Confirmed with Link: Canucks sign F Daniel Sprong to 1-Year Deal ($975K)

[biturbo19]

I don't think it's overblown. He consistently gets between high 4th line to low 3rd line minutes and is effectively a 4th line player in usage. This is despite his elite-level 5 v 5 production. It's been like this since his Penguins days and it's clearly not because he was buried on the 4th line on a Cup contender.

With that said, he's been a UFA two summers straight now. One would assume that he's smart enough to realize that his perceived defensive deficiencies are greatly impacting his ability to make money. It's costing him millions. So maybe we'll see a version of Sprong that actually puts in an effort on the defensive end but how that would impact his offensive game is another matter.

Yeah. We'll see on this i guess. I wouldn't hold my breath. He's not some young, developing player. He's 27 years old with 350ish NHL games under his belt. It's exceedingly rare for guys to change significantly at that point. He kind of "is what he is". If he ain't "got it" by now, he probably never will.

Everyone once in a blue moon, there's a Mike Santorelli, who gets a bigtime wakeup call, lands in exactly the right situation and suddenly puts in proper effort to be a decent defensive player for a couple years and cash in for a few last paycheques. But it's extremely rare.

It works well enough. I think there's some manufactured chemistry there (they are friends). Hoglander isn't a sniper so I think they could keep Hoglander besides Petey if they have someone who can shoot the puck on the other wing. Like there was some chemistry in the short time Hoglander, Petey, and Lindholm were together. There are times when Petey goes threw the motions and I think having a guy like Hoglander helps during those times.

I think it comes down to Petey. When he's playing at his best and dominating we can better evaluate his wingers. When's kind of going through the motions but still putting up points we end up blaming his wingers but it has little to do with chemistry.

See...i view this as a lot more of a two-way street. It's been a few times now over the years, that Hoglander has been given a look beside Pettersson...and pretty much every time, he ends up being disruptive. Whether Pete is in one of his funks or not, he tends to end up in one when he has to play with disjointed players like that.

Like, we all know at this point that Mercurial Pete is hugely a "confidence player". He can ride really high, or really low, depending on how he's feeling it. And we've generally seen that the best "cure" for those lulls, is to throw him with other really smart, high skill players (like the Lotto Line) that let him just ride the wave and build up his confidence with puck possession until he's back to just ragging the puck around and dominating possession for a line all by himself.

Not sticking him with a bunch of typical "sparkplug" grinder types (like Hoglander) who play a really energetic but choppy, broken-up game. It's guys who can drive more actual puck possession for the line that seem to get him going, more than guys who are more "quick strike", where he ends up very disengaged from the play...and just sort of picks up his occasional points while barely having puck possession.

Yea yea the player he has been is well known, especially on Anaheim and Detroit.

The entire point is the current context.
The player we'll see here is very likely to not be the same with completely different circumstances that should be ideal for him to put it together, as well as his age/ contract/ + more..
Nobody is saying elite but you, but I don't think improvement to hog lvl min is unreasonable, especially when playing with Jake & ep.

Everyone saying he's going to be atrocious and useless when not scoring are not accounting for the context enough, thus its being overblown.
Skinner and arvi are amazing with little mention of D, but 975 sprong is guaranteed to be trash because defense.

I think those takes age pretty badly, same with the Debrusk detractors, here in this system with these coaches and teammates I think we'll see much improvement from many players, and career highs too, fwds and dmans.

I mean, Arvidsson is a very reliable defensive player. He's a guy i wouldn't blink at throwing out there on a matchup line, the way the Kings often did. He's cut from a very different cloth than these other guys.

As far as Skinner vs Sprong...it's fine that Sprong is dirt cheap and Skinner is also poor defensively. But if we're talking about a pair of defensively weak players...the offensive ceiling with Skinner is absolutely miles higher than Sprong, to help at least try to offset or balance that out. So yeah...that's gonna cost a bit more.


It's not really a big deal, because Sprong is dirt cheap. But just being "cheap" alone, doesn't make him any less of a liability defensively. It doesn't erase the issue on the ice just because he's a defensive liability for cheap.

 

[jd22]

I have a theory that his defensive inadequacies stem from the Dutch psyche of "that's somebody elses problem" for every single situation imaginable across all levels of society.

