Confirmed with Link: Kailer Yamamoto to Seattle Kraken (1 x 1.5M)

[The Marquis]

It’s a little weird that we’ve pegged a guy for our 4th line who just played on the 1st or 2nd line of a playoff team.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

It’s a little weird that we’ve pegged a guy for our 4th line who just played on the 1st or 2nd line of a playoff team.

And I think that may be the reason that playoff team did not get far and we did. Improper utilization of the players best skills because of lack of depth on the team.

The one thing above all else Sprong gave that 4th line was that he could score off the rush! That threat along produced and had others backing up I doubt Yamamoto will give the Kraken that but you never know...as for fit well sometimes you have to give the gifted some space and more time when they are on...

We need to stop looking at Yamamoto as a Sprong replacement. He is not because he is a different player. He makes the team D better, can PK, and is not one dimensional. Regarding point production, Sprong had a career year where he more than doubled his previous career best. We may not be debating much if you took both of their previous seasons out of the equation and made a comparison based on that.

And then you add the fact that we were healthy scratching Sprong, despite him having the career year. It did not matter to Hakstol and Francis that he can score goals, they want better rounded players.

 

[Baszie]

And I think that may be the reason that playoff team did not get far and we did. Improper utilization of the players best skills because of lack of depth on the team.

We need to stop looking at Yamamoto as a Sprong replacement. He is not because he is a different player. He makes the team D better, can PK, and is not one dimensional. Regarding point production, Sprong had a career year where he more than doubled his previous career best. We may not be debating much if you took both of their previous seasons out of the equation and made a comparison based on that.

And then you add the fact that we were healthy scratching Sprong, despite him having the career year. It did not matter to Hakstol and Francis that he can score goals, they want better rounded players.

Its quite obvious that Hakstol (and probably) Francis are not a fan of Sprong. However I don't really understand the takes about bad defense and one dimensional. All the data show a completely different picture.

Ramblings: Playmaking Standouts Including Sprong, Roslovic, Dach, Scheifele, And More - June 8

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Its quite obvious that Hakstol (and probably) Francis are not a fan of Sprong. However I don't really understand the takes about bad defense and one dimensional. All the data show a completely different picture.

Ramblings: Playmaking Standouts Including Sprong, Roslovic, Dach, Scheifele, And More - June 8

View attachment 725746

But do those numbers look good as a result of Sprong's role being sheltered and the quality of teammates he had? For example, just comparing offensive/neutral/defensive zone starts between Yamamoto and Sprong, you can tell that one was trusted in all situations whereas the other was not. It is also the style of play in relation to be aggressive on the forecheck and backcheck.

Sprong may thrive on other teams but he has to be put in specific situations.

 

[GrungeHockey]

The one thing above all else Sprong gave that 4th line was that he could score off the rush! That threat along produced and had others backing up I doubt Yamamoto will give the Kraken that but you never know...as for fit well sometimes you have to give the gifted some space and more time when they are on...

Name me one team in the league with a "skilled" 4th line.

 

[Baszie]

But do those numbers look good as a result of Sprong's role being sheltered and the quality of teammates he had? For example, just comparing offensive/neutral/defensive zone starts between Yamamoto and Sprong, you can tell that one was trusted in all situations whereas the other was not. It is also the style of play in relation to be aggressive on the forecheck and backcheck.

Sprong may thrive on other teams but he has to be put in specific situations.

Donato and Geekie got for a large part similar sheltered minutes. It did not save their defensive metrics at all.

It’s not surprising Sprong is gone as Hakstol indeed never trusted him.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

And I think that may be the reason that playoff team did not get far and we did. Improper utilization of the players best skills because of lack of depth on the team.

We need to stop looking at Yamamoto as a Sprong replacement. He is not because he is a different player. He makes the team D better, can PK, and is not one dimensional. Regarding point production, Sprong had a career year where he more than doubled his previous career best. We may not be debating much if you took both of their previous seasons out of the equation and made a comparison based on that.

And then you add the fact that we were healthy scratching Sprong, despite him having the career year. It did not matter to Hakstol and Francis that he can score goals, they want better rounded players.

My real beef was that when Sprong was on and scoring the Kraken needed to put him on the PP more! And sometimes mix him with other linemates other than the 4th line where Geekie was there to do what exactly...not contribute Offense and Pass the Puck that's for sure. The thing is the Forward core outside of Beniers and a couple others are vets that have only so many years left...best to keep 25-26 year olds for Down the road when the interchangable part becomes even most important

Name me one team in the league with a "skilled" 4th line.

