Player Discussion Aatu Raty

[Shareefruck]

If Raty does make the team and Blueger is ready for opening night we have some interesting options.

I would have assumed Blueger would slide back in on Garland's line but maybe you keep Hoglander-Raty-Garland together with the chemistry they've shown. Then you could run Suter-Blueger-Sherwood as more of a matchup line.

Considering that they haven't found a fit with Pettersson - DeBrusk yet, my guess would be that they'll just use Suter/Heinen the same way.

Suter - Miller - Boeser
Heinen - Pettersson - DeBrusk
Joshua - Raty - Garland (Hoglander - Raty - Garland for opening night)
Hoglander - Blueger - Sherwood (Sprong/DiGiuseppe - Blueger - Sherwood for opening night)

I think it's fine to start the season with Raty considering that Sprong hasn't really shown that he's a capable everyday guy yet.

 

[F A N]

I think it's fine to start the season with Raty considering that Sprong hasn't really shown that he's a capable everyday guy yet.

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Sprong has been an "everyday" player with a few healthy scratches here and there. He played 76 games last season and 66 the year before. It really comes down to how you want your team to play and what you want out of him. If you want an energy type grinder who is hard to play against in all 3 zones that's not him. If you want a top 6 player who can play a 200 foot game that's not him. He's not a long term top 6 fit because he doesn't score enough to outproduce his defensive deficieinces. If you want someone to produce offensively 5 v 5 playing on the 4th line (given his defensive struggles) that's him.

I do think Sprong is what he is. He's there to produce offensively on the 4th line. When he isn't producing his coach is going to want to scratch him.

Otherwise, ya I'm fine with starting Raty too. He has certainly earned the right to be considered for a spot.

 

[F A N]

delete

 

[IComeInPeace]

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Sprong has been an "everyday" player with a few healthy scratches here and there. He played 76 games last season and 66 the year before. It really comes down to how you want your team to play and what you want out of him. If you want an energy type grinder who is hard to play against in all 3 zones that's not him. If you want a top 6 player who can play a 200 foot game that's not him. He's not a long term top 6 fit because he doesn't score enough to outproduce his defensive deficieinces. If you want someone to produce offensively 5 v 5 playing on the 4th line (given his defensive struggles) that's him.

I do think Sprong is what he is. He's there to produce offensively on the 4th line. When he isn't producing his coach is going to want to scratch him.

Otherwise, ya I'm fine with starting Raty too. He has certainly earned the right to be considered for a spot.

#1 how are you awake and posting at this time?

#2 thus far I don’t think Sprong has shown that he’s a gong show defensively. I think that is the most important thing (but it’s super early)

If they can get Sprong to the point where he’s not a liability in the d-zone (which is a huge task) then he should be a staple in the lineup.

I listened to a Tocchet interview recently where he interviewed Sprong before the signing and asked him why he thought his defensive play was so poor and whatever Sprong said, Tocchet seemed comfortable that it could be improved upon.

I think it was something like 7 coached in 7 seasons. Not getting enough time / coaching to learn the defensive systems and understand his assignments…

Anyways…more than anything from this pre-season as it pertains to Sprong, the most important thing for me is that his d-zone play has been adequate.
He has not shown himself to be a huge liability.

 

[Shareefruck]

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Sprong has been an "everyday" player with a few healthy scratches here and there. He played 76 games last season and 66 the year before. It really comes down to how you want your team to play and what you want out of him. If you want an energy type grinder who is hard to play against in all 3 zones that's not him. If you want a top 6 player who can play a 200 foot game that's not him. He's not a long term top 6 fit because he doesn't score enough to outproduce his defensive deficieinces. If you want someone to produce offensively 5 v 5 playing on the 4th line (given his defensive struggles) that's him.

I do think Sprong is what he is. He's there to produce offensively on the 4th line. When he isn't producing his coach is going to want to scratch him.

Otherwise, ya I'm fine with starting Raty too. He has certainly earned the right to be considered for a spot.

All I mean is that he hasn't really played in a way during the preseason that I think would convince Tocchett that he should necessarily be in the line-up most nights, so there is room for Raty (which may have seemed less possible heading into preseason, considering how many solid forward depth acquisitions were made).

 

[Jerry the great]

All I mean is that he hasn't really played in a way during the preseason that I think would convince Tocchett that he should be in the line-up most nights, so there is room for Raty (which may have seemed less possible heading into preseason, considering how many solid depth acquisitions were made).

I like Raty and he may have forced his way onto the early season Canucks' roster (assuming DJ starts on IR), but he will not be ahead of Sprong IMO, who has been unremarkable defensively (in a good way) and dangerous in the offensive zone. If Sprong clicks with Pettersson and DeBrusk, he could score 30+ and it wouldn't be totally surprising.