Post-Game Talk: Post Pre-Season Talk

Status
Not open for further replies.

Scandale du Jour

JordanStaal#1Fan
Mar 11, 2002
62,360
29,110
Asbestos, Qc
www.angelfire.com
:laugh: You just can't hate the Caps. It's like the Steelers hating the Browns. It just can't happen. Washington finally got one punch in on our fight. Good for them. They've been knocked down 8 times. It's like a little brother getting one up on you have 200 tries. Good for them.

And everyone knows my take. They finally got to taste what we got to do 5 times. For families who went through all the crap, good for them.

As for the Wilson thing - they were actually a statistically BETTER TEAM with Wilson out of the lineup as pointed out by McCurdy's stats last year. So Wilson being on the ice gives the Pens a better chance. That idiot would be running around like a goon no matter what team he is on. I can hate him all I want.

What's next, my brother? A poem dedicated to Claude Giroux?
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
Yeah then I'll disagree if you think ZAR outplayed Sprong. ZAR was really bad. If we are holding that standard, then DiPauli should be on this team.

It's imperative to watch away from the puck in preseason and not just look up who nailed a couple assists.

And I did that, and I still stick by that opinion. I genuinely don't see why people are saying Sprong was better than ZAR in the preseason, there was nothing in the preseason I saw that warranted that. Sprong did borderline nothing in the preseason, which is supported by looking at his stats in the preseason. ZAR at least did something in getting 3 primary assists in a game.

This isn't me saying ZAR played well enough to be on this team, he absolutely didn't. I just don't see at all why people are acting like Sprong was better than ZAR was. ZAR did something in one of the games, Sprong did basically nothing in all of the games while getting a better opportunity to do something. Sprong looked like a guy who was trying to show off that his weaknesses aren't that weak, only for him to do nothing to show off his strengths. He didn't look like an skilled goal scorer, he looked like a nothing player that wasn't good at anything.
 

Tom Hanks

Spelling mistakes brought to you by my iPhone.
Nov 10, 2017
30,463
32,539
:laugh: You just can't hate the Caps. It's like the Steelers hating the Browns. It just can't happen. Washington finally got one punch in on our fight. Good for them. They've been knocked down 8 times. It's like a little brother getting one up on you have 200 tries. Good for them.

And everyone knows my take. They finally got to taste what we got to do 5 times. For families who went through all the crap, good for them.

As for the Wilson thing - they were actually a statistically BETTER TEAM with Wilson out of the lineup as pointed out by McCurdy's stats last year. So Wilson being on the ice gives the Pens a better chance. That idiot would be running around like a goon no matter what team he is on. I can hate him all I want.

I noticed by the eye test that that changed the series a bit when Wilson got suspended. The line he was on was more dangerous without him. Can’t remember who replaced him but he was more dynamic and fast.

I still hate the Caps and deservedly so. As for their fans I saw a lot of them complain when Wilson got suspended saying it was nothing. So **** them :P
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scandale du Jour

EightyOne

My posts are jokes. And hockey is just a game.
Nov 23, 2016
12,697
12,034
I mean, yes, f*** them. But I'm with Cole. I don't hate that team. I have a healthy fear of them, because they are like always a skilled team. The Pens usually just walk away with every series so it's like...what rivalry?

Hate, though..Yeah, that's still the Flyers. I hate the city. I hate so that much US history is in that city because I hate the Flyers. It's like an American existential breakdown for me. All because of that f***ing team.

BUT! Where their fans wish blood on our team, I still just want to beat them up on the scoreboard.

Maybe I'm not in the mood for gladiator death bouts yet.

Although, my fondest memories are Kasparaitis on Lindros and Hartnell sitting on his ass complaining "he pulled my hair!"

So. I'm not perfect. Lol.
 

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,372
19,420
I genuinely don't know how you can say this. ZAR was better than Sprong was in the preseason, which really isn't a high bar. Sprong wasn't good at any point in the preseason, the best you can say about him is that his play off the puck was solid and he did nothing that he was known for. ZAR at least had that 1 terrific game, which is 1 more than Sprong had.

Ya, no clue what you are seeing man.

Sprong was easily keeping up with the play and even scared a few defenseman with his speed. Even though he wasn’t lighting it up he made several pretty plays and you could very easily see his skill and raw talent on display.

People want to knock on Sprong making mistakes, but he never cost them a goal like ZAR with his atrocious turnover up high that got put in his net.

