Grub's Canucks & NHL News, Rumours, and & Fantasy GM | The Boys of Summer

[Mr. Canucklehead]

Sprong is less talented Kuzmenko 2.0

Allergic to the boards, quirky bad personality. Inconsistent, often poor defensively, streaky scoring winger

He's 27 and about to be on his 6th team. Cant believe some of you just agreed that you like him more than Mercer??

Dawson Mercer will be a stud and kinda is already in this league as he approaches his prime ages.

Making marginal improvements to his athleticism defending and faceoffs is pretty commonplace for 21/22 yr olds. He already has PK acumen and is a board demon with some of the better hands shot and he can dish. He's a target player in the mold of a young JT Miller who hasn't solidified himself in a playoff teams top6 just yet.

Mercer >>>>>> Sprong unless your just simply looking at this year but even then given the versatility Mercer is still a better player. If Allvin and JR are sniffing around it's because they are smart and see a player about to be bridged that should immediately outplay his contract for 2-3 yrs before he gets expensive and they are trying to plan for Miller to the wing to lessen his heavy lifting

I don’t imagine (might be wrong) many think that Sprong is better than Mercer - they just may be more willing to pay the cost to get him. Money vs assets.

Mercer is easily the more desirable player. Sprong has potential to be a bit of a moneypuck depth signing - but as you say, his fit in a Rick Tocchet system is questionable.

 

[TruGr1t]

Sprong is less talented Kuzmenko 2.0

Allergic to the boards, quirky bad personality. Inconsistent, often poor defensively, streaky scoring winger

He's 27 and about to be on his 6th team. Cant believe some of you just agreed that you like him more than Mercer??

Dawson Mercer will be a stud and kinda is already in this league as he approaches his prime ages.

Making marginal improvements to his athleticism defending and faceoffs is pretty commonplace for 21/22 yr olds. He already has PK acumen and is a board demon with some of the better hands shot and he can dish. He's a target player in the mold of a young JT Miller who hasn't solidified himself in a playoff teams top6 just yet.

Mercer >>>>>> Sprong unless your just simply looking at this year but even then given the versatility Mercer is still a better player. If Allvin and JR are sniffing around it's because they are smart and see a player about to be bridged that should immediately outplay his contract for 2-3 yrs before he gets expensive and they are trying to plan for Miller to the wing to lessen his heavy lifting

Mercer is also property of the Devils and is an RFA without arbitration rights. They’ll just sign him and I’ve seen no conclusive evidence they are even considering trading him.

Sprong is obviously free in terms of assets and Rutherford/Tocchet both have experience with the player in the past. Once again, rely on this management team’s pro scouting.

 

[VanJack]

Canucks are still under the cap ceiling, albeit by only a few million dollars. I thought there were real advantages to entering the season below the salary cap threshold....because the cap flexibility builds up as the season moves forward.

That's why, despite Dhaliwal's musings on X, I'd be surprised if the Canucks were to ink Sprong. Frankly I'd rather see them give a shot to a young guy like Podkolzin, or maybe another forward from Abbotsford.

They're players earning close to the league minimum, and would enable the Canucks to stay below the cap.

 

[TruGr1t]

Canucks are still under the cap ceiling, albeit by only a few million dollars. I thought there were real advantages to entering the season below the salary cap threshold....because the cap flexibility builds up as the season moves forward.

That's why, despite Dhaliwal's musings on X, I'd be surprised if the Canucks were to ink Sprong. Frankly I'd rather see them give a shot to a young guy like Podkolzin, or maybe another forward from Abbotsford.

They're players earning close to the league minimum, and would enable the Canucks to stay below the cap.

They are under $200k under the cap and won’t accrue much anyways short of moving Poolman’s contract. More likely, they accrue a little bit and eventually dip into Poolman’s LTIR space at some point.

You can maneuver the roster to largely be in the same position if you sign Sprong. I see no reason Podz should be gifted a roster spot based on recent performance. He can compete for one with everyone else. The most likely cap casualty of a Sprong signing is probably Hoglander anyways. From a performance perspective I don’t see a huge discrepancy in swapping those players, both are subpar defensively … Hoglander is a bit feistier and better on the boards, while Sprong generates a lot more for his linemates in terms of A/60. They are both basically 20 goal guys in similar usage.

If you can plug in Sprong and extract some excess value from a Hoglander trade, you probably end up with a better roster.

 

[LemonSauceD]

pretty much a modern day Phil Kessel

 

[VanJack]

Frankly, I just can't see how signing a guy like Sprong would make Hoglander expendable.

Hoglander is 23, earning $1.1m and is an RFA in a year. Sprong is 27, and a big liability defensively. So it's hardly 'a wash'.

The only thing that would mitigate it is if the Canucks were able to trade Hoglander and maybe nab another d-man, which is a big area of need. But then they'd still have to find a way to squeeze that contract under the cap.

And they certainly wouldn't be 'gifting' a spot to Podz. He's in competition with guys like Bains, Sasson, Raty and Karlsson for the remaining spots on the roster. And if he can't beat out those guys, the Canucks would be forced to put him on waivers, where he'd be claimed or sure as a former top-10 pick.

So it could be more likely they trade Podz, rather than Hoglander.

 

[TruGr1t]

Frankly, I just can't see how signing a guy like Sprong would make Hoglander expendable.

Hoglander is 23, earning $1.1m and is an RFA in a year. Sprong is 27, and a big liability defensively. So it's hardly 'a wash'.

The only thing that would mitigate it is if the Canucks were able to trade Hoglander and maybe nab another d-man, which is a big area of need. But then they'd still have to find a way to squeeze that contract under the cap.

And they certainly wouldn't be 'gifting' a spot to Podz. He's in competition with guys like Bains, Sasson, Raty and Karlsson for the remaining spots on the roster. And if he can't beat out those guys, the Canucks would be forced to put him on waivers, where he'd be claimed or sure as a former top-10 pick.

So it could be more likely they trade Podz, rather than Hoglander.

Hoglander is basically Sprong with a worse assist per 60 total and a bit more edge. They are equally poor defensively. The only real risk you’re taking is age differential if Hoglander develops a bit more, but that’s why he’ll have value in trade.

There’s a reason Tocchet won’t play Hoglander over 12 mins per game and scratched him in the playoffs.

 

[sting101]

"Last season, it was well known Hakstol wasn’t the biggest fan of Daniel Sprong’s defensive abilities — resulting in the fourth-line winger repeatedly becoming a healthy scratch despite scoring 21 goals. Sprong left for Detroit as a free agent last summer."

Also add to that a few players in their exit interviews implied if he was back as coach they might not want to be. Hard to guess who that was??

Hakstol was a Jack Adams finalist.....im out on selfish goal sucks. Dont care if its a cultural thing you earn your minutes 200ft or get lost

Kylington on the other hand i have some interest but hard to get a read on his play as outside of one year with Tanev. He's been a little Matt Bartkowski ish more than a 20 min reliable puck mover.

Certainly a lot of mental health issues that would require enough of a comfort level to sign with any term whatsoever. Frankly i doubt they signed Forbort to immediately be a healthy scratch to start the year.

As ive said before the only move i would want to see is a really good young player at C or LD added if you can turn Hoglander's 1 year of contractual value and dump Poolman for that player plus maybe Suter and even picks to sweeten the pot to get the right player. I doubt teams are looking for that though too much small winger and cap at this stage when almost everyone is a playoff team.

Gotta stay patient and save the small space we have

 

[valkynax]

A random note here: I always thought Poolman was an uncharacteristic error made by our management. Turns out it's from Commando Dimbo...

 

[sting101]

Hoglander is basically Sprong with a worse assist per 60 total and a bit more edge. They are equally poor defensively. The only real risk you’re taking is age differential if Hoglander develops a bit more, but that’s why he’ll have value in trade.

There’s a reason Tocchet won’t play Hoglander over 12 mins per game and scratched him in the playoffs.

Tocchet benched Garland in the bubble playoffs. Last year he was riding that stallion

Young players grow.

The one thing that the league getting faster and better every year does is makes it tougher on young player to be effective 200ft. While the skills can translate to offense it takes time to win a chess match and get stronger in puck battles against players with a bunch of years behind them working at it.

Sprong is available for a reason

 

[TruGr1t]

Tocchet benched Garland in the bubble playoffs. Last year he was riding that stallion

Young players grow.

The one thing that the league getting faster and better every year does is makes it tougher on young player to be effective 200ft. While the skills can translate to offense it takes time to win a chess match and get stronger in puck battles against players with a bunch of years behind them working at it.

Sprong is available for a reason

I don’t worry about the locker room stuff. That’s Allvin and Tocchet’s issue and they’ve proven to have a good handle on it. Plus you’ve got guys like Miller in the room.

On a pure statistical basis Sprong is actually an offensive upgrade on Hoglander. It makes a ton of sense asset-wise in my mind to capitalize on whatever value Hoglander has, insert basically an equal if not better player, and remain effectively cap neutral.

I’m really rather ambivalent on it, but if management thinks it makes sense I can see why.

 

[Vector]

A random note here: I always thought Poolman was an uncharacteristic error made by our management. Turns out it's from Commando Dimbo...

You really just went into a fugue state for a few years, huh? Ditto.

 

[LemonSauceD]

Also add to that a few players in their exit interviews implied if he was back as coach they might not want to be. Hard to guess who that was??

Hakstol was a Jack Adams finalist.....im out on selfish goal sucks. Dont care if its a cultural thing you earn your minutes 200ft or get lost

Two different timelines. Sprong was already gone.

 

[valkynax]

You really just went into a fugue state for a few years, huh? Ditto.

Hey man Engrish is not even my first language so cut me some slack eh?

 

[VanJack]

Based strictly on that Sprong highlight package, he'd drive Tocchet nuts on the defensive side of the puck. If Tocchet couldn't live with Kuzmenko, despite his 39 goals, then his confidence in this player wouldn't even last a game.

I mean Sprong is now 27 and on his sixth NHL organization. How is that even possible?

 

[sting101]

Two different timelines. Sprong was already gone.

Does it matter?

 

[TruGr1t]

Based strictly on that Sprong highlight package, he'd drive Tocchet nuts on the defensive side of the puck. If Tocchet couldn't live with Kuzmenko, despite his 39 goals, then his confidence in this player wouldn't even last a game.

I mean Sprong is now 27 and on his sixth NHL organization. How is that even possible?

The issue with Kuzmenko was the cap hit. If he made $2M AAV or less, I doubt people would have had much issue with him.

 

[HelloCookie]

Based strictly on that Sprong highlight package, he'd drive Tocchet nuts on the defensive side of the puck. If Tocchet couldn't live with Kuzmenko, despite his 39 goals, then his confidence in this player wouldn't even last a game.

I mean Sprong is now 27 and on his sixth NHL organization. How is that even possible?

I have been listening this one red wings podcast on a regular basis and they were often frustrated in sprong's game unless it resulted in more goals for than against. I'd rather the canucks don't get a exclusively top6 fringer.

 

[LemonSauceD]

Does it matter?

Yes it does because the premise of your argument was that Sprong was bad bad bad and amalgamated with other teammates to kick Hakstol out which is incorrect.

Also what is this obsession with 200ft players or bust? If you wanted a team of 200ft players go get a bunch of Nic Dowd’s and David Kampf’s.

We have a bunch of non 200ft players and they all more or less come with their own flaws but provide good value and they are paid accordingly.

 

[Vector]

The issue with Kuzmenko was the cap hit. If he made $2M AAV or less, I doubt people would have had much issue with him.

Was also the extra year on the contract.

 

[Vector]

I have been listening this one red wings podcast on a regular basis and they were often frustrated in sprong's game unless it resulted in more goals for than against. I'd rather the canucks don't get a exclusively top6 fringer.

Wait…that’s literally every forward.

 

[sting101]

I don’t worry about the locker room stuff. That’s Allvin and Tocchet’s issue and they’ve proven to have a good handle on it. Plus you’ve got guys like Miller in the room.

On a pure statistical basis Sprong is actually an offensive upgrade on Hoglander. It makes a ton of sense asset-wise in my mind to capitalize on whatever value Hoglander has, insert basically an equal if not better player, and remain effectively cap neutral.

I’m really rather ambivalent on it, but if management thinks it makes sense I can see why.

whats that suppose to mean?

Hoglander is a better player with upside and he's friends with EP40. It should not be even a consideration.

His HD chance % is better his compete is better better forechecker younger feisty. +17 giveaway takeaway ratio and 90 hits vs -9 GA/TKA and 26 hits and allergic to the boards. It's not even close for me

 

[krutovsdonut]

all this sprong talk makes me nostalgic. i haven't thought about kyle wellwood for ages.

 

[wonton15]

Still find it fascinating that management clearly drew a hard line and it was close to his ask but neither side could get there. It was the right call, especially at the term.

 

[TruGr1t]

whats that suppose to mean?

Hoglander is a better player with upside and he's friends with EP40. It should not be even a consideration.

His HD chance % is better his compete is better better forechecker younger feisty. +17 giveaway takeaway ratio and 90 hits vs -9 GA/TKA and 26 hits and allergic to the boards. It's not even close for me

Offensive production doesn’t really indicate that. Sprong has a substantially higher A/60 over the past two seasons, and is averaging around 20 goals. He’s been a true 20/20 guy averaging 12 mins per game since the Kraken. He is obviously better in the category where Hoglander struggles, generating chances for his linemates.

Hoglander is a better board battler and “feistier” I guess, but that’s really the only differences I see. They have averaged very similar ice time and are both poor defensive players.