Trump to sign executive order that aims to slash drug prices by 59%New Foto - Trump to sign executive order that aims to slash drug prices by 59%

President Donald Trump on Monday is set tosignasweepingexecutive order that aims to cut prescription drug costs in the U.S.by aligning what the government pays for certain medications to the prices paid in other countries. The order, experts say, is a reimagined and far more aggressive version of Trump's policy during his first term to cut drug costs, whichfailed to take effect after a federal judge blocked it. Like the original policy, health policy experts expect it will meet significant pushback from the drug industry. The new order directs Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to come up with price-cutting goals within 30 days, White House officials said on call Monday. The move will kick off a round of negotiations between Kennedy and the drug industry. Should talks stall, Kennedy will move to enforce the "most favored nation" pricing model, capping the U.S. prices at the lowest rates paid by other wealthy nations. Most notably, officials said the policy will not be limited to certain drugs under Medicare, as it was in original version, but will also target medications covered by Medicaid and private insurance. The administration hasn't singled out a specific class of drugs for price cuts, but officials said it's fair to expect that GLP-1s — a class of drugs that includes Ozempic, Wegovy and Zepbound — will be included among them. Last month, the administration rejected a Biden-era proposal for Medicare to cover weight loss drugs. The move would have saved patients money butcost the government about $25 billionover 10 years. The Food and Drug Administration will also consider expanding the importation of prescription drugs from countries beyond Canada, where prices are often cheaper than in the U.S, officials said, and the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission will be directed to act against "anti-competitive" actions by drugmakers that they say keep drug prices high. "The president is dead serious about lower drug prices," an official said on the call. Prescription drug prices are notoriously high in the U.S. Although the country makes up less than 5% of the global population, it accounts for nearly three-quarters of global pharmaceutical profits, officials said Monday. According to theRand Corporation, a public policy think tank, Americans pay up to 10 times more for medications than people in other similarly wealthy nations. While experts backed Trump's approach, they questioned how the administration would legally pursue price reductions for drugs under private insurance. They also worried about its ability to withstand legal pushback from the drug industry. "If this touches all drugs for all people, it's far more ambitious, but the ripple effects are far more uncertain," said Tricia Neuman, executive director for the program on Medicare policy at KFF, a health policy research group. "I would expect the drug industry to throw every legal argument at this proposal." Arthur Caplan, the head of the medical ethics division at NYU Langone Medical Center in New York City, said the administration may need to set a more realistic expectations for what it can achieve. In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump claimed that prescription drug costs would be reduced "almost immediately" by 30% to 80% and that the U.S. "will pay the same price as the Nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the World." In a follow up post Monday, Trump said drug prices would be cut by 59%. Caplan said immediate relief would be great — but argued it's impossible for the U.S. to achieve the lowest prices in the world. "We are not going to get the price paid by South Africa, Peru, Egypt, Bolivia and Laos," Caplan said. "Drug companies usually give whopping discounts to very poor countries on humanitarian grounds they won't give rich countries. The prices paid in the poorest nations have no chance of being the price paid by the Trump administration." Stacie Dusetzina, a health policy professor at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, worried the policy might harm doctors and pharmacies if the price cuts were immediate. "For retail pharmacies or clinician administered drugs, they buy their drugs ahead of time to stock the shelves or have them available to treat patients," she said. "What the pharmacy or clinic paid to acquire their drugs is likely higher than the proposed new price, which means they would lose money when those drugs were filled." On Monday's call, an official appeared to clarify Trump's Sunday remarks, saying that drugmakers are expected to be "coming to the table very soon" and that the administration anticipates "action" and "relief very soon." Officials didn't say how this would impact the ongoing Medicare drug pricing negotiations, a policy signed into law by President Joe Biden through the Inflation Reduction Act. In the final days of the Biden administration, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Servicesannounced the next round of drugs up for price negotiations. The first round of negotiations is estimated to save Medicare $6 billion in 2026, when the prices go into effect. But officials argued that the lower prices achieved through the Biden administration were "inadequate" and that Trump's new policy would achieve more aggressive price cuts. "We'll be taking action to go beyond what what achieved under the Inflation Reduction Act," an official said. The Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, a drug industry trade group that filed a lawsuit against Trump's original policy, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. In a statement last week, Alex Schriver, a spokesperson for PhRMA said the Trump administration should instead focus on so-called pharmacy benefit managers to address high drug costs. PBMs, also known as middlemen, work with insurance companies to negotiate discounted prices from drug companies in exchange for including the drugs in their coverage. In theory, PBMs are supposed to save patients money, butthey've been the target of U.S. lawmakersfollowing government findings accusing them of inflating the price of drugs.

