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

[Saints11]

I have said this before and will say it again; Sprong will have a career as a poor man’s Thomas Vanek. He will bounce from team to team being moved not for what he can do, but for what he doesn’t do. He will be a hired gun. A weak link on a defensive team who will score his share of goals. He is a shooter, not a complete hockey player. The league has a lot of them. They come in score their goals and are then moved out because they frustrate teammates, coaches, and the front office after a year or two. Think James Neal, and to a lesser extent, Phil Kessel.

 

[Gurglesons]

Why are all his linemates absolved when that line gets scored on? Why is he the only one to get the blame? Don't you see that's a bit of an unbalanced argument.

Because Sprong is statistically the worst defensive player on the Ducks?

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Sprong has exactly the same CF% in Anaheim as Sheary does in Buffalo. Except he scores goals and points at a better pace.

False at least 5v5.

Sheary - 1.485 p/60
Sprong- 0.906 p/60

 

[Ryder71]

Because Sprong is statistically the worst defensive player on the Ducks?

By what metrics specifically?

 

[Empoleon8771]

I don't know why WC says "Sheary sucks" while also using Sheary as a benchmark for Sprong.

 

[Gurglesons]

By what metrics specifically?

Every metric.

 

[Ryder71]

What I find funny is that couple of Pens fans are over on the Ducks board telling them just how bad Sprong is, and the vast majority (that I saw anyhow) aren't necessarily buying it. lol

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

So, as I said many times Daniel Sprong at his best would be Conor Sheary at his worst?

This is neither Sprong at his best nor Sheary at his worst.

This is a 21 year old Sprong, in the first opportunity he's had to be used properly at ES and on the PP, outpacing the standard a 26 year old Sheary has set for the last 2 years.

That's why we should have used him in those roles when we had the chances while he was here. That's why pining for the much older, much more expensive Sheary when we had Sprong in our back pocket was goofy.

 

[Empoleon8771]

What I find funny is that couple of Pens fans are over on the Ducks board telling them just how bad Sprong is, and the vast majority (that I saw anyhow) aren't necessarily buying it. lol

They also realize that he's a project and they can't score goals. I think there's a big difference in expectations for Sprong between the two fanbases.

 

[Ryder71]

Every metric.

I think you're conflating his individual production and then using a team stat to show how horrible he is. Which again is an unbalanced manner in which to debate the subject.

 

[Ryder71]

They also realize that he's a project and they can't score goals. I think there's a big difference in expectations for Sprong between the two fanbases.

Now this I certainly agree with. But I think the people who see the value in Sprong on this here board are far more pragmatic about it.

 

[EightyOne]

Who the f*** would go argue THAT sort of thing on another board?

God. That's like DMing your ex's new beau and telling them how they never picked up their toenail clippings from the floor.

f***. It's one thing to bitch about players here. It's totally acceptable, in fact.

 

[Gurglesons]

What I find funny is that couple of Pens fans are over on the Ducks board telling them just how bad Sprong is, and the vast majority (that I saw anyhow) aren't necessarily buying it. lol

Well, I don’t think anyone in this thread thinks Sprong is “that bad”.

I think you and my assessment of Sprong is pretty similar. He’s a Pirri, Parenteau, etc type that needs someone else to do the work for him and he’ll produce.

The thing is you think he will prospect to more and needs minutes to do that, I think the flaws in his game have a much lesser chance to suddenly disappear especially at 21.

 

[Gurglesons]

This is neither Sprong at his best nor Sheary at his worst.

This is a 21 year old Sprong, in the first opportunity he's had to be used properly at ES and on the PP, outpacing the standard a 26 year old Sheary has set for the last 2 years.

That's why we should have used him in those roles when we had the chances while he was here. That's why pining for the much older, much more expensive Sheary when we had Sprong in our back pocket was goofy.

If we used Sprong in our top six we would likely be out of the playoffs given his statistics and the few games we were able to win when he was here.

 

[Ryder71]

Well, I don’t think anyone in this thread thinks Sprong is “that bad”.

I think you and my assessment of Sprong is pretty similar. He’s a Pirri, Parenteau, etc type that needs someone else to do the work for him and he’ll produce.

The thing is you think he will prospect to more and needs minutes to do that, I think the flaws in his game have a much lesser change to suddenly disappear especially at 21.

I don't know about topping out at a Pirri per se but generally speaking you're probably right. Maybe my expectations are a bit lower than yours. I have not been surprised one bit with how Sprong has done out in Disneyland.

 

[Gurglesons]

Who the **** would go argue THAT sort of thing on another board?

God. That's like DMing your ex's new beau and telling them how they never picked up their toenail clippings from the floor.

