Penguins aren’t longshots to claim 2020 Stanley Cup |

Penguins aren’t longshots to claim 2020 Stanley Cup

Jonathan Bombulie
St. Louis Blues from left Brayden Schenn, Jordan Binnington, Joel Edmundson, Robert Bortuzzo and Vladimir Tarasenko, of Russia, right, celebrate with the Stanley Cup in the locker room after defeating the Boston Bruins in Game 7 of the NHL Stanley Cup Final, Wednesday, June 12, 2019, in Boston.

Despite an uneven season and a dismal playoff showing, the Pittsburgh Penguins remain in the top third of the league as far as bookmakers are concerned.

The Penguins are an 18-1 shot to win the 2020 Stanley Cup, according to odds released by hours after the St. Louis Blues beat the Boston Bruins in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final to secure the 2019 championship. Only nine teams have shorter odds.

Tampa Bay, which had a record-breaking regular season before being swept out of the first round of the playoffs by Columbus, will open as the 8-1 favorites, followed by Boston and Vegas at 9-1 and Toronto at 10-1.

The defending champion Blues will be a 12-1 shot, joined by Colorado. San Jose, Washington and Winnipeg at are 16-1, followed by Calgary and the Penguins at 18-1.

The longest of longshots is Ottawa at 100-1.

Follow the Pittsburgh Penguins all offseason long.

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review assistant sports editor. You can contact Jonathan by email at [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Sports | Penguins
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.