Share This Page

Letang, Michalek are hit with concussions

Montreal team physical Dr. David Mulder, MD, oversaw Penguins defenseman Kris Letang after he absorbed a hit from Canadiens forward Max Pacioretty on Nov. 27 and concluded that, despite a broken nose, Letang was fit to immediately return to the game.

Letang, it turns out, was concussed.

Penguins coach Dan Bylsma announced Monday that Letang and defenseman Zbynek Michalek, who were both injured in Montreal, have concussions. The severity of the concussions remains unknown, as does any possible return date. Neither player was active against Boston on Monday.

Bylsma explained that the decision to allow Letang to return — the defenseman scored the game-winning goal in overtime following the hit from Pacioretty, who was subsequently suspended three games for the blow to the head - was out of his hands.

"That's completely by the doctors," Bylsma said. "It's not anything to do with our training staff. We saw Dr. Mulder in Montreal. I think he has the longest tenure in the league. He's well respected. He went and saw Kris, and at that time, Kris didn't have any issues other than they rearranged his nose."

Concussion symptoms do not always immediately occur. When center Sidney Crosby sustained a concussion Jan. 5 against Tampa Bay, he remained in the contest through its duration and did not have a headache until the following morning.

Michalek was also injured in the third period against Montreal. Although it isn't known when either will return, Michalek was not plagued by headaches over the weekend, perhaps an indication that his concussion is less severe.

Letang, who also has a history of migraine headaches, has been dealing with symptoms but the team wasn't initially certain if they were concussion-related.

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.