My dog pooped on someone elses driveway? Not my problem!

I blindly bike across a road without checking for traffic? Somebody elses problem! After all, I'm protected by THE LAW and the laws of physics can't hurt me!

I see an old lady lose her walker and it rolls 20m away while standing right beside her? Not my problem, she can go hobble over there herself to get it!

 

[F A N]

Yea yea the player he has been is well known, especially on Anaheim and Detroit.

The entire point is the current context.
The player we'll see here is very likely to not be the same with completely different circumstances that should be ideal for him to put it together, as well as his age/ contract/ + more..

But what makes you think that with his years of NHL experience at age 27 and having played for multiple teams and coaches that he will "put it together" defensively? Or even that he will suddenly play most of the season in a top 6 role?

Nobody is saying elite but you, but I don't think improvement to hog lvl min is unreasonable, especially when playing with Jake & ep.

There are certainly others saying his ES production is elite-level. I didn't confirm the stats myself, but it's been reported that over the past two seasons, he is ranked 11th in the entire league in points per 60 at ES. His ES goals per 60 is better than Petey and McDavid's. Regardless, you can argue against my use of "elite-level" to describe his ES production but the point still stands: despite his incredibly good ES offensive production he's basically been deployed in a 4th line role.

Everyone saying he's going to be atrocious and useless when not scoring are not accounting for the context enough, thus its being overblown.
Skinner and arvi are amazing with little mention of D, but 975 sprong is guaranteed to be trash because defense.

I think those takes age pretty badly, same with the Debrusk detractors, here in this system with these coaches and teammates I think we'll see much improvement from many players, and career highs too, fwds and dmans.

Sorry I'm missing the Arvi reference, but Skinner is known to not play D. I don't know where you are getting that there's little mention of D when talking about Skinner.

We've seen defensive improvements from defensemen who actually tries to play D and whose capable of being good defensively (e.g. Myers). We've seen defensive improvements from a young player who tries very hard (e.g. Hoglander): even then Hoglander was on a short leash. Meanwhile a guy like Kuzmenko was in Tocchet's dog house almost from Day 1 and never left.

The talk of structure isn't some throwaway comment. Tocchet expects his players to have good defensive habits and execute their tasks. A guy like Hoglander is young and was better able to learn how to play with more structure within Tocchet's system. Kuzemko was older and had trouble learning Tocchet's system and executing defensively while still playing the offensive game he is accustomed to. You also can't compare Sprong to a defenseman like Myers. Myers' biggest problem is in the past is that he's prone to making bad decisions and there were expectations of him contributing offensively which led to some obvious mistakes. It shouldn't be a surprise that playing with more structure and a capable partner has produced better resuts. You're telling Myers "this is where you need to be and this is what you need to do" instead of Myers needing to make decisions on what he needs to do.

 

[F A N]

Yeah. We'll see on this i guess. I wouldn't hold my breath. He's not some young, developing player. He's 27 years old with 350ish NHL games under his belt. It's exceedingly rare for guys to change significantly at that point. He kind of "is what he is". If he ain't "got it" by now, he probably never will.

Everyone once in a blue moon, there's a Mike Santorelli, who gets a bigtime wakeup call, lands in exactly the right situation and suddenly puts in proper effort to be a decent defensive player for a couple years and cash in for a few last paycheques. But it's extremely rare.

I don't think Santorelli was ever that bad defensively. I may be mistaken, but I think Santorelli's issue is that when he gets away from moving his legs he isn't effective. So I think the Santorelli we saw here wasn't exactly better offensively it's just that he worked extremely hard and he was a good fit under Torts' system. I think Sprongs issue has more to do with the fact that he doesn't try playing D.

Not sticking him with a bunch of typical "sparkplug" grinder types (like Hoglander) who play a really energetic but choppy, broken-up game. It's guys who can drive more actual puck possession for the line that seem to get him going, more than guys who are more "quick strike", where he ends up very disengaged from the play...and just sort of picks up his occasional points while barely having puck possession.

I don't disagree with your take on Hoglander and Petey. I do think Petey works better with creative offensive players who are capable of those 'quick strikes" you said. Hence my comment about Petey needing a sniper on his other wing if he is to play with Hoglander. Hoglander is very good at winning puck battles but he could still be quicker in getting the puck off his stick after getting the puck.

