Penguins Prediction Rewind: Inconsistency keeps Kris Letang from returning to elite status |

Penguins Prediction Rewind: Inconsistency keeps Kris Letang from returning to elite status

Jonathan Bombulie
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Penguins defenseman Kris Letang out on the ice after morning skate before 6 of the Stanley Cup Final Sunday, June 11 , 2017 at Bridgestone Arena.

Note: Last summer, beat writer Jonathan Bombulie made a series of predictions leading up to the start of the 2017-18 season. Some of them were hilariously off the mark. In this series, Bombulie will explain what he was thinking and where his logic went off course.


Kris Letang will not finish in the top five in Norris Trophy voting.


— Even if Letang’s neck is no longer a concern, it’s entirely possible some other ailment strikes. Letang plays a dynamic, physical game. He doesn’t take it easy. Perhaps as a result, he’s played as many as 70 games only once in the last six seasons. It’s tough to keep him on the ice.

— It’s safe to bet that Letang will remain the team’s top offensive option on the blue line, but the gap is closing. If Letang and Justin Schultz have to share the offensive production, they’ll probably have to share Norris votes as well.

— This is a bit of a golden age for NHL defensemen. With Erik Karlsson and Brent Burns putting up huge numbers and Duncan Keith, Drew Doughty and Victor Hedman displaying two-way greatness, not to mention the guys down in the Nashville, it’s harder than ever to crack the Norris voting.


A sample of Facebook comments:

— “The team just got better without even making any acquisitions in the offseason. The addition of Letang is all they need. Pure and simple! A top five defenseman in the league!”

— “This guy is a bum. If you don’t believe me, just watch for yourselves. He is constantly beat on the corners and does nothing in front of the net. He does nothing for this team except eat up a lot of cash.”


The memory of Letang on the ice for pivotal goals against in the Washington Capitals series is probably fresh in the mind of many fans, but looking back objectively, it was a complicated season for Letang.

In one sense, his recovery from neck surgery went extraordinarily well. He played 79 games, his highest total since 2011-12, and averaged 25 minutes of ice time per game.

In another sense, it didn’t go well. Letang admitted his stamina didn’t come back as quickly as he expected, and perhaps as a result, the first half of his season was not good. In 37 games before New Year’s Day, the Penguins were outscored 38-14 when he was on the ice at even strength.

In one sense, he recovered from those early season struggled remarkably. After New Year’s Day, he was on the ice for more goals for than goals against and his 56.5 shot-attempt percentage was in the top five among NHL defensemen.

In another sense, glaring errors in the Capitals series washed away all the progress he made at the tail end of the regular season.

There’s plenty in there to focus on for both the optimist and pessimist. On balance, though, Letang wasn’t anywhere near consistent enough to merit Norris consideration.


The prediction was correct in that Letang wasn’t a Norris contender, but there were plenty of flaws in the rationale.

Most notably, it wasn’t external factors that prevented Letang from reaching his previous heights. His struggles had nothing to do with the emergence of Schultz or the competition he faces from the other elite defensemen in the league.

His struggles were internal, as he made mistakes at critical times down the stretch.


There is no topic more polarizing among Penguins fans than the play of the team’s top offensive defenseman.

Keep up with the Pittsburgh Penguins all season long.

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jonathan at [email protected] or via Twitter @BombulieTrib.

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.