeatedly failing to convert in regulation.

"Lots of chances," Letang said. "Maybe too many chances. I should have scored more goals."

The suspicion in the Penguins' dressing room yesterday was that an offensive explosion might be attainable in Game 4 given more of the same effort.

"We're playing very well offensively, especially (Wednesday night), we were creating so many chances," defenseman Sergei Gonchar said. "We have a good chance if we're gonna continue to play the same way."

Coach Dan Bylsma cautioned against buying into the perception that such an explosion is imminent.

"We can't count on us breaking out," Bylsma said. "We can't count on it getting easier. It's going to get more difficult. They're going to be refocused and re-energized and they're going to come back at us with a renewed game plan and a renewed effort.

"We need to make sure we get right back to the offensive zone and get that many shots, that many chances at this goalie. We have to be real persistent in getting our opportunities and getting to the net."

As for which team is better ...

"We'll know when the series is over," Gonchar said.

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.