Daniel Sprong Containment Thread Part 3 | Mod Warning Post #1

[Ryder71]

No it isn’t. They have a ton of two way forwards that need help scoring and Sprong was brought in because his skill is scoring and he isn’t doing it.

Sprong is being given minutes to score at ES with their most talented centers and isn’t scoring.

If Phil Kessel isn’t producing at ES, he has no point to be in high our line-up correct?

I see what you're getting at, but I fundamentally disagree. These things go in cycles. I don't expect Sprong to be this ineffective for much longer. Just like I don't expect the ducks to continue to not score. I'm also cognizant of the fact that Sprong is a very young player. I would expect him to grow and evolve with time.

 

[Ogrezilla]

No it isn’t. They have a ton of two way forwards that need help scoring and Sprong was brought in because his skill is scoring and he isn’t doing it.

Sprong is being given minutes to score at ES with their most talented centers and isn’t scoring.

If Phil Kessel isn’t producing at ES, he has no point to be in high our line-up correct?

Right. Sprong needs to score. And if that means he needs his center to always create chances for him, that's not going to work for very long.

 

[Gurglesons]

They were good players without Geno, but generally speaking they were complimentary pieces. I'm not saying Sprong is on their level, I'm saying he''s somewhat in that mold. And to be clear I was referring to both players as they were when they played for the Pens. I thought that would be the best manner from which to reference it.

Is this supposed to be a positive thing?

It seems like you’re agreeing with what we all said about Sprong all along. His game isn’t good enough to play him above a 3rd or 4th line role. And his game isn’t suited for bottom six usage, so his chances will come on mediocre teams desperate for scoring at any cost.

 

[Ryder71]

Is this supposed to be a positive thing?

It seems like you’re agreeing with what we all said about Sprong all along. His game isn’t good enough to play him above a 3rd or 4th line role.

I'm not saying it's positive or negative, I just think it is what it is.

And no I don't agree that he should be on a lower line. If he's not in the top six, or isn't on a quality teams top nine, it' a waste for him to be relegated to a 4th line. He needs a center with a lot of offensive acumen. Be patient with Daniel.

 

[Shwag33]

I see where ryder is getting at, but sprong just doesn't seem to be in the right places at the right times. Even two of his goals scored with the ducks early were not in a high danger area; they were scored almost on the goal line. If that's your spot to score goals from you're going to be in for a rough time.

He can't create his own shot well enough and doesn't have the IQ or possibly speed to be in the right areas to score goals in the NHL.

 

[Gurglesons]

I'm not saying it's positive or negative, I just think it is what it is.

And no I don't agree that he should be on a lower line. If he's not in the top six, or isn't on a quality teams top nine, it' a waste for him to be relegated to a 4th line. He needs a center with a lot of offensive acumen. Be patient with Daniel.

It’s hard for me to be patient with a player that doesn’t score and gets scored on frequently.

 

[ziggyjoe212]

Sprong is on pace for 27 goals on the 2nd worst offensive team in the NHL. That's not too shabby for a rookie.

This may end up as a win-win trade.

 

[Riptide]

When they were on a winning streak Sprong was producing though. That's when the team as a whole was playing well. My point is how the team goes Sprong likely follows. But he's not gonna be the catalyst or lead the way on that front. I don't have a soft spot for him, I just think I understand the type of player he is better. He's like a Sykora or a poor mans Neal. He can produce but it largely is dependent on his linemates. Kinda like a parasite. And I don't mean that in a derogatory way, but that's sort of what I'm getting at.

The issue with that, is that even when Sprong was producing and the team was winning, his analytics still sucked and he still had a negative goal differential.

I was wrong about this kid. I thought he was going to be special, and was furious when they traded him. Now I see that JR was within his rights to trade him, he's not a bad player but he certainly isn't what we thought he was.

We all saw his potential. And we were all salivating over what might have been - so I get being high on him as what he might be if his potential hit - it didn't.

 

[Ryder71]

The issue with that, is that even when Sprong was producing and the team was winning, his analytics still sucked and he still had a negative goal differential.

But there are four other players on the ice and they also need to do their part. His job is to score, not be Bergeron on the backcheck. I get your point but I think it's a team issue as much or more than a Sprong issue.

 

[Gurglesons]

Sprong is on pace for 27 goals on the 2nd worst offensive team in the NHL. That's not too shabby for a rookie.

This may end up as a win-win trade.

True.

 

[EightyOne]

Sprong is on pace for 27 goals on the 2nd worst offensive team in the NHL. That's not too shabby for a rookie.

This may end up as a win-win trade.

Hmm.

Why do I calculate more like way less than 27 goals?

ANA has 38 games left. Sprong scored 5 goals in 15 games with them. At best he's on pace for 15 goals, right?

Am I wrong? Are you calculating that over 82 games? Why do an 82 game pace when 30% of the year wasn't on ANA?

 

[Gurglesons]

But there are four other players on the ice and they also need to do their part. His job is to score, not be Bergeron on the backcheck. I get your point but I think it's a team issue as much or more than a Sprong issue.

This isn’t how the NHL works in today’s era.

 

[Gurglesons]

Hmm.

Why do I calculate more like way less than 27 goals?

ANA has 38 games left. Sprong scored 5 goals in 15 games with them. At best he's on pace for 15 goals, right?

Am I wrong? Are you calculating that over 82 games? Why do an 82 game pace when 30% of the year wasn't on ANA?

He is on a 27 goal pace if we factor it out to an 81 game season since coming to Anaheim.

Given his habit of scoring in bunches, I would say that has a lot to do with his lack of games played though.

Interestingly enough if we factor our Pettersson he’s on pace for 27 points as a defensive stud.

