Hmm? I never said Sprong was a poor fit with Miller. I don't think his actual offensive style is similar to Tanguay at all, but I think his offense-defense ratio and potential effect/complement offensively with those two can maybe be similar (I always thought Tanguay's defensive game was almost non-existent those years, but it never mattered on those lines). I'm also not married with Miller necessarily needing to be the high leverage guy when the Garland line seems really capable of it, and depending on the third winger, the Pettersson line could turn into one as well. Lots of options in that regard. If Miller/Boeser's strong defensive ability instead gets utilized via making Sprong viable as a first liner (which is otherwise an insanely tall order, despite arguably having the offensive ability), that would be just as effective/worthwhile of a way to make use of it, IMO.
I think Sprong's typical (possibly optimal) deployment is odd like Hoglander's, but I also don't see him as the tunnel-vision one-man show type like him, necessarily-- he does seem to be able to complement other players offensively and function as an offensive catalyst of sorts for others. Seems like it's purely his defense that holds him back, not his inability to play with skilled guys (which is partly Hoglander's problem). Also, I dunno, even if their combined lack of defense didn't scare me like it does (I wouldn't be comfortable with Suter covering for both of them), I would have doubts that Hoglander + Sprong would mix well offensively.
Personally, I think it's either try to change/insulate Sprong into something top-six viable, trade Hoglander, live with Hoglander on the top six (it's not optimal, but he can still do it), or expect Sprong to be in Tocchet's dog-house and used as a 13th forward, in my eyes. Using both on the fourth line isn't something I'd bother looking at.