****. It's one thing to ***** about players here. It's totally acceptable, in fact.

Any time I discuss Sprong with that fan base I think they have the same exact opinion as I do. He’s a hugely flawed player that scores goal.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

I don't know why WC says "Sheary sucks" while also using Sheary as a benchmark for Sprong.

Because I said from the beginning that if Sprong were given the chance with a scoring line center and used properly on the PP, he could outproduce what Sheary did last year with the best center in the world. It was prompted by pining for Sheary from certain quarters earlier this year while we kept Sprong on the 4th line. I even made a bet about it.

And here we are.

 

[Gurglesons]

I don't know about topping out at a Pirri per se but generally speaking you're probably right. Maybe my expectations are a bit lower than yours. I have not been surprised one bit with how Sprong has done out in Disneyland.

Neither am I. My assessment was always that he’d produce in a top six or nine role.

My issue is that people wanted him played over Simon, Hornqvist, Kessel and Rust. You know players that play the game the right way and are more complete.

 

[Gurglesons]

Because I said from the beginning that if Sprong were given the chance with a scoring line center and used properly on the PP, he could outproduce what Sheary did last year with the best center in the world. It was prompted by pining for Sheary from certain quarters earlier this year while we kept Sprong on the 4th line. I even made a bet about it.

And here we are.

The amazing pace of 35 points versus 30 points with Sprong getting 1st PP minutes.

27 EV Sheary versus 20 EV Sprong.

But Getzlaf isn’t Crosby or something. Even though Sheary spent 47% of his ES ice time away from Crosby last year.

 

[Ryder71]

Neither am I. My assessment was always that he’d produce in a top six or nine role.

My issue is that people wanted him played over Simon, Hornqvist, Kessel and Rust. You know players that play the game the right way and are more complete.

But my contention with that was that Rust was anemic for quite some time and Horny was battling injuries. Yet they still didn't give him a shot with Geno. So while I see your point, it's not that cut and dry IMO. There were ample circumstances he could have been given a look.

 

[Empoleon8771]

I still love the Pirri comparison for Sprong, because I think it just fits so well. Pirri is a guy that has scored a ton of goals in the NHL in a relatively short career, with him having a career average of like 24 goals and 40 points per 82 games. He has been consistent with his production outside of a poor year with the NYR in 2016-2017, with being a .5 PPG player in all of 2013-2014 (25 points in 49 games), 2014-2015 (24 points in 49 games) and 2015-2016 (29 points in 61 games). Despite all of this, he still can't stick in the NHL today and has been on 5 teams since 2013-2014.

Even in Pirri's case, I think he's getting unfairly jerked around. He should be in the NHL full time somewhere. He's just not getting that chance because he's such a flawed player outside of his goal scoring.

 

[Gurglesons]

But my contention with that was that Rust was anemic for quite some time and Horny was battling injuries. Yet they still didn't give him a shot with Geno. So while I see your point, it's not that cut and dry IMO. There were ample circumstances he could have been given a look.

The circumstances we were getting crushed defensively. Sprong wasn’t the right choice. This squad preaches accountability. Sprong is the least accountable despite what some want to make him seem like.

 

[Ryder71]

I still love the Pirri comparison for Sprong, because I think it just fits so well. Pirri is a guy that has scored a ton of goals in the NHL in a relatively short career, with him having a career average of like 24 goals and 40 points per 82 games. He has been consistent with his production outside of a poor year with the NYR in 2016-2017, with being a .5 PPG player in all of 2013-2014 (25 points in 49 games), 2014-2015 (24 points in 49 games) and 2015-2016 (29 points in 61 games). Despite all of this, he still can't stick in the NHL today and has been on 5 teams since 2013-2014.

Maybe he likes to go to museums by himself and not necessarily going out and bonding with his teammates.

 

[WheresRamziAbid]

Because I said from the beginning that if Sprong were given the chance with a scoring line center and used properly on the PP, he could outproduce what Sheary did last year with the best center in the world. It was prompted by pining for Sheary from certain quarters earlier this year while we kept Sprong on the 4th line. I even made a bet about it.

And here we are.

I bet if you pit both Sprong and Sheary on Crosbys RW for 82 games Shearys numbers would be better across the board.

 

[Dipsy Doodle]

If we used Sprong in our top six we would likely be out of the playoffs given his statistics and the few games we were able to win when he was here.

Sprong only played on the 4th line here this year, and his advanced stats were through the roof last year. He presently has the 6th best CF% on the Ducks, and his GA/60 is lower than Getzlaf and Rakell's and only a hair above Kase's.

His underlying numbers are fine. He wouldn't be turning us into a non-playoff team.