 

[biturbo19]

I don't think Santorelli was ever that bad defensively. I may be mistaken, but I think Santorelli's issue is that when he gets away from moving his legs he isn't effective. So I think the Santorelli we saw here wasn't exactly better offensively it's just that he worked extremely hard and he was a good fit under Torts' system. I think Sprongs issue has more to do with the fact that he doesn't try playing D.

Ehhh...Santorelli was a skilled journeyman who bounced around a ton all over the place and showed he could put up some points at times, but it wasn't really until he came to Vancouver that he seemed to invest more seriously in his defensive game. And it paid dividends for him with that Leafs contract. But it all sort of fell back off again not long after. I don't know that he was ever quite as flakey as Sprong can be defensively, but it was a known weak point with Santorelli's game prior to landing here.

Part of it may have just been a good fit with Torts system, but he was also reasonably solid enough for Toronto the year after as well from what i recall.

I don't disagree with your take on Hoglander and Petey. I do think Petey works better with creative offensive players who are capable of those 'quick strikes" you said. Hence my comment about Petey needing a sniper on his other wing if he is to play with Hoglander. Hoglander is very good at winning puck battles but he could still be quicker in getting the puck off his stick after getting the puck.

I'd actually say the exact opposite. If Pettersson is going to get stuck with quick-strike Hoggy...he absolutely NEEDS a puck possession beast opposite him. Not another "one touch" sniper. Hoglander isn't a "sniper" per se. But he's also a poor puckhandler/puck possessor and an even worse puck distributor. That's the problem i see with him and Pettersson, and where it detaches Pettersson from the play.

When Hoglander is at his best...the puck is barely on his stick at all. It's forechecking, kicking pucks loose, jumping on pucks, capitalizing on broken plays, cashing in rebounds and turnovers, chaos around the net. The more the puck is on Hoggy's stick, the worse he's usually playing.

When Pettersson is at his best...the puck is constantly on his stick and he completely dictates the entire flow of play on the ice. That's where guys like Miller and Boeser can really get him going when he's in a funk. They tend to also possess the puck a ton and thrive in playing the game with control. That in turn, gives Petey more opportunities to possess the puck and work it around and start to get back into a groove in setting up those plays that make him special.

 

[Nick Lang]

I don't think it's overblown. He consistently gets between high 4th line to low 3rd line minutes and is effectively a 4th line player in usage. This is despite his elite-level 5 v 5 production. It's been like this since his Penguins days and it's clearly not because he was buried on the 4th line on a Cup contender.

With that said, he's been a UFA two summers straight now. One would assume that he's smart enough to realize that his perceived defensive deficiencies are greatly impacting his ability to make money. It's costing him millions. So maybe we'll see a version of Sprong that actually puts in an effort on the defensive end but how that would impact his offensive game is another matter.


It works well enough. I think there's some manufactured chemistry there (they are friends). Hoglander isn't a sniper so I think they could keep Hoglander besides Petey if they have someone who can shoot the puck on the other wing. Like there was some chemistry in the short time Hoglander, Petey, and Lindholm were together. There are times when Petey goes threw the motions and I think having a guy like Hoglander helps during those times.

I think it comes down to Petey. When he's playing at his best and dominating we can better evaluate his wingers. When's kind of going through the motions but still putting up points we end up blaming his wingers but it has little to do with chemistry.

I thought Petey and Hoglander had zero chemistry together. Looked contrived and unnatural. Petey wants to play East West with siilky smooth movement and give and goes beating the opponent mentally. Hoglander just wants to muck it up and then grab loose pucks by the net and rip them in. Totally different styles. I also think friendship has zero bearing out on the ice. If anything it's a negative causing players to force passes and have tunnel vision. Sometimes they will work harder in practice possibly if they're happy but I don't think they are that good of friends. Just put Petey with good players suited to his style.

 

[Bojack Horvatman]

Burmistrov is an easy candidate for my "I almost forgot that guy was a Canuck" award.

Mathieu Schneider is another one

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

Forward depth is unbelievable! Sprung is an upgrade over Lafferty. We should be amongst the highest scoring teams next season. Podkolzin, Di Giuseppe, Aman all on the outside looking in now, Di Giuseppe will likely be the 13th. Nice to have NHL calibre depth in case of injury.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Forward depth is unbelievable! We should be amongst the highest scoring teams next season. Podkolzin, Di Giuseppe, Aman all on the outside looking in now, Di Giuseppe will likely be the 13th. Nice to have NHL calibre depth in case of injury.