Trump to sign executive order that aims to slash drug prices by 59%

Trump to sign executive order that aims to slash drug prices by 59% President Donald Trump on Monday is set tosignasweepingexecutive order t...
House GOP Medicaid proposal sets work requirements and a showdown with fiscal hawksNew Foto - House GOP Medicaid proposal sets work requirements and a showdown with fiscal hawks

WASHINGTON – House Republicans plan to enact work requirements and more frequent eligibility checksfor Medicaid, according to a proposal released late on May 11 by a key GOP-led committee. However, the House Energy and Commerce Committee's proposal does not pursuesome of the deeper cutsthat lawmakers had considered, including lowering the federal match rates with states or capping per-person federal spending in Medicaid. The highly anticipated plan is expected to be a part of House Republicans'party-line billto implement President Donald Trump's agenda. More:Millions of people could lose coverage under Trump-backed GOP plans to cut Medicaid: CBO The Energy and Commerce Committee was directed to find $880 billion in savings. Trump had ruled out cuts to Medicare and Social Security, so Medicaid was the largest remaining program on the chopping block. But the proposal appears aimed at enticing GOP moderates who had said they cannot vote for major changes to the program that provides health insurance for more than 71 million low-income Americans. Committee chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, told theWall Street Journalhe expects the biggest pushback to come from Republicans who feel it "doesn't go far enough." It sets up a potential showdown withfiscal conservatives, who have pushed their colleagues to overhaul the program and want the final Republican tax package to cut as much money as it spends. Lawmakers are also proposing to bar the use of Medicaid and CHIP funding for gender transition procedures for people under age 18; lowering the federal match rate for states that use their Medicaid infrastructure to provide health care to undocumented immigrants; and reducing cost-sharing for Medicaid Expansion patients who make more than the federal poverty level, which is currently $32,150 for a family of four. The proposal also includes a provision to bar people fromusing Medicaidunless their citizenship, nationality or immigration status has been verified. More:Trump open to Medicaid work requirements as GOP debates spending cuts It's not immediately clear whether the proposed changes meet the $880 billion in savings the committee was directed to find. The committee will meet Tuesday to consider the legislation. Any cuts to Medicaid are sure to meet with strong opposition, and not just from Democrats. Ina New York Times opinion essaypublished May 12, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., wrote: "It's safe to say the Trump coalition was not pulling the lever for Medicaid cuts in November." Instead, Hawley wrote, working families deserve a cap on prescription drug prices and tax cuts. "What we should not do is eliminate their health care," he said. More:The latest on what President Trump is saying about Medicaid Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, also slammed the House GOP for its proposal, saying Trump's party has "defied the will of the American public by proposing the largest Medicaid cut in history." "This bill must not pass," said Wyden, the ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee. Congressional Republicans aim to finish their spending package by July 4. But the hard deadline will come at the beginning of August, when Treasury Sec. Scott Bessent warned the United States will likelyhit its debt limit. The central piece of the package will be an extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts, which expire at the end of the year. The president also wants to eliminate tax on tips, overtime and Social Security payments. More:Health Sec. Kennedy launches autism project using Medicare and Medicaid data The bill is also expected to roll back several clean energy provisions implemented under former PresidentJoe Bidenand increase spending on defense and border security. Republicans plan to pass the package using a process called "reconciliation," which allows them to bypass the filibuster in the Senate and negates the need for Democratic support. (This story has This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:Republican Medicaid proposal seeks to walk the line on cuts