ZAR was just there and his mashed potato feet have him constantly behind the play. His hands and vision are pretty underwhelming. He looked like a third line AHLer and was the least impressive guy of Sprong, Simon, Johnson, Haggerty, Lafferty, TB, and Angello.

Again, zero clue what you are seeing with him that’s even a bit encouraging.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EVGENIMERLIN

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
Ya, no clue what you are seeing man.

Sprong was easily keeping up with the play and even scared a few defenseman with his speed. Even though he wasn’t lighting it up, you could very easily see his skill and raw talent on display.

People want to knock on Sprong making mistakes, but he never cost them a goal like ZAR with his atrocious turnover up high that got put in his net.

ZAR was just there and his mashed potato feet have him constantly behind the play. His hands and vision are pretty underwhelming. He looked like a third line AHLer and was the least impressive guy of Sprong, Simon, Johnson, Haggerty, Lafferty, TB, and Angello.

Again, zero clue what you are seeing with him that’s even a bit encouraging.

After watching Sprong and looking at his stats from the preseason, I genuinely don't know how anyone can speak positively of what he did in the preseason. It makes no sense for you to simultaneously say this about Sprong while also saying "ZAR looked like a third line AHLer", it just doesn't make a shred of sense. Sprong did nothing in the preseason, him "scaring a few defenseman" with his speed isn't anything if you don't generate anything from it. He was a possession black hole, only had 5 shots in 4 games and didn't produce anything. Your bar for him is either incredibly low or you're cherrypicking good things while ignoring the rest of nothing that he did.

He looked like a guy who was trying to show he was good off the puck, only to show absolutely none of the skill he had. ZAR wasn't much better, but at least he did something in one of the games. Sprong didn't even do that. It makes absolutely no sense to pretend like Sprong was anything but bad in the preseason, ZAR was at least good for a game. Sprong had the worst preseason of his career this year, he was better in both 2015 and 2017. The stats and eye test completely support that. It just sounds like excuse making for Sprong at this point.

Sprong this year was probably the second most disappointing showing of a top prospect in training camp that I can remember, only Pouliot in 2015 tops it.
 
Last edited:

Rusty Razor

Registered User
Jun 25, 2017
434
367
I noticed by the eye test that that changed the series a bit when Wilson got suspended. The line he was on was more dangerous without him. Can’t remember who replaced him but he was more dynamic and fast.

I still hate the Caps and deservedly so. As for their fans I saw a lot of them complain when Wilson got suspended saying it was nothing. So **** them :P

Not sure if it was a direct replacement, but Jakub Vrana jumped into the top six because of it and that Vrana-Backstrom-Oshie line stayed together for the rest of the playoffs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom Hanks

Turin

Registered User
Feb 27, 2018
22,500
26,154
He was only a possession black hole playing with a 4th line center on the top line. I can’t take this Sprong arguement anymore with some of you people. f*** you Jim Rutherford for keeping him up in 2015/16 and f*** you for drafting a prospect who wouldn’t make an immediate, impressive jump to the NHL at all given your fan base.
 

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,372
19,420
After watching Sprong and looking at his stats from the preseason, I genuinely don't know how anyone can speak positively of what he did in the preseason. It makes no sense for you to simultaneously say this about Sprong while also saying "ZAR looked like a third line AHLer", it just doesn't make a shred of sense. Sprong did nothing in the preseason, him "scaring a few defenseman" with his speed isn't anything if you don't generate anything from it. He was a possession black hole, only had 5 shots in 4 games and didn't produce anything. Your bar for him is either incredibly low or you're cherrypicking good things while ignoring the rest of nothing that he did.

He looked like a guy who was trying to show he was good off the puck, only to show absolutely none of the skill he had. ZAR wasn't much better, but at least he did something in one of the games. Sprong didn't even do that. It makes absolutely no sense to pretend like Sprong was anything but bad in the preseason, ZAR was at least good for a game. Sprong had the worst preseason of his career this year, he was better in both 2015 and 2017.

I don’t look at stats in the preseason, I watch a players overall game and skill set.

Pretending like Sprong did jack shit is disingenuous as hell. His line looked dangerous all game the other night and he was a big part of that.

The stat sheet won’t show when he backed off the defense with his speed and dropped it to Dumo who slid it to Guentzel all alone and Jake blew it... it won’t show that play he made beating a man to the puck behind the net and he threw a pretty pass to Johnson in front and dude fanned on it...

His raw talent was apparent all preseason, and he looked his best the last game, way better than ZAR did last night.