It'll be interesting to see our starting lineup this fall. Here was the lineup we rolled into Game 1 vs. Edmonton with on October 8th last year -

PDG - Miller - Boeser
Kuzmenko - Pettersson - Garland
Suter - Blueger - Beauvillier
Joshua - Lafferty - Hoglander

Hughes - Hronek
Myers - Cole
Hirose - Juulsen

Demko
DeSmith

 

[Bertuzzzi44]

This is a fantastic depth signing that allows you to trade Hoglander if the right opportunity comes along. Wouldn't actually be surprised if they try attaching Hoglander to Poolman and just accept a late draft pick and the cap space.

Hoglander is a 23 y/o coming off a 20 goal season playing the majority of it on the 4th line before moving up with limited power play time, believe all his goals came 5-on-5. He’s a breakout player and a potential consistent 30 goal scorer going forward. He was the best player on the terrible Hoglander-Pettersson-Mikheyev line. A young talented winger that’s getting feistier and better, he’s someone we should lock up long term.

 

[Jyrki21]

Burmistrov is an easy candidate for my "I almost forgot that guy was a Canuck" award.

I was pretty sure I remembered seeing him score live in Ottawa... and yep indeed, I was in attendance for 50% of Burmistrov's goals (and 25% of his assists) as a Canuck that night. (Also the game with Vanek's breakaway clapper).

Kind of like how I got to witness 100% of Rory Fitzpatrick's and Mario Bližňák's Canucks goals at the Scotia/Canadian Tire Centre.

Mathieu Schneider is another one

Very good call. Marco Sturm too.

And the second Peter Schaefer go-round.

 

[ProviesGhost]

This situation seems to be more of a test of the coach, than the player.

 

[Mr. Canucklehead]

I was pretty sure I remembered seeing him score live in Ottawa... and yep indeed, I was in attendance for 50% of Burmistrov's goals (and 25% of his assists) as a Canuck that night. (Also the game with Vanek's breakaway clapper).

Kind of like how I got to witness 100% of Rory Fitzpatrick's and Mario Bližňák's Canucks goals at the Scotia/Canadian Tire Centre.


Very good call. Marco Sturm too.

And the second Peter Schaefer go-round.

You guys should have fun with this.

All Vancouver Canucks Since the 2005-2006 Season

Can you name the All Vancouver Canucks Since the 2005-2006 Season?

www.sporcle.com

 

[Vector]

Hoglander is a 23 y/o coming off a 20 goal season playing the majority of it on the 4th line before moving up with limited power play time, believe all his goals came 5-on-5. He’s a breakout player and a potential consistent 30 goal scorer going forward. He was the best player on the terrible Hoglander-Pettersson-Mikheyev line. A young talented winger that’s getting feistier and better, he’s someone we should lock up long term.

He finished sixth in total even strength ice-time amongst forwards and Pettersson was his most common centre at 321 minutes. He definitely did spend time on the fourth line (Lafferty/Aman were second with 280 minutes with him) and averaged only 12 minutes a game at even strength which is right in line with Di Giuseppe.

What's interesting is looking at who assisted on his goals. He started on the 4th line with most of his goals being assisted by Lafferty but was eventually elevated in the line-up and finished the season with Pettersson.

Total Teammate Assists by Player:
Pettersson | 5
Lafferty | 5
Myers | 5
Hughes | 4
Hronek | 4
Boeser | 3
Mikheyev | 3
Aman | 3
Garland | 3
Suter | 2
Beauvillier | 1
Miller | 1
Lindholm | 1

Lafferty was all at the beginning of the season and Pettersson was at the end.

Spoiler: Teammate Assist Breakdown

Boeser/Myers
Hughes/Hronek
Lafferty
Myers/Lafferty
Myers/Mikheyev
Beauvillier/Lafferty
Aman
Miller/Hughes
Boeser/Myers
Hughes/Hronek
Aman/Lafferty
Suter/Hronek
Lafferty/Hughes
Aman/Garland
Hronek/Pettersson
Pettersson/Hughes
Lindholm
Myers/Mikheyev
Hughes/Hronek
Suter/Pettersson
Pettersson/Garland
Pettersson/Garland
Boeser
Pettersson/Mikheyev

 

[bossram]

Unquestionably so.