House GOP Medicaid proposal sets work requirements and a showdown with fiscal hawks

House GOP Medicaid proposal sets work requirements and a showdown with fiscal hawks WASHINGTON – House Republicans plan to enact work requir...
Divided Supreme Court on full display heading into birthright citizenship hearingNew Foto - Divided Supreme Court on full display heading into birthright citizenship hearing

The Supreme Court that will hear a case overbirthright citizenshipthis week has been acting less like a group seeking consensus and more like nine justices clinging to their own interests. Ruptures have occurred in litigation arising from PresidentDonald Trump's effort to transform the federal government and remake America. But more broadly, the fractured court has been evident in the justices' separate opinions, behavior on the bench, and public appearances. Justices have increasingly gone their own way in memoirs and books, too. As a result, the court may be less inclined to speak with one voice. The riven justices could, as the country hurtles toward a possible constitutional showdown, risk appearing like yet another set of political actors, unable to meet head-on threats to the rule of law. Lower court judges have found over and over that the Trump administration has rejected statutory and constitutional guarantees, including, as one judge observed last week, "that neither citizen nor alien be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Thursday's hearing in the white marble and heavy red drape setting will offer the first Supreme Court oral arguments over any second-term Trump initiative since Chief Justice John Roberts swore in the president on January 20. The birthright citizenship case could become a platform for the agendas of individual justices. Already, the focus of "friend of the court" briefs varies widely as outside groups – from constitutional scholars and legal historians to the Chamber of Commerce and Restaurant Law Center – see the case as a catalyst for their respective issues. The justices have not specified the legal questions they're taking up, as is normally the situation. But based on the Trump administration's request for emergency intervention and the limited filings at this point, the justices are likely to decide an important procedural issue, rather than directly decide who's entitled to citizenship. The procedural issue centers on the method lower court judges have employed to stall Trump's proposed end to citizenship for anyone born in the United States. (With limited briefing and a compressed schedule for a ruling, it's doubtful the court would fully address the constitutionality of erasing the birthright promise, which traces to 1868 and ratification of the 14th Amendment.) The method invoked against the Trump administration is known as a "nationwide injunction," when a single US district court judge blocks enforcement of a government action not merely in the judge's district but throughout the country. Administration lawyers have urged the justices to narrow the injunctions to cover only those parties to the cases. A resolution could affect challenges to a vast array of new presidential policy for years to come. When the Supreme Court of earlier eras faced confrontations involving a president, the justices strove for unanimity. But last year's decision in the Trump v. United States presidential immunity case showed this courtunable to pull together the kind of consensusseen in previous separation-of-powers landmarks. Moreover, the justices on the dominant right side of the bench and the dissenting left have increasingly splintered. Roberts is often stymied in compromise by such fellow conservatives as Justice Samuel Alito. And liberal Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson shows no qualmsabout breaking from her senior colleagueson the left to pen her own dissenting opinion. Jackson, who by virtue of her newest-justice status sits at the far end of the bench, has sometimes seemed remote, both literally and figuratively. Ina recent speechat a legal conference in Puerto Rico, Jackson criticized the rhetorical attacks on the judiciary emanating from the administration but also referred to the loneliness that can seize a judge hearing difficult cases. "I do know that loneliness from my own service as a district judge in the District of Columbia," she said. "It is very stressful to have to decide a difficult case in the spotlight and under pressure. … When you add to that having to endure baseless attacks on your intelligence and integrity – coming from people who are not so subtly trying to influence your decision-making – it can sometimes take raw courage to remain steadfast in doing what the law requires." Within their own court ranks, Jackson and Alito have each leveled piercing criticism against colleagues, in opposite directions. In a Saturday night dissent on April 19, Alitounspooled his piquein seven bullet points, angry that the majority had prevented the administration from speedily deporting a group of migrants in Texas as it had done with a separate set of migrants to El Salvador in March. Alito, joined only by Justice Clarence Thomas, disapprovingly noted that the emergency request from the migrants' lawyers had come in "on Good Friday afternoon," and he condemned his colleagues for responding "hastily and prematurely … with dubious factual