ZAR kills offense unless he’s in front of the net. He literally looks like Kuhn trying to handle the puck in space. Whatever you are seeing, again I have no idea...
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
If the best you can do to say a player was good was cherry picking a couple plays in 4 games that didn't result goals, plays he should be making considering the talents he has, it really supports my claim that you have a very low bar for what "good" for Sprong is.

Sorry, I expect better from him than making 2 nice passes in 4 games while being extremely underwhelming 95% of the time. If you're going to be failing the eye test and the advanced stats test, you have to at least produce something. ZAR did that somewhat, Sprong didn't.
 
Last edited:

Tom Hanks

Spelling mistakes brought to you by my iPhone.
Nov 10, 2017
30,463
32,539
If the best you can do to say a player was good was cherry picking a couple plays in 4 games that didn't result goals, plays he should be making considering the talents he has, it really supports my claim that you have a very low bar for what "good" for Sprong is.

Sorry, I expect better from him than making 2 nice passes in 4 games while being extremely underwhelming 95% of the time.

You’d agree though that Sprong is a better fit to the 4th line than ZAR though, yeah?

I don’t really know what ZAR would bring to that line. Sheahan’s the bigger guy on that line to do the heavier stuff. Sometimes he’s passive with his size but he got better as the season went on. Those 2 should go to the same areas.

At least with Sprong you have a shooter and he’s also fast and I think those are two good complements for that line.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Riptide

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,372
19,420
If the best you can do to say a player was good was cherry picking a couple plays in 4 games that didn't result goals, plays he should be making considering the talents he has, it really supports my claim that you have a very low bar for what "good" for Sprong is.

Sorry, I expect better from him than making 2 nice passes in 4 games while being extremely underwhelming 95% of the time.

I already said he didn’t play as well as I hoped, but you could see the raw talent and I backed it up with specific plays. Isn’t that what one does when they make a claim, back it up?

He also had more than two nice passes. He had dozens of nice little passes most people don’t notice, 2-3 sweet little one touch passes while going full speed that impressed me in particular, that I’ve never seen ZAR pull off.

Can you back up anything ZAR did besides three meh helpers?

Where is his skill set to create anything by himself, because I haven’t seen it. He can’t beat guys with his poor skating, his hands are avg, his vision and passing are avg... tell me all these skills he displayed that made him look better than Sprong.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
I already said he didn’t play as well as I hoped, but you could see the raw talent and I backed it up with specific plays. Isn’t that what one does when they make a claim, back it up?

He also had more than two nice passes. He had dozens of nice little passes most people don’t notice, 2-3 sweet little one touch passes while going full speed that impressed me in particular, that I’ve never seen ZAR pull off.

Can you back up anything ZAR did besides three meh helpers?

Where is his skill set to create anything by himself, because I haven’t seen it. He can’t beat guys with his poor skating, his hands are avg, his vision and passing are avg... tell me all these skills he displayed that made him look better than Sprong.

Your entire argument really seems to be "Sprong did stuff he should be expected to do and ZAR isn't a skilled player, therefore Sprong was better". That's really what I'm reading here. What did Sprong do that isn't stuff that should be expected from him? Oh wow, he made a couple of nice passes. He was a PPG player in the AHL last year and is the organization's best prospect, there's a problem if he can't make a couple of nice passes. Your bar for Sprong is so absurdly low, you're basically giving him credit for being talented and not ****ing himself on the ice. You're criticizing ZAR because he's not Sprong.

Want to give ZAR an actual criticism, instead of complaining that he's not a skilled player? Point out how he had 1 hit in the preseason. Point out how he was very slow. Point out how he wasn't playing physical. That is what he brings, to criticize him because he's not dangling around defenseman is insanely disingenuous. You're giving Sprong credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, and knocking ZAR for things that he doesn't deserve to be knocked for.

What did ZAR do outside of his 3 assists? What did Sprong do outside of what should be expected of him with his talent level? Talent does not equal performance, Sprong having the talent to make plays in the offensive zone doesn't mean he performed better than someone who doesn't have that talent. That's what it really comes down to here, you're either cherrypicking things to say positive about Sprong or your bar for him is on the floor low. No one should be satisfied with him making a nice pass once a game. No one should be satisfied that he skated fast with the puck in one of the games, making a defenseman retreat in the defensive zone. This is Pouliot-apologist level stuff here, Sprong should be held to a higher standard than that.
 

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
You’d agree though that Sprong is a better fit to the 4th line than ZAR though, yeah?

I don’t really know what ZAR would bring to that line. Sheahan’s the bigger guy on that line to do the heavier stuff. Sometimes he’s passive with his size but he got better as the season went on. Those 2 should go to the same areas.