A more reasonable question to ask is whether the combination of the coaching staff and a bit of a "moment" for Sprong can lead to him being a low-average defensive player, rather than terrible, while more-or-less sustaining his offensive production. That would count as an important success, I think.

Yea yea the player he has been is well known, especially on Anaheim and Detroit.

The entire point is the current context.
The player we'll see here is very likely to not be the same with completely different circumstances that should be ideal for him to put it together, as well as his age/ contract/ + more..
Nobody is saying elite but you, but I don't think improvement to hog lvl min is unreasonable, especially when playing with Jake & ep.

Everyone saying he's going to be atrocious and useless when not scoring are not accounting for the context enough, thus its being overblown.
Skinner and arvi are amazing with little mention of D, but 975 sprong is guaranteed to be trash because defense.

I think those takes age pretty badly, same with the Debrusk detractors, here in this system with these coaches and teammates I think we'll see much improvement from many players, and career highs too, fwds and dmans.

I think they can get him to be "less bad" defensively. But he is what he is. We've seen his career. He's played like this in every "context", with multiple teams, including a first stint with Tocchet and Rutherford. I don't see how the "current context" will create a drastically different player, especially when 5 previous NHL coaches could not create any appreciable change in his game.

As I've said before, a big issue with trying to make him better defensively will likely come at the cost of his offensive efficiency. A large proportion of his rush chance creation (one of his only high-end traits) comes from "poaching" and basically not being in the defensive picture, in the hopes his teammates can regain the puck for him and hit him on the rush. A more committed Sprong defensively, will not get as many of those chances.

I don't know why you're bringing up Skinner and Arvidsson. I have been far less complementary of those signings than people on the mains. I think Skinner is in the same class of player as Sprong: will score, but is atrocious defensively. Arvidsson is fundamentally a different kind of player and is frankly bizarre that you would use that as a comparable. This is just whataboutism.

Debrusk has always been a far better two-way player than Sprong. And we've actually seen improvement in that area over his career. We have not with Sprong. I've been one of the most complementary of the Debrusk signing.

Once again, I'm not saying Sprong is trash or that it's a bad signing. I think it's a decent bet to address a skill/shooting area they had a big need in. I'm saying be realistic about what he is.

 

[Lindgren]

I think they can get him to be "less bad" defensively. But he is what he is. We've seen his career. He's played like this in every "context", with multiple teams, including a first stint with Tocchet and Rutherford. I don't see how the "current context" will create a drastically different player, especially when 5 previous NHL coaches could not create any appreciable change in his game.

As I've said before, a big issue with trying to make him better defensively will likely come at the cost of his offensive efficiency. A large proportion of his rush chance creation (one of his only high-end traits) comes from "poaching" and basically not being in the defensive picture, in the hopes his teammates can regain the puck for him and hit him on the rush. A more committed Sprong defensively, will not get as many of those chances.

I don't know why you're bringing up Skinner and Arvidsson. I have been far less complementary of those signings than people on the mains. I think Skinner is in the same class of player as Sprong: will score, but is atrocious defensively. Arvidsson is fundamentally a different kind of player and is frankly bizarre that you would use that as a comparable. This is just whataboutism.

Debrusk has always been a far better two-way player than Sprong. And we've actually seen improvement in that area over his career. We have not with Sprong. I've been one of the most complementary of the Debrusk signing.

Once again, I'm not saying Sprong is trash or that it's a bad signing. I think it's a decent bet to address a skill/shooting area they had a big need in. I'm saying be realistic about what he is.

I didn't bring up Skinner and Arvidsson or anyone else. You must be thinking of a different poster.

He won't be "drastically" better. I guess the Canucks are betting that they can make him somewhat better. We'll see. I think players sometimes do have those sorts of mid-career improvements. Luke Schenn comes to mind.

 

[bossram]

I didn't bring up Skinner and Arvidsson or anyone else. You must be thinking of a different poster.

He won't be "drastically" better. I guess the Canucks are betting that they can make him somewhat better. We'll see. I think players sometimes do have those sorts of mid-career improvements. Luke Schenn comes to mind.