support" to thwart the administration. While the birthright citizenship case is the first Trump controversy the justices will air in their courtroom, they have decided several other preliminary challenges to his second-term initiatives behind the scenes based only on filings. All have yielded split votes, with the deportation controversies being most fractious. As Justice Sonia Sotomayor dissented in anApril 7 casecentered on Trump's effort to use the 18th century Alien Enemies Act to round up Venezuelan migrants and fly them to a Salvadoran prison, she condemned the administration and her colleagues on the right wing who accepted some of its arguments. "History is no stranger to such lawless regimes, but this Nation's system of laws is designed to prevent, not enable, their rise," she said, "Because the Court should not reward the Government's efforts to erode the rule of law … I respectfully dissent." She was joined by Jackson and the court's third liberal, Justice Elena Kagan. Jackson then broke off and turned up the heat by referring to the court's infamous 1944 decision in Korematsu v. United States, permitting the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II, and writing, "We are just as wrong now as we have been in the past, with similarly devastating consequences. It just seems we are now less willing to face it." Some conservatives have spared no outrage. Afterthe court on March 5rejected a Trump request to keep billions of dollars in foreign aid approved by Congress frozen, Alito wrote that he was "stunned." He also declared that the lower court judge who'd temporarily blocked Trump's freeze onthe foreign aid had engagedin "an act of judicial hubris." Signing onto that dissent were Thomas and two of Trump's appointees from his first term, Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh. Kavanaugh has written separately to play down the ideological differences. And he regularly breaks away in a concurring opinion that tries to appease the losing side. Later in March, Kavanaugh joined the majority's decision upholding federal regulations for licensing "ghost guns," weapons built from mail-order kits. But then Kavanaugh wrote separately to express concern, and potentially to protect from prosecution, individuals and businesses who might "have substantial difficulty determining when weapon parts kits or unfinished frames or receivers qualify as firearms" and inadvertently face stiff penalties. Kavanaugh's statement prompted Sotomayor to then respond in her own solo concurrence: "That worry is unfounded. For more than half a century, firearms dealers, manufacturers, and importers have complied with the Gun Control Act's requirements. … What is new is that some manufacturers have sought to circumvent the Act's requirements by selling easy-to-assemble firearm kits and frames, which they claim fall outside the statute's scope. … The Gun Control Act does not tolerate such evasion." Kavanaugh, who at his 2018 confirmation hearings, repeatedly spoke of being "a team player on a team of nine," had in earlier years been more of a partner to Roberts for compromise at the center of the bench. In recent cases, however, Justice Amy Coney Barrett, Trump's third appointee, has been more inclined to move to the center. Of the nine, Roberts and Kagan are less apt to write separately to put an additional slant on a majority opinion. They are ideological and political opposites, but share an institutional mindset. Kagan, to be sure, does not mask her views during oral arguments.In an April disputeover the validity of a task force that recommends preventative health care services under Obamacare, she alluded to the conservative majority's larger pattern of limiting the power of independent panels. "We don't go around just creating independent agencies," she quipped. "More often we destroy independent agencies." The most intriguing member of the bench remains Barrett, who has an overall conservative record but pulled away from her brethren on enough instances to provoke great wrath from Trump hardliners. She may have pushed for Thursday's special hearing in the birthright citizenship case. When she separated herself from fellow conservatives who summarily threw out a US district court judge's order in the early April Venezuelan-migrant case, she signed onto a part of Sotomayor's dissent criticizing the majority for reaching its conclusion "without oral argument or the benefit of percolation in the lower courts, and with just a few days of deliberation based on barebones briefing." Barrett is bound to offer the public greater insight into her way of operating in September, when she will publish a book on her life and approach to the law. (Last year, Jacksonpublished a memoirtitled "Lovely One," and Kavanaugh is set to publish his own judicial memoir next year. Thomas, Sotomayor and Gorsuch have previously written memoirs and books.) According to promotional materials for Barrett's "Listening to the Law: Reflections on the Court and Constitution," her book will answer such questions as "How has she adjusted to the Court? What is it like to be a Supreme Court justice with school-age children? … How does the Court get its cases? How does it decide them?" And, in a final question crucial for court watchers, the materials concluded, "How doesshedecide?" For more CNN news and newsletters create an account atCNN.com

