Sidney Crosby’s OT winner in Edmonton up for NHL goal of the year | TribLIVE.com
Penguins/NHL

Sidney Crosby’s OT winner in Edmonton up for NHL goal of the year

Jonathan Bombulie
1160290_web1_PensCrosbyGoal
AP
Edmonton Oilers’ goaltender Cam Talbot (33) looks on as Pittsburgh Penguins’ Sidney Crosby (87) looks for a shot during the first period of an NHL hockey game, Tuesday, Oct. 23, 2018 in Edmonton, Alberta.

A stunning individual effort by Sidney Crosby that gave the Pittsburgh Penguins an overtime victory in Edmonton in October is a nominee for NHL goal of the year.

Goal of the Year is one of 20 categories on the ballot in the NHL’s Fan Choice Awards, which hand out offbeat honors ranging from Best Goalie Mask to Best Team Dog. Voting is open on the league’s website through June 15.

Crosby stickhandled through a host of Oilers before scoring on the backhand.

Crosby’s competition is stiff. Edmonton’s Connor McDavid pulled a puck back between his skates and scored against Dallas in March.

Calgary’s Mikael Backlund dangled through the Washington defense in February and scored on a version of the backhand move that Peter Forsberg made famous.

Florida’s Aleksander Barkov scored on a between-the-legs shot on a breakaway in February.

Jonathan Bombulie is a Tribune-Review staff writer. 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 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.