At least with Sprong you have a shooter and he’s also fast and I think those are two good complements for that line.

Sheahan is butter soft, so I don't know how you can say this. On paper, I'd want both Sprong and ZAR on the 4th line, because both brings unique traits to that line and they complement Cullen extremely well. That won't happen though. If I had to pick one, with the assumption that both are playing well, I'd pick ZAR and try to find Sprong a spot in the top-9. ZAR fits what I think that line needs more than Sprong does.
 

EightyOne

My posts are jokes. And hockey is just a game.
Nov 23, 2016
12,697
12,034
Okay. They both failed to impress.

IF either of them would be able to flesh out a good game and tick they boxes on what they bring to the team...

...would you rather have a ZAR being a ZAR or a Sprong being a Sprong?


Edit: personally, I take Sprong every time. His offensive potential is still way higher than ZAR. Notice: POTENTIAL. ZAR is honestly any old random AHL call-up. Doesn't mean he won't have a career. But. That's his upside. Sprong may never get there. But. POTENTIALLY he could eclipse that.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Riptide

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
Okay. They both failed to impress.

IF either of them would be able to flesh out a good game and tick they boxes on what they bring to the team...

...would you rather have a ZAR being a ZAR or a Sprong being a Sprong?


Edit: personally, I take Sprong every time. His offensive potential is still way higher than ZAR. Notice: POTENTIAL. ZAR is honestly any old random AHL call-up. Doesn't mean he won't have a career. But. That's his upside. Sprong may never get there. But. POTENTIALLY he could eclipse that.

I don't think anyone disagrees with taking Sprong over ZAR, the problem I have is more so people being easy on Sprong and being absurdly unfair towards ZAR. I even see it in your post, when you called ZAR a "random AHL call-up". His upside isn't as high as Sprong's upside (although I'm not sure where Sprong's upside actually is), but ZAR still has the upside of a Maroon type of complementary winger.

I'd rather have both pan out, because both bring unique traits that other guys on the roster don't bring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EightyOne

Mr Jiggyfly

Registered User
Jan 29, 2004
34,372
19,420
Your entire argument really seems to be "Sprong did stuff he should be expected to do and ZAR isn't a skilled player, therefore Sprong was better". That's really what I'm reading here. What did Sprong do that isn't stuff that should be expected from him? Oh wow, he made a couple of nice passes. He was a PPG player in the AHL last year and is the organization's best prospect, there's a problem if he can't make a couple of nice passes. Your bar for Sprong is so absurdly low, you're basically giving him credit for being talented and not ****ing himself on the ice. You're criticizing ZAR because he's not Sprong.

Want to give ZAR an actual criticism, instead of complaining that he's not a skilled player? Point out how he had 1 hit in the preseason. Point out how he was very slow. Point out how he wasn't playing physical. That is what he brings, to criticize him because he's not dangling around defenseman is insanely disingenuous. You're giving Sprong credit for things he doesn't deserve credit for, and knocking ZAR for things that he doesn't deserve to be knocked for.

What did ZAR do outside of his 3 assists? What did Sprong do outside of what should be expected of him with his talent level? Talent does not equal performance, Sprong having the talent to make plays in the offensive zone doesn't mean he performed better than someone who doesn't have that talent. That's what it really comes down to here, you're either cherrypicking things to say positive about Sprong or your bar for him is on the floor low. No one should be satisfied with him making a nice pass once a game. No one should be satisfied that he skated fast with the puck in one of the games, making a defenseman retreat in the defensive zone. This is Pouliot-apologist level stuff here, Sprong should be held to a higher standard than that.

Sprong is a skill player that displayed his raw skills, what is ZAR? A plugger that struggles to even get from point A-B and you think this is... a good thing?

What were you honestly even seeing from him? He’s so bad in space it’s concerning as hell..

There are guys who can play that simple straight ahead game and bang bodies in the A already, like TDP most especially and Haggerty, and do it more effectively that what I’m sure we are seeing from ZAR.

So ya, I’m looking at his skill set to see if he brings something different tons of other pluggers don’t, and I am not seeing them.

I already pointed out he was slow and terrible in space, which is where he will be most of the time in the NHL game. A guy like Hornqvist has sneaky wheels, despite the knocks on his skating. ZAR doesn’t even have that

And you want to exaggerate that Sprong made one skilled play a game, which is BS, but you know what, that’s more than ZAR made the entire preseason.

Name one skill play he even made...