Divided Supreme Court on full display heading into birthright citizenship hearing

Divided Supreme Court on full display heading into birthright citizenship hearing The Supreme Court that will hear a case overbirthright cit...
NBA playoffs: Dismal start dooms Nuggets as Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Thunder rally in Game 4 winNew Foto - NBA playoffs: Dismal start dooms Nuggets as Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Thunder rally in Game 4 win

DENVER — A 3-1 series lead was inDenver's grasp on Sunday. But an all-time poor first quarter from the Nuggets and a strong close byShai Gilgeous-AlexanderandOklahoma City's bench proved too much for Denver to overcome ina 92-87 Thunder win. The Nuggets managed just eight points in the first quarter in an opening stanza that saw both teams limp out of the gates. Denver eventually found its offensive rhythm and entered the fourth quarter with a six-point lead. But an 11-0 Thunder run sucked the air out of a previously frenetic Ball Arena. The Nuggets went cold from the field again and missed multiple free throws down the stretch as the Thunder held on to tie the Western Conference semifinal series at 2-2. Gilgeous-Alexander led Oklahoma City with 25 points, 6 rebounds, 6 assists and 2 steals.Nikola Jokićposted 27 points, 13 rebounds, 3 assists and 4 steals in the losing effort. Jokić shot 7 of 22 from the field, as Oklahoma City's stifling defense continued to fluster him. The Thunder lost Game 3 on Friday asGilgeous-Alexander faded down the stretchwith a 1-of-8 effort from the field in the fourth quarter and overtime combined. There was no fading from OKC's MVP candidate Sunday. Gilgeous-Alexander led the Thunder's fourth-quarter surge with seven of Oklahoma City's eight points during a critical fourth-quarter stretch that kept the Nuggets at bay. A tough step-back jumper extended Oklahoma City's lead to 83-78. Shai showing off the midrange 🏹pic.twitter.com/pRqpSv05bL — OKC THUNDER (@okcthunder)May 11, 2025 An aggressive drive to the hoop extended the lead again to 88-81 with 2:23 remaining, further thwarting Denver's hopes of a rally. SGA takes it all the way to the cup 😤OKC looking to hold on in Game 4 🍿pic.twitter.com/vsED4jqd10 — NBA TV (@NBATV)May 11, 2025 When the game was done, Gilgeous-Alexander had scored nine points in the final quarter as the Thunder turned a 69-63 deficit into a five-point win. "It felt good," Gilgeous-Alexander said. "It always feels good to win. It sucks to lose. Like I said last game, I'm always willing to take the good and the bad. And last game I took the bad. Tonight, I took the good." Thunder head coach Mark Daigneault praised his star guard's resilience following a poor outing in Game 3. "I always marvel at his ability to get himself back to zero," Daigneault said. "Usually he's getting himself back to zero off of a great game. That's his secret sauce. He stays so level and humble despite his success. "But when he does fail, he doesn't point fingers, he doesn't pout. He's not emotional, he's not angry. He's just so level that he gets himself right back into play. He's the last guy you worry about bouncing back." In a game where both teams were playing with tired legs afterthe Nuggets' overtime win in Game 3 Friday night, Oklahoma City's depth — and Denver's lack thereof — proved critical. The Thunder got 56 combined minutes from five different bench players who totaled 36 points, 17 rebounds and six assists. Aaron Wiggins (11 points), Cason Wallace (11 points) and Alex Caruso (10 points) each scored in double figures and provided Daigneault with a steady rotation of fresh defenders to take on Denver's offensive stars. Caruso, Wiggins and Wallace were all on the floor to start the fourth quarter that launched Oklahoma City's late rally. The Nuggets countered with 41 minutes from three bench players — 27 of them from Russell Westbrook. Denver's bench unit tallied six total points as Westbrook's 2-of-12 effort from the field paced 3-of-15 combined shooting from Nuggets backups. It marked a stark difference between the two rosters and a spot where Oklahoma City has a clear advantage. "They were huge," Daigneault said of his bench unit. "They made huge shots. And they gave us huge defense and toughness plays. ... "We played a lot of minutes — our top guys played a lot of minutes the other night in the overtime game. Quick turnaround and early game today. We made a very intentional effort to use our depth today and get everybody going." The effort of the bench unit drew praise from Oklahoma City's starters, including All-Star Jalen Williams. "We just have guys who are ready to go. ... We have a lot of guys that can play and do a lot of things on the floor, and it