Discussion in 'Pittsburgh Penguins' started by Kasperi kapanen, Mar 16, 2016.
He’s no longer waiver exempt.
Due to him spending the season in the AHL (as noted), its very hard for most people here to give a full account of his progress, but most of the stats and reports from WBS watchers are good.
Trade wise, most of us would prefer not to lose him, but would consider it for an improvement on defence. One on one, we'd want a young NHL ready dman with top 4 potential - Rasmus Andersson from Calgary is the example commonly used, assuming Calgary fans are telling us the truth about him. If we were to use him in a package with other assets, it would be a package aimed at bringing back a 2-3 dman.
Rutherford first said he should be a regular, and then went back and said he will be a regular. I think this makes it pretty likely he won't be traded this off-season.
Which is good IMO, they should have him make the team. Give him 20 games, if they don't like him then trade him. Would give the 2nd PP balance.
I would not trade Sprong, period. We're not getting a top Dman for him and I think with Sheary taking a major step backwards this season (to the point where he's out the door) and guys like Brassard & Rust clearly showing they are support players having not shown an ability to drive a line themselves, we really need a pure offensive threat who could give us 3 CONSISTENT scoring lines. A triple combo the likes of Sid-Jake-Horny, Geno-Kessel-etc., and Brass-Sprong-etc.
We simply DO NOT have the assets to package into a deal to get a legitimate top pairing Dman. As much as I would like to upgrade our D, I am also confident that Maatta, Schultz, and Dumoulin will all continue to improve quite substantially (they are still all young by Dmen standards). I even believe Letang (2 years removed from being a Conn Smythe candidate) can improve and bounce back, and we don't know if Oleksiak will top out as a 3rd pairing guy, or actually grow into a high end 2nd pairing guy (he is still young as well). If we had a deeper pool of prospects & draft picks, I would absolutely make a trade. But our secondary & tertiary scoring was pathetic in the playoffs and we have NO CHANCE at competing against the likes of Tampa and others if we do not address this. Trading Sprong is absolutely the opposite move, and I would even look at adding a guy like Evander Kane if we could successfully move Sheary + Hunwick, and if the plan is to not extend Hagelin, giving us enough cap room to sign a guy like Kane.
The only way it would make sense to trade Letang is if we signed Carlson this summer, because we would need to replace him with another top-2 RD and he's the only guy out there. This is a move I would absolutely consider just from a pure asset management POV.
Good, I think it's time for Sprong
Hopefully he has a good off season work out and comes in ready
I want Sprong to play, I think almost as much as @Kip Drordy but I wonder if this isn't an attempt to build value.
GMs don't actually do this, I feel like this is just a myth. He was asked about Sprong and Rutherford said that he'll be a regular on the team next year, which is what everyone expected. I don't think it's anything more than that.
Can’t wait to pre order my Sprong sweater!
This makes me happy if true. Really pulling for the kid to make it.
This was Rutherford's full quote on Sprong.
This boxes even worse for Sheary, because Sprong isn't taking Kessel or Hornys spot on the right. Going to be Sheary vs rust for that last LW spot. Not sure if I can see either staying on the team to be a fourth liner
Crosby played in 2016 playoffs with a rookie Sheary on his wing; 2017 he had rookie Guentzel on his wing; 2018 he had rookie Simon on his wing for much of the time. Really no reason why next year rookie Sprong (he's not Calder eligible next season but I'd still classify him as NHL rookie) couldn't hold the spot next to Crosby (and Guentzel). And Sprong has the talent to make similar impact Guentzel did.
Let's do it.
I understand why Rutherford leaves players to do well in all areas before calling them up. He stated long ago that he wished he kept Bennett in the minors longer and they didn't develop him correctly. Bennett had the skill and IQ to be a good NHL player but now isn't even in the NHL.
SProng should already have 82 games in plus 12 games in the playoffs.
What was the question that was asked to JR about Sprong? Was it "why wasnt he in the lineup?" Or more about his future?
By the way, if a coach doesnt want a player in..our FO wont step in right?
There is one reason Bennett wasn't and won't be an NHL player; injuries. Even if he never turned out to be the scoring line winger we wanted when we drafted him, he was still good enough to be a serviceable player in the bottom six. Injuries really decimated his career.
Sprong needed a full year of development, uninterrupted. The right choice was made and he had a great year for a first year professional.
Didn't he say something similar about Sundqvist?
Hopefully, Mr. Sprong doesn't spend his summer reading all his laurels from this board.
He better be a gym & rink regular.
Did Rutherford talk to Sullivan about this, though? Or did he go rogue like when he acquired Reaves and Sullivan clearly didn't seem excited about playing him?
One has to wonder how a GM can be so sure that a prospect will make the team next year when his coach decided he shouldn't play in the playoffs at all this year. We could ice the exact same forward roster next year, if we chose.
Did Sprong just immediately get better as soon as the playoffs ended?
Is Sully getting a toy taken away?
Did Sully and JR decide to give the whole returning group enough rope for this year, but the disappointing performance from some of the supporting cast coupled with the loss was the red line?
JR seems to talk about Sprong staying in the AHL as the plan all along this season to develop him to be a better player for when he does get a regular spot.
Separate names with a comma.