For three Baby Pens, all signs point to Pittsburgh
Wilkes-Barre/Scranton Penguins winger Eric Tangradi woke up early Sunday morning in a Hartford hotel room to welcome news.
“Hey, Tango,” said forward Paul Thompson, his roommate on the road. “Lockout's over.”
Tangradi, rookie winger Beau Bennett and defenseman Robert Bortuzzo were healthy scratches for the first time this season when the Baby Pens lost, 2-0, to the Connecticut Whale on Sunday.
“All I know is we got a day off to get healthy,” Tangradi said. “As far as details, I don't know anything yet.”
It's not hard to connect the dots and presume those three will head to Pittsburgh to join 20 players on one-way contracts on the Penguins' training camp roster.
Tangradi and Bortuzzo have NHL experience and reached the point under the old CBA that they would have needed to clear waivers to play in the minors. It's no surprise they'll get looks.
Bennett is different. The 2010 first-round pick who missed most of last season at the University of Denver with a wrist injury has exceeded expectations. He leads the Baby Pens in scoring with 16 points (5 goals) in his past 16 games.
Because he is an imaginative, play-making winger, the Penguins might be tempted to try him in a top-six role.
“He's obviously someone that can help your team offensively,” Baby Pens coach John Hynes said.
Two other players who would be considered candidates for inclusion on a training camp roster — defensemen Brian Strait and Simon Despres — were in the Baby Pens' lineup Sunday.
Jonathan Bombulie is a freelance writer.
Show commenting policy
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.