doesn't have to be scoring," Williams said. "That's what makes our team special. Being able to play multiple guys in a series and for them to have the same mentality to be ready and make plays is really a key." Nuggets coach David Adelman, meanwhile, faced postgame questions about the lack of production from Denver's bench and maintaining a short rotation during Denver's fourth-quarter collapse. "We just have to get more from more people," Adelman said. "And I have to maybe play more than eight guys. I felt like, once we pushed [the lead] to eight [points], I really stayed with a shorter rotation thinking that we had a chance to kind of push that thing and take control of the game." In a game with few offensive bright spots, Jokić's 27-point effort was by far the Nuggets' best. But for a third straight game, it didn't come with the efficiency Denver's three-time MVP is accustomed to. Jokić exploded for 42 points on 15-of-29 shooting in Denver's come-from-behind win in Game 1. But his 7-of-22 (31.8%) effort Sunday marked a third consecutive game in which he's shot less than 40% from the field. Jokić shot 6 of 16 (37.5%) in Denver's blowout loss in Game 2 and 8 of 25 (32%) in Denver's Game 3 win. He somewhat made up for his struggles Sunday with an 11-of-14 effort at the line, but he missed two critical free throws late in the fourth quarter. A defensive effort led by Oklahoma City's Isaiah Hartenstein is definitely giving Jokić fits. "It's a team effort, I think," Hartenstein said. "We do a great job of — yeah, it's mostly my job to defend him one-on-one — but I don't think my teammates will leave me on an island. That's what makes it so good. "He's gonna make tough shots, and you're gonna have to mentally live with that. But I think we're doing a good job of swarming, rotating the right way and executing a game plan." Jokić credited Oklahoma City's defense with showing him "a little bit of everything." "They're physical, they're handsy, they are coming — they are good with help," Jokić said. "And sometimes I just cannot make a shot." Maybe a 1:30 p.m. local tip wasn't the best idea. After a Game 3 that went to overtime and left both teams in the arena past midnight Friday, neither team looked ready to play early Sunday. In fact, they played the worst first quarter in NBA playoff history — in terms of scoring, at least. The Thunder took a 17-8 lead into the second quarter after a first that set multiple marks for futility. The combined 25 points were the fewest of any first quarter in NBA playoff history. For the Nuggets, their eight points markedtheir lowest output in a single quarter in their postseason history. Thepregame betting over of 228.5 points at BetMGMwas never in peril. It was a remarkable display of offensive ineptitude by both teams, particularly from the Nuggets. And good defense can't take all the credit. Both teams repeatedly missed open jumpers. Air balls were aplenty. Most of them were from 3-point distance. Oklahoma City managed a single made 3 on 11 attempts. Lugentz Dort halted an 0-for-8 Thunder start from long distance with a 3 with 4:57 remaining in the stanza. It's an effort the Nuggets surely would have traded for. Denver didn't hit a single 3 in the first quarter. The Nuggets shot 0 of 13 from long distance in a 2-of-21 effort from the field that shockingly stood out from Oklahoma City's own tepid 6-of-22 performance. Westbrook finally broke the 3-point drought for Denver that extended to 0 for 16 into the second quarter. Westbrook's 3 with 4:24 remaining in the half sent Ball Arena into a frenzy and cut the Thunder's lead to 31-26. The Nuggets were somehow still in the game, thanks to Oklahoma City's own offensive struggles. But the slow start was ultimately too much for Denver to overcome. Both head coaches talked about the short turnaround time pregame. "It's extremely short rest," Nuggets coach David Adelman said. "We tried to stay off our feet as much as possible. ... "It's short rest for both teams, obviously. They're much younger. They watch different Netflix shows than our guys do." Adelman added he believed the Nuggets were "ready to play." Daigneault downplayed the turnaround time as something that wouldn't give one team the advantage over the other. "No different from Denver is how we look at it," Daigneault said. "It's the same time for them, the same reset for them. Neither team is at an advantage or disadvantage with that, so we really don't think about it. It's an equal playing field today for both teams." The Thunder finished the contest shooting 35.6% from the floor and 24.4% (10 of 41) from 3; the Nuggets shot 31.3% from the field and 24.4% (11 of 45) from long range. Game 5 is scheduled for 9:30 p.m. ET in Oklahoma City on Tuesday.