So, we still win the trade because a 30 pt defensive defenseman is much more rare than a 32 point RW scoring 25 with tons of PP time.

 

[Empoleon8771]

Want to know why guys like Pirri can't make the NHL full time, despite scoring in small sample sizes in the NHL and lighting up the AHL? Because teams don't want players who only bring scoring, unless they're elite at scoring. If Sprong doesn't become an elite scorer or can't round out his game, he won't make it to the NHL full time. Being a watered down version of Sykora (which is an insult to Sykora, but w/e) isn't a good thing for Sprong.

One trick ponies don't make the NHL anymore. If Sprong is useless without an elite playmaker setting him up, he'll be in Europe in 3 years.

 

[Ryder71]

This isn’t how the NHL works in today’s era.

I think there are plenty of NHLers who aren't exactly good two way players. Not as much as before but still there are some. Kessel, Neal, Tarasenko, Laine as examples.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I think there are plenty of NHLers who aren't exactly good two way players. Not as much as before but still there are some. Kessel, Neal, Tarasenko, Laine as examples.

Guys like Pirri and Pulkkinen are way better comparables for Sprong right now than those guys. You're insulting those guys by comparing them to Sprong. Those guys don't need to be paired with a specific elite offensive center for them to be productive.

 

[Ryder71]

Guys like Pirri and Pulkkinen are way better comparables for Sprong right now than those guys. You're insulting those guys by comparing them to Sprong. Those guys don't need to be paired with a specific elite offensive center for them to be productive.

I'm speaking about it in the context of backchecking, not production.

 

[Gurglesons]

I think there are plenty of NHLers who aren't exactly good two way players. Not as much as before but still there are some. Kessel, Neal, Tarasenko, Laine as examples.

Kessel at 21 - 36 goals | 60 Points - Elite scoring on that Boston squad.
Neal at 21 - 24 goals | 37 Points - He was also an absolute truck of a player before his 1st suspension in Dallas
Tarasenko at 21 - 8 goals | 19 points - I’ll humor you and say you have a point here.
Laine - Not yet 21. Already has 100 goals.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I'm speaking about it in the context of backchecking, not production.

My point still stands though, especially with mentioning the part about needing an elite center. None of those guys need to be playing with Malkin to put up good numbers. Teams deal with their defensive issues because they're so good offensively. Unless Sprong becomes a 25 goal, 50 point player, teams won't deal with his lack of defensive game.

In most cases, what pixies said is completely true. The exceptions are the guys who produce enough where they're still a positive to their team through their production. Coincidentally, those guys are also the guys that change teams often.

 

[Riptide]

I think you're trying to be too nuanced here. I'm saying that if you expect Sprong to be the guy who's gonna lead the Ducks back to scoring lots of goals I'm telling you he's not that type of player.

Lead the team? No. But no one is really expecting him to be that guy.

He is a lot like Sykora and Neal, how can you say otherwise. Neither of those guys drove their respective lines. They were complimentary players. And in Neals case Geno maximized Neals goal scoring prowess. I'm just wondering if Getzlaf, Henrique or whatever center there is doing something similar for Sprong. It doesn't seem that they are. And again it's more an indictment of the center than it is the complimentary winger.

Neither of Sykora or Neal A) required that their center be generational just to be effective NHLer's. B) were absolute trash away from the puck. And both brought more to their game then just their offense.

I'm not saying it's positive or negative, I just think it is what it is.

And no I don't agree that he should be on a lower line. If he's not in the top six, or isn't on a quality teams top nine, it' a waste for him to be relegated to a 4th line. He needs a center with a lot of offensive acumen. Be patient with Daniel.

Sadly, currently he needs more than that.

 

[Ryder71]

Kessel at 21 - 36 goals | 60 Points - Elite scoring on that Boston squad.
Neal at 21 - 24 goals | 37 Points - He was also an absolute truck of a player before his 1st suspension in Dallas
Tarasenko at 21 - 8 goals | 19 points - I’ll humor you and say you have a point here.
Laine - Not yet 21. Already has 100 goals.

What does that have to do with backchecking though? That's all well and good, but you asserted that their aren't players who don't play a two way game. I gave examples to the contrary.

 

[Riptide]

Sprong is on pace for 27 goals on the 2nd worst offensive team in the NHL. That's not too shabby for a rookie.

This may end up as a win-win trade.

And is on pace for the other team to score 44 goals while he's on the ice at ES (at least last time I looked).

 

[Riptide]

But there are four other players on the ice and they also need to do their part. His job is to score, not be Bergeron on the backcheck. I get your point but I think it's a team issue as much or more than a Sprong issue.

And every one of them does better when Sprong isn't there with them - that's not a team issue, that's a Sprong issue.

 

[Ryder71]

Lead the team? No. But no one is really expecting him to be that guy.


Neither of Sykora or Neal A) required that their center be generational just to be effective NHLer's. B) were absolute trash away from the puck. And both brought more to their game then just their offense.


Sadly, currently he needs more than that.

Neal and Sykora are complimentary pieces, which was what my point was. That's not to say they aren't better away from the puck. But generally speaking they didn't drive their lines here in PITT. If our centers were struggling, you didn't see them light it up on their own, did you?

 

[Gurglesons]

What does that have to do with backchecking though? That's all well and good, but you asserted that their aren't players who don't play a two way game. I gave examples to the contrary.

You gave examples of elite goal scorers in the league.

Sprong is not an elite goal scorer. He’s a 30 point pace player no matter where he plays. Sid’s wing, Getzlaf’s wing, top six minutes bottom six minutes.

30 pt pace players like ZAR that play a lesser offensive game, but don’t get caved in are always going to be more valuable than that.