ShareThis Page

Devils snuff Penguins' offense, again

| Sunday, Feb. 5, 2012

NEWARK, N.J. — Only 24 hours after producing one of their finest performances of the season, the Penguins delivered a dud in New Jersey.

As usual.

The Devils snuffed the Penguins' offense most of the game and chased goalie Marc-Andre Fleury in a 5-2 victory.

New Jersey now only trails the Penguins by one point for the fifth spot in the Eastern Conference standings.

The Penguins rarely have success in the Prudential Center, which opened in 2007. After winning their first three games in the Devils' new home, the Penguins have gone 2-7-2 at the Prudential Center during the past four seasons. They have lost four straight in this building and seven of their past eight.

In fact, in their past 11 games in this building, the Penguins have only mustered 15 goals.

Scoring was not a problem for New Jersey star Ilya Kovalchuk. He scored early into the contest, set up a shorthanded goal and finished with three points.

Penguins center Evgeni Malkin scored his 29th goal of the season and defenseman Matt Niskanen also added a goal for the Penguins, who trailed 3-0 early in the second period. Right wing Tyler Kennedy left the game with 2:21 remaining, having apparently sustained an ankle or foot injury.

Kovalchuk, Zach Parise, David Clarkson, Dainius Zubrus and Anton Volchenkov scored for the Devils.

The Penguins finish their three-game road trip Tuesday night in Montreal.

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.

click me