NBA playoffs: Dismal start dooms Nuggets as Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Thunder rally in Game 4 win

NBA playoffs: Dismal start dooms Nuggets as Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Thunder rally in Game 4 win DENVER — A 3-1 series lead was inDenve...
Panthers shut out Maple Leafs 2-0 to even seriesNew Foto - Panthers shut out Maple Leafs 2-0 to even series

SUNRISE, Fla. (AP) — Sergei Bobrovsky stopped 23 shots for his fifth career playoff shutout, Carter Verhaeghe and Sam Bennett scored and the Florida Panthers beat the Toronto Maple Leafs 2-0 on Sunday night in Game 4 to even the Eastern Conference semifinal series. Verhaeghe scored on a power play in the first period, Bennett added the insurance score with 7:50 left and Bobrovsky did the rest. He's the first goalie with two shutouts this year in the playoffs. Joseph Woll stopped 35 shots for the Maple Leafs, who took a 2-0 series lead with a pair of home wins and now return there for Game 5 on Wednesday night with the series tied. Verhaeghe's goal came on Florida's fourth power play of the first period. Matthew Tkachuk, along the left-wing boards, threaded a pass through the slot and past two defenders onto the waiting stick ofVerhaeghe — who slammed a one-timerpast Woll. It was part of a spree of shots early for Florida. The Panthers took 21 of the game's first 26 shots on net, simply controlling play for long stretches and keeping all the action in front of Woll. He held firm, time and again, keeping Toronto in it. STARS 5, JETS 2 DALLAS (AP) — Mikko Rantanen had a goal and two assists, including on the tiebreaking goal by Alexander Petrovic that was finally confirmed after a lengthy review as Dallas beat Winnipeg to take lead in the second-round Western Conference series. Officials reviewed Petrovic's goal for well over five minutes and while determining there was a kicking motion, the goal was good after the puck went off goalie Connor Hellebuyck's stick and into the net with 16:09 left. That all came off the rebound of the initial a shot by Rantanen, who 49 seconds after play resumed scored his ninth goal of the playoffs — all coming in the last six games. Game 4 is Tuesday night in Dallas. Roope Hintz had a goal and an assist for the Stars, and Wyatt Johnston added a late goal. Sam Steel and Mikael Granlund each had two assists. Rantanen, who has 18 points this postseason, had the primary assist on a power-play goal by Hintz only 2:27 in for a 1-0 lead. When Dallas scored again late in the first period for a 2-1 lead, Rantanen was on the ice for defenseman Thomas Harley's goal, but the assists went to Granlund and Steel. Thatended Rantanen's NHL playoffs-record streakof consecutive goals involved in at 13 in a row for the Stars since Game 5 of their first-round series against Colorado. Stars goalie Jake Oettinger stopped 23 shots. Hellebuyck, the odds-on favorite to win his third Vezina Trophy as the league's best goalie, and also among three finalists for the Hart Trophy that goes to the MVP of the NHL regular season, dropped to 0-4 in road games this postseason after giving up the five goals on 26 shots.

Panthers shut out Maple Leafs 2-0 to even series

Panthers shut out Maple Leafs 2-0 to even series SUNRISE, Fla. (AP) — Sergei Bobrovsky stopped 23 shots for his fifth career playoff shutout...

 

VS JORNAL © 2015 | Distributed By My Blogger Themes | Designed By Templateism.com