What are you trying to say?I'm confused

 

[GrungeHockey]

What are you trying to say?I'm confused

4th line is a role playing line filled with grit, 2 way players, energy guys, and if you're lucky good PK guys who can shutdown as well.
A one dimensional scorer is not what you want there.

 

[rsteen]

It’s a little weird that we’ve pegged a guy for our 4th line who just played on the 1st or 2nd line of a playoff team.

He might not stay there if he plays well, but with how deep the Kraken are at forward there's no pressure on him to be more than that.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

4th line is a role playing line filled with grit, 2 way players, energy guys, and if you're lucky good PK guys who can shutdown as well.
A one dimensional scorer is not what you want there.

A 1 dimensional player? A 21 Goal Scorer Right? How many teams have 21 goal scorers on their 4th line...none probably...and why are we stereo typing the 4th line players...they should be able to contribute Offense they're Forwards that's what they should be doing Offense and Defense because we are so found of Defense

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

Donato and Geekie got for a large part similar sheltered minutes. It did not save their defensive metrics at all.

It’s not surprising Sprong is gone as Hakstol indeed never trusted him.

Trust goes 2 ways...Hakstol could not be trusted to give more PP time when Sprong was scoring or the PP1 unit was sputtering

 

[majormajor]

But do those numbers look good as a result of Sprong's role being sheltered and the quality of teammates he had? For example, just comparing offensive/neutral/defensive zone starts between Yamamoto and Sprong, you can tell that one was trusted in all situations whereas the other was not. It is also the style of play in relation to be aggressive on the forecheck and backcheck.

Sprong may thrive on other teams but he has to be put in specific situations.

The point is that we had that specific situation and set up for him to put up those great results which brought about great results for the team. Both him and the team might be worse off now.

4th line is a role playing line filled with grit, 2 way players, energy guys, and if you're lucky good PK guys who can shutdown as well.
A one dimensional scorer is not what you want there.

If you exchanged Seattle's one-dimensional 4th line for a typical 4th line last year, they might not have made the playoffs. That's how good that line was. They greatly outscored opponents.

There's no question in my mind that by letting Sprong go we are making a significant downgrade in the regular season roster. I don't like it. It's the playoffs where things might be different because rush scoring drops off there. But you have to make the playoffs to have that problem, and our chances just went down.

 

[Gniwder]

It’s a little weird that we’ve pegged a guy for our 4th line who just played on the 1st or 2nd line of a playoff team.

That's actually a good thing:

Oiler's first line = Kraken's 4th line

Now we just need to get McDavid, then we're all set. He's been improving on his faceoffs, lol.

 

[Fuhrious]

I'm with @GrungeHockey on this one...typical team construction doesnt involve $2m AAV pure offense wingers on their 4th line. That unit is lucky to get 7-10 minutes TOI a game, it's just not where you put those players. "Problem" is, Sprong doesnt realistically displace anyone above him on the Kraken depth chart for a higher line slot or more TOI, and understandably he sought that opportunity elsewhere.

I think the bigger problem the team could realistically face would/will be what happens if players like Eberle and/or McCann slide off what was pretty impressive career seasons? Their TOI and position on the various special teams means that loss would be much more impactful imo.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

The point is that we had that specific situation and set up for him to put up those great results which brought about great results for the team. Both him and the team might be worse off now.



If you exchanged Seattle's one-dimensional 4th line for a typical 4th line last year, they might not have made the playoffs. That's how good that line was. They greatly outscored opponents.

There's no question in my mind that by letting Sprong go we are making a significant downgrade in the regular season roster. I don't like it. It's the playoffs where things might be different because rush scoring drops off there. But you have to make the playoffs to have that problem, and our chances just went down.

I have mentioned this already. Sprong was put in a situation to succeed and he did well. Also, we need to find a way to replace his production.

But if Yamamoto can produce more than half of what Sprong did while being more responsible defensively, PK and be trusted by coaching, it is a wash.

Also, there is no way we can guarantee Sprong would do the same this season on our team. It was a career season for him in a contract year. We can argue in circles about it but it's a moot point. Francis and Hakstol didn't think he was worth bringing back.

 

[majormajor]

I'm with @GrungeHockey on this one...typical team construction doesnt involve $2m AAV pure offense wingers on their 4th line.

When you have the best 4th line in the league (measured by how much they outscored opponents) you shouldn't be eager to exchange that for a typical 4th line. A typical 4th line gets outscored and plays more limited minutes.

That unit is lucky to get 7-10 minutes TOI a game, it's just not where you put those players. "Problem" is, Sprong doesnt realistically displace anyone above him on the Kraken depth chart for a higher line slot or more TOI

That's not true. Seattle had 4 scoring lines last year and they all played good minutes, that's what allowed them to stay fresh and play high tempo so consistently.

