Tim Benz, Mark Madden break down Penguins’ 3-0 hole vs. Islanders | TribLIVE.com
Breakfast With Benz

Tim Benz, Mark Madden break down Penguins’ 3-0 hole vs. Islanders

Tim Benz

We bring you this week’s Madden Monday from PPG Paints Arena after the Penguins drop a 4-1 decision in Game 3 to the New York Islanders.

Mark Madden of 105.9 the X and TribLIVE joins me as we figure out how the Isles have built a commanding 3-0 series lead in the Eastern Conference quarterfinal. The Penguins have never erased such a deficit. In recent tries, they were swept by Boston in 2013. They extended a 3-0 hole to a Game 6 against Philadelphia in 2012.

LISTEN: Breaking down Penguins-Islanders Game 3

The Islanders came back from 3-0 down against the Penguins back in 1975. It sure doesn’t feel like the Penguins will be getting even in 2019, though, because New York looks very much in control.

Mark and I talk about how things have gone so wrong, so quickly for the Penguins. We also discuss the club’s inability to sustain momentum against the Islanders. And we try to figure out why the team can’t score worth a lick against New York goaltender Robin Lehner.

Also, we bring up golf because of Tiger Woods’ exciting win at the Masters.

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.

Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins’ Jack Johnson checks his stick after the Islanders’ Leo Komarov’s goal in the third period Sunday, April 14, 2019 at PPG Paints Arena.
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.