Prospect Info: - Daniel Sprong Progress | Page 2 | HFBoards - NHL Message Board and Forum for National Hockey League
Toggle sidebar

Prospect Info: Daniel Sprong Progress

They'll protect him either way. So if he's good enough next year, he'll be on the team.
 
Shady Machine said:
What would you do then if you were Bettman and the league was expanding?
Click to expand...

Allow teams to protect more than the amount they are letting them. There's a lot of un-signed talent/players in the AHL and there would still be a fair amount of decent players to be had even if you allowed teams to protect 2-3 more then they are letting them.

I kind of don't want Quebec to get a team, because it's going to be a mess there with "Oh we only hire french speaking people!" bs that the Habs do but probably even more radical than they would be.
 
Honour Over Glory said:
Allow teams to protect more than the amount they are letting them. There's a lot of un-signed talent/players in the AHL and there would still be a fair amount of decent players to be had even if you allowed teams to protect 2-3 more then they are letting them.

I kind of don't want Quebec to get a team, because it's going to be a mess there with "Oh we only hire french speaking people!" bs that the Habs do but probably even more radical than they would be.
Click to expand...

The intent is to allow the expansion team to be competitive sooner. The previous round took a really long time to ice a competitive team. If it's a team in Vegas, it's in the league's best interest to ice a competitive team as soon as possible to keep up the hype and build a sustainable fanbase. At the end of the day it's a business and I bet most owners are okay with losing 1 good player for 15MM bucks.
 
Right. Sure, the Thrashers weren't in a great market, but it sure wouldn't have hurt to have a team that didn't perpetually suck in extravagant fashion.
 
That would be complete horse **** to lose Murray just because we also have Fleury. So this hypothetical LV team could sign Ben Bishop in free agency and then pluck Murray in the expansion draft and suddenly have better goaltending depth than us, or even flip Murray to another team for assets.
 
Is there a limit to one player per team that can be selected? As in, no team can lose more than one player to the expansion draft?
 
Jacob said:
That would be complete horse **** to lose Murray just because we also have Fleury. So this hypothetical LV team could sign Ben Bishop in free agency and then pluck Murray in the expansion draft and suddenly have better goaltending depth than us, or even flip Murray to another team for assets.
Click to expand...

Why would any sane team expansion protect MAF instead of Murray as their 1 G?
 
Jacob said:
Well, it'd suck to lose either one of the two.
Click to expand...

Can we all agree that losing Murray is much more damaging to the future of this club? Murray's SV% since last year is > .930%. You can argue that he is probably (at the very least) MAF's equal right now. Now look at his salary.

Murray may end up being the best player we drafted in 2012....
 
Murray's got some things to work on. I'm not ready to anoint him our goalie of the future just yet. But he's a hell of a prospect and he has value that I'd rather not lose for nothing.
 
wgknestrick said:
Why would any sane team expansion protect MAF instead of Murray as their 1 G?
Click to expand...

I forsee us either bribing LV with a pick to not take Fleury, or we trade him to a team that has zero goaltenders that they would want to protect (Calgary).
 
Since Sprongs season is over, do you think the Pens play him in the AHL and then call him up during playoffs?
 
Charlottetown Islanders fan here.

What is the thought in Pittsburgh? Will he be sent back or do you guys think he will be effective on your roster?
 
edguy said:
Charlottetown Islanders fan here.

What is the thought in Pittsburgh? Will he be sent back or do you guys think he will be effective on your roster?
Click to expand...

Right now the Penguins are pretty deep at RW. I would send him back unless his two way game got a lot better after being sent back this year.
 
pensandcaps said:
Considering theyre picking 5th...no ****. Id trade him for mcdavid.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure I would make that trade. Sprong looks like the real deal and almost a certainty. If last years draft was done over, I think Sprong would have a shot at going in the top 10.


Lastly, the dude can LW. He said it emphatically and if you watch his game, a lot of his offense comes with him cruising down the off wing.

For some players, they can comfortably play any forward position while other are lost.

AND NO,, you don't trade Sprong unless you are getting back a proven star with a track record under the age of 28.

Thank you
 
Pghkev said:
I'm not so sure I would make that trade. Sprong looks like the real deal and almost a certainty. If last years draft was done over, I think Sprong would have a shot at going in the top 10.


Lastly, the dude can LW. He said it emphatically and if you watch his game, a lot of his offense comes with him cruising down the off wing.

For some players, they can comfortably play any forward position while other are lost.

AND NO,, you don't trade Sprong unless you are getting back a proven star with a track record under the age of 28.

Thank you
Click to expand...

As someone whose watched sprong ALOT over his junior days. He cant play ANY forward position. He is horrible up the middle. Either wing sure. center not even close
 
The trade was for humor. The only thing about Sprong that worries me is his attitude. If turns out to be a little ****stain no one on the team can stand...he might not be worth that kind of trouble and he'll never be a leader.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Latest posts

Ad

Ad

Top Bottom