It was in response to the other poster that was quoted in the same post.

 

[Lindgren]

It was in response to the other poster that was quoted in the same post.

I only see you quoting me.

(Perhaps it's a poster I've ignored?)

 

[credulous]

i can't believe a guy who is probably getting cut in camp has 11 pages of discussion

 

[arttk]

i can't believe a guy who is probably getting cut in camp has 11 pages of discussion

doubt he will get cut if Toc personally called him to recruit him

 

[Bgav]

i can't believe a guy who is probably getting cut in camp has 11 pages of discussion

If there were betting odds, the favorite wouldn't be getting cut.

 

[credulous]

If there were betting odds, the favorite wouldn't be getting cut.

if i had to bet right now on who makes the canucks final roster (ignoring technical moves like papering down players to maximize cap space on the season opening roster) it'd be sprong and podkolzin not making the cut

(i probably wouldn't bet tho because training camp injuries are pretty common and i think they'll be able to carry one or both of them at least to start the season)

 

[sting101]

It's been a few times now over the years, that Hoglander has been given a look beside Pettersson...and pretty much every time, he ends up being disruptive. Whether Pete is in one of his funks or not, he tends to end up in one when he has to play with disjointed players like that.

Like, we all know at this point that Mercurial Pete is hugely a "confidence player". He can ride really high, or really low, depending on how he's feeling it. And we've generally seen that the best "cure" for those lulls, is to throw him with other really smart, high skill players (like the Lotto Line) that let him just ride the wave and build up his confidence with puck possession until he's back to just ragging the puck around and dominating possession for a line all by himself.

Not sticking him with a bunch of typical "sparkplug" grinder types (like Hoglander) who play a really energetic but choppy, broken-up game. It's guys who can drive more actual puck possession for the line that seem to get him going, more than guys who are more "quick strike", where he ends up very disengaged from the play...and just sort of picks up his occasional points while barely having puck possession.

It's not really a big deal, because Sprong is dirt cheap. But just being "cheap" alone, doesn't make him any less of a liability defensively. It doesn't erase the issue on the ice just because he's a defensive liability for cheap.

I dont see how Hoglanders past where he was 19-22 and had enough issues he wasn't even a NHL player is a good barometer for being disruptive. And "typical spark plug grinder types" is being harsh given his age and career trajectory

Fact is him and Pettersson have had really good chemistry, play driving statistics and unfortunately for Hoglander (and getting an accurate sample) he was stuck with 2 players in terrible funks at the time where you might have the best barometer for how the 2 look going forward. I'm not sure if trying to accurately quantify what Hoglander is fully capable of with Pettersson is a great thing to bank on just yet

Ideally a PF who could finish and create time and space in possession would be best for EP40 (if you could pluck someone from the league that wouldn't just take over driving Petterssons' line you would probably target Brady Tkachuk) Given the unrealistic expectation of teams giving us their best players you have to optimistic about Jake DeBrusk and his skillset. Hoglander Pettersson DeBrusk looks like a fine play driving line to me.

On Sprong i fully agree with what you have been saying. Last 2 years he's started strong then faded. It's ended the same way with him being benched and untrusted. Like Lafferty if we get 50-60 games of supplementary scoring that's fine too but my hope would be it doesn't take away opportunity for others to grow or worse they trade someone and bank on him being productive further up the lineup and then he goes back to being bad when you need him most.

 

[arttk]

if i had to bet right now on who makes the canucks final roster (ignoring technical moves like papering down players to maximize cap space on the season opening roster) it'd be sprong and podkolzin not making the cut

(i probably wouldn't bet tho because training camp injuries are pretty common and i think they'll be able to carry one or both of them at least to start the season)

https://x.com/i/web/status/1815518734314000884

 

[bossram]

I only see you quoting me.

(Perhaps it's a poster I've ignored?)

It could be. I also quoted VanillaCoke.

if i had to bet right now on who makes the canucks final roster (ignoring technical moves like papering down players to maximize cap space on the season opening roster) it'd be sprong and podkolzin not making the cut

(i probably wouldn't bet tho because training camp injuries are pretty common and i think they'll be able to carry one or both of them at least to start the season)

I would absolutely take the other side of that bet on Sprong with you.