There's no problem that Sprong doesn't displace anyone higher up, because he doesn't have to. He was marvelously effective where he was.

 

[majormajor]

I have mentioned this already. Sprong was put in a situation to succeed and he did well. Also, we need to find a way to replace his production.

But if Yamamoto can produce more than half of what Sprong did while being more responsible defensively, PK and be trusted by coaching, it is a wash.

Also, there is no way we can guarantee Sprong would do the same this season on our team. It was a career season for him in a contract year. We can argue in circles about it but it's a moot point. Francis and Hakstol didn't think he was worth bringing back.

I'm just going on record that I think it was the wrong decision.

I wavered for a bit because it was clear Hak wasn't using the 4th line in the playoffs. But now midsummer it's pretty uncertain whether this club makes the playoffs, and I don't like giving up the one big advantage the club had last year.

 

[Fuhrious]

When you have the best 4th line in the league (measured by how much they outscored opponents) you shouldn't be eager to exchange that for a typical 4th line. A typical 4th line gets outscored and plays more limited minutes.



That's not true. Seattle had 4 scoring lines last year and they all played good minutes, that's what allowed them to stay fresh and play high tempo so consistently.

There's no problem that Sprong doesn't displace anyone higher up, because he doesn't have to. He was marvelously effective where he was.

You're welcome to subscribe to that theory in team construction all you want, but when you get a player such as Sprong who doesnt want to be limited to 10-11 minutes per game, wants to be slotted on a higher line with higher-skill linemates, wants to be locked into a slot on a powerplay unit, and wants a commensurate AAV to all those things, dont be surprised if they seek that opportunity elsewhere rather than reside on your "balanced 4th line".

 

[majormajor]

You're welcome to subscribe to that theory in team construction all you want, but when you get a player such as Sprong who doesnt want to be limited to 10-11 minutes per game, wants to be slotted on a higher line with higher-skill linemates, wants to be locked into a slot on a powerplay unit, and wants a commensurate AAV to all those things, dont be surprised if they seek that opportunity elsewhere rather than reside on your "balanced 4th line".

Could he be given a QO, or was he aged into UFA? If he was still RFA age then we should have given him the QO. If he was UFA age (I can't remember) then perhaps he refused to come back. But there is the argument being made here that the club should not have brought him back, and that I disagree with.

 

[The Marquis]

We’ll see how Detroit and Seattle do this coming offseason. If Detroit makes up their goals by 26, that’s a playoff team. If Seattle drops 26, that’s not. I don’t think either happen because of Yamamoto or Sprong.

 

[Fistfullofbeer]

Could he be given a QO, or was he aged into UFA? If he was still RFA age then we should have given him the QO. If he was UFA age (I can't remember) then perhaps he refused to come back. But there is the argument being made here that the club should not have brought him back, and that I disagree with.

He was arbitration eligible(RFA) and as a 20+ goal scorer I am pretty sure Francis would not have liked the numbers. And it does appear that Francis is very picky about players in that situation.

 

[Fuhrious]

There’s also the unknowable factor of what conversations GMRF may have had with Sprong’s agent regarding an extension, arbitration, etc. Presumably any GM worth their salt would have engaged in some form of preliminary dialogue with the player and/or their representative which could have factored into the decision to not make a QO.

 

[RayMartyniukTotems]

You're welcome to subscribe to that theory in team construction all you want, but when you get a player such as Sprong who doesnt want to be limited to 10-11 minutes per game, wants to be slotted on a higher line with higher-skill linemates, wants to be locked into a slot on a powerplay unit, and wants a commensurate AAV to all those things, dont be surprised if they seek that opportunity elsewhere rather than reside on your "balanced 4th line".

Don't you want players to play hard to get the opportunity for more work and better linemates otherwise might as well go back to the USSR

 

[Fuhrious]

Don't you want players to play hard to get the opportunity for more work and better linemates otherwise might as well go back to the USSR

Not even sure how to respond to that, brother.

 

[Upperchucker]

Watched him play for years in Spokane and the way the Oilers used him made no sense. Why would you put the smallest guy on the ice posted up trying to screen the goalie? That's never been his game and he lacked the size to do it with any type of efficiency. It was easy to push him out of the way. He always did best staying on the move and sliding beneath guys from 5-25 feet where he disappeared in the bodies with the puck on his stick. Before the goalie could find him the puck was in the back of the net. He's never going to be effective in a physical game in front of the net.