Penguins Prediction Rewind: Jake Guentzel, not Phil Kessel, was team’s most dangerous scorer |

Penguins Prediction Rewind: Jake Guentzel, not Phil Kessel, was team’s most dangerous scorer

Jonathan Bombulie
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
The Penguins’ Jake Guentzel beats the Canucks’ Anders Nilsson in the first period Tuesday, Oct. 16, 2018 at PPG Paints Arena.

Last summer, beat writer Jonathan Bombulie made a series of predictions leading up to the start of the 2018-19 season. Some were OK. Some were hilariously off the mark. In this series, Bombulie will explain what he was thinking and where his logic went off course.


Which Penguins winger will score the most goals this season?

A. Phil Kessel

B. Patric Hornqvist

C. Jake Guentzel

D. None of the above


A. Phil Kessel


C. Jake Guentzel


• At this time last year, Kessel was one of only 16 active NHL players to have scored at least 330 career goals. He probably wouldn’t shoot 13.0% or score 12 times on the power play like he did while netting 34 goals in 2017-18, but he wouldn’t drop off enough to fall out of the top spot among the team’s wingers.

• Guentzel was obviously well on his way to establishing himself as a top scorer, but it was hard to pinpoint where his ceiling and floor were when it comes to production. He scored 16 goals in half a season as a rookie, then followed that up with 22 goals in his first full season. It was hard to say which pace would be Guentzel’s norm. Picking a spot in between was prudent.

• Hornqvist’s 29 goals from 2017-18 looked like an anomaly, largely because 15 of them came on the power play.


A sample of Facebook comments:

• “I’ll pick Phil by a good margin if he plays with Malkin or Crosby. If he receives typical third-line ice time with Brassard and has as much success playing with him as he did last season, he might not score 20 goals.”

• “It’s really hard to bet against Phil Kessel here. Guentzel might hit 30 this year, but I don’t think he will be able to beat out Phil.”


• Kessel didn’t have a bad year when it came to goal scoring, but he took a step back, going from 34 goals to 27. His even-strength total dropped from 22 to 15. His shots on goal total dropped from 449 to 370, the lowest for a full season in his career.

• Guentzel had a breakthrough season, finishing the year as one of 13 NHL players to crack the 40-goal mark. His shot total skyrocketed from 296 to 375. His shooting percentage came in at a robust 17.6%.

• Hornqvist’s power-play goal total nosedived from 15 to 6. He tied Bryan Rust for third in goals among the team’s wingers with 18.


• Guentzel’s growth as a goal scorer wasn’t incremental; it was dramatic. His stellar 2018 playoff performance wasn’t just a hot stretch; it was a sign of things to come. His career shooting percentage of 16.3% doesn’t really look like a fluke anymore.

• Kessel’s drop in production wasn’t related to falling power-play production or a change in puck luck. He scored fewer goals mostly because he took fewer shots.


• Guentzel is the real deal. Scoring 40 goals without the benefit of much power-play time is a trick few players in the league could pull off. Make future predictions accordingly.

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.