Late in the third period yesterday ZAR had the puck coming down the LHB and the defender started to pivot his inside foot to cover the backdoor because his partner was trailing behind his assignment...

I thought for sure even ZAR could get the corner, but holy f*** dude... he’s so slow that the defender recovered from that and pushed him harmlessly to the corner.

Yet you don’t notice stuff like that and get concerned?

Yet we are suppose to be seeing how he outplayed Sprong... it’s nutty, sorry Emp.

Sprong and Simon both need to show a lot more, but at least you can see something there... ZAR isn’t showing anything to get us excited and I doubt his feet are going to magically get better.
 
Last edited:

Empoleon8771

Registered User
Aug 25, 2015
81,791
79,978
Redmond, WA
And there is it again, name one skill play ZAR made. ZAR isn't a skill player. Period. To judge him based on him making skilled plays is absolutely asinine. To say Sprong did better than ZAR because Sprong's player ability is a more skilled player is absolutely asinine. Sprong should be expected to make more skilled plays, but to say Sprong outperformed ZAR because he made more skilled plays is way nuttier than anything I've said.

Want to criticize ZAR? Criticize him for not doing stuff that he's expected to do. To say "Sprong's better because ZAR made no skilled plays in the preseason", it's just proving my point 100%. This entire discussion stems down to "Sprong is more skilled than ZAR, therefore Sprong was better in the preseason". I could cut down your entire post to that 1 sentence and sum up your entire argument.

ZAR wasn't good in the preseason, because he didn't do what he should be expected to do. He looked slow, didn't play physical and wasn't very effective as a net front guy. But at least he produced somewhat. Sprong wasn't good in the preseason, because he only had spurts of doing what he should be expected to do. He had only a couple of plays here and there, which is completely unacceptable based on his talent level. To add on to that, he didn't produce at all while getting better opportunities. It makes no sense to coddle to Sprong while simultaneously going hard after ZAR, especially considering how people don't think ZAR is anything. If ZAR is nothing, why even attack him in the first place? He's irrelevant if he's nothing.
 
Last edited:

Peat

Registered User
Jun 14, 2016
29,635
25,451
I just can't bring myself to care that much about ZAR vs Sprong. I don't think either changed the narrative about themselves and the identity of the tallest midget is irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Empoleon8771

KIRK

Registered User
Aug 2, 2005
109,700
51,216
No way were any of those teams just as deep as this one at the start of the regular season. One of them had Miro Satan in the top 6... All of which were before trades took over and made them way better.

You are looking at final rosters vs. starting rosters. I cannot think of a single roster the Pens had this deep except 93 to start the season.

I see that you quoted half of my post, which laid out that the reason 'I wouldn't go there' talking about how deep we are is (a) it's as much about how the pieces fit together as it is about an abstract talent calculation and (b) I want to see how it all looks in March (which is when you have an idea truly of where your team sits). In other words, I don't care if one sees this team as deep NOW, and the entirety of my post suggested that I care how it all looks when it really matters.

Yeah, Cole beat me to it. JR's powder is still pretty dry to make in-season trades this year to address fit; we have at least one pick in every round this year I believe. But I just can't recall us starting out this stacked in recent history. And what's potentially just as important, we're rested.

Heck, we could have a spare top 4 D man. Though I'm pretty sure there's no way we part with any NHL D except for possibly Ruh.

Starting out? Leaving aside the relevance of that . . .

2011-2012 was comparable. In rotisserie terms, this year is stronger up front because of Phil (assuming we find a spot where he can thrive and isn't forcing his center to play to his weaknesses). Then again, the starting 6 on defense that year included the two prizes of free agency (Martin and Michalek), Letang, and Orpik. I'm not talking about how Michalek panned out, but AT THE TIME, I think the defense with that top 4 and Gologoski, Lovejoy, and Engelland to round it was viewed as a bit stronger than this year's collection.
 

ColePens

RIP Fugu Buffaloed & parabola
Mar 27, 2008
107,025
67,650
Pittsburgh
I see that you quoted half of my post, which laid out that the reason 'I wouldn't go there' talking about how deep we are is (a) it's as much about how the pieces fit together as it is about an abstract talent calculation and (b) I want to see how it all looks in March (which is when you have an idea truly of where your team sits). In other words, I don't care if one sees this team as deep NOW, and the entirety of my post suggested that I care how it all looks when it really matters.

I only read half of your posts. Then I assume the other 50% is defending Malkin due to straight paranoia. :sarcasm:

beautiful, brought a tear to my eye

Definitely some Whitman or some T S Eliot through these veins.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad