ShareThis Page
Podcast: Previewing critical matchup for Penguins vs. sliding Sabres | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Podcast: Previewing critical matchup for Penguins vs. sliding Sabres

Tim Benz
820292_web1_gtr-weekinpics04-100118
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins’ Evgeni Malkin gets sandwiched between the Sabres’ Nathan Beaulieu and Casey Mittelstadt (r) in the first period Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2018 at PPG Paints Arena.

The Penguins are in Buffalo on Friday night to play the Sabres. It’s an important game in the Eastern Conference.

The Sabres made a push in the wild-card chase, but they’ve bottomed out lately, losing seven of nine.

Meanwhile, the Penguins are trying to secure the final playoff spot in the Metropolitan Division, or at least the second wild-card spot.

With Columbus’ 4-3 win over Philadelphia last night, the Blue Jackets pushed the Penguins back into ninth place in the conference.

Buffalo News Sabres reporter Lance Lysowski — formerly of the Pittsburgh sports journalism parish — joins me for the Sided.co podcast Friday to look at the matchup.

LISTEN: Previewing Penguins’ matchup vs. sliding Sabres

We dive into the reasons why the Sabres are struggling, Jack Eichel’s numbers and whether the city is currently looking at Buffalo as a real contender.

Plus, what kind of threat do they pose to the Penguins tonight and in the rematch on March 14.

Tim Benz is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Tim at [email protected] or via Twitter. All tweets could be reposted. All emails are subject to publication unless specified otherwise.

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.