Jump to content
The Official Site of the Vancouver Canucks
Canucks Community

[Rumour] Sprong on the Trade Block


Provost

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Provost said:

Pretty much an accurate description.  Mostly it is an idea because he exactly fits the speed, attacking game Green wants.

If it was Baertschi going the other way, they probably have to add something... especially if we do them a favour and retain cap so they can add another deadline piece.

It is possible it could take less and maybe a middle of the pack prospect.  Heck, we got Goldobin for almost free.

Baer has a bad history of concussions.  Doubtful teams want to offer anything of value to acquire him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have had too many reclaimation projects over the last few seasons. We have seen successes in Baertchi and Granlund. Failures in Vey, Etem and Pedan. Still on the verge of breaking or breaking through we have Goldobin, Leipsic and Pouliot. I will say stay away from reclaimation projects, focus on drafting and developing our own players. If we want to add, I feel like we should look at proven NHL players for a right price starting next off-season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

No, all our players are full of warts and worth crap, compared to the the high-end players and prospects on every other team.  Even EP apparently isn't enough to get Nylander.

:picard:

Isn't that the premise of most trades though - lets get rid of player X because everyone is going to be so much better than the players the Canucks have invested in.  Here again Sprong is going to be better than Baertschi.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, RRypien37 said:

Why are they giving up on a promising 21 year old who has put up points in every single league he has played in? Something more to this? 

Benning moved on from Shinkaruk right around the same time - he explained that he didn't think that he could score in the NHL and admitted that he had been looking to trade him for a D for a while.  Shinkaruk was in his draft+3.  Sprong is in his draft+4.

 

I can't remember which analyst it was but he was of the opinion that teams would be better off cutting bait with prospects much earlier.  He was saying that teams know very early on who will do well at the next level.  He thinks they mostly hold on to players because they don't want to be perceived as having drafted the wrong player.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Hutton Wink said:

No, all our players are full of warts and worth crap, compared to the the high-end players and prospects on every other team.  Even EP apparently isn't enough to get Nylander.

:picard:

I seen Toronto fans say Nylander is worth both Pesce and Faulk. Nylander is apparently just that good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Bure_Pavel said:

Gm is not happy with the work ethic of their secondary scoring so far.

If that's what it boiled down to, playing a 21yr old winger with Cullen, Sheahan, Rust and Grant may not be the answer.

None of them have produced the 4 pts that Sprong has.

 

Or the 41.4% ozone starts - doesn't tend to lead to a lot of production from NHL rookies.

 

I think the criticism here belongs elsewhere - not on Sprong.

 

If he still lacks a viable NHL two way game - then what were they doing elevating him to the NHL straight out of the Q?

The NHL is not a "development league" - and particularly where contending teams are concerned - so what's with both the apparent intent to develop him at the NHL level, and to sell - perhaps prematurely - on a player like this?  The additional factor in his 'mishandling' imo is the fact that they've eaten his waiver ineligibility by wasting a season on those 18 games he played straight out of the Q (with 2 goals).

 

Not sure what they think they're going to get for him - but they're reverse pump and dumping him by the looks of things, without the pump.  Selling him after a small sample of bottom six minutes where his on ice goals against per 60 is 4.9, while goals for per 60 is 2.1 - is the definition of selling low on young talent.

 

Not a fan of Rutherford - think he got lucky inheriting a team virtually any GM could cruise control into the playoffs - and was fortunate to have a coach step in and put Leipsic on his work.

 

As for whether he makes a good target for this team - not really imo.   The Canucks aren't exactly hard up for young, skilled winger talent - and a smaller winger in addition -  (on RW alone = Boeser, Virtanen, Lind, Jasek, Palmu, Lockwood...Gaudette may wind up at RW as well.....).    The only way I'd see a deal making sense is if it were a hockey deal - young winger for young winger - and I don't see that being realistic - or even that advisable.  I don't think Sprong has Baertschi's value (as a .5+ ppg NHLer) - and who else really makes the Pens any better in the short term (which is likely what they'd be looking to do - improve immediately).   I'm not giving up a Granlund for him - not giving up a Virtanen - don't really think this is a deal that makes sense - not unlike the lack of need to spend on a Nylander.   The types of players we may offer - ie a Leipsic - is doubtful to be seen as the immediate upgrade they probably want.  If they want a Baertschi, including MDZ for Oleksiak might make that more attractive/viable for us lol.

 

If the Canucks are going to target an undervalued winger, I'd look at an underperforming player like Puljujarvi instead - spend a bit more for more size, a better two way game - and perhaps a desperate Deadmonton management group that can't seem to find wingers to play with centers like McMe1st and Draisiaitl. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds like it's more than Sprong.  

 

https://triblive.com/sports/penguins/14264066-74/penguins-gm-jim-rutherford-pans-teams-performance-suggests-roster-changes-may-be

Quote

 

WASHINGTON – Pittsburgh Penguins general manager Jim Rutherford is taking his team’s early season losing streak very seriously. 

Rutherford gave a scathing assessment of his team’s recent performance on his bi-weekly radio show that aired Wednesday night on 105.9 FM, wondering aloud if roster changes would be required to snap the team out of its four-game skid and uneven start to the season.

“Has this team been together too long? It’s something I always have to watch for,” Rutherford said. “When do you have to make those changes? The players are doing everything they can to tell me now’s the time.” 

No area of the team was spared from Rutherford’s critical eye. 

He took the team’s younger players to task. 

“At a young age, guys win Stanley Cups and a lot of guys go their whole career and they don’t even get close to it,” Rutherford said. “We’ve got some young guys that won a couple, then they get bigger contracts and then they kind of settle in. They forget what got them to where they are today.” 

Then he turned his attention to the players in contract years. 

“Maybe they change their game,” he said. “Maybe they think scoring more goals or getting more points is what’s going to get them more money. So they get away from their game, what their role is.” 

He said he’s not satisfied with his team’s goaltending. 

“The two years we won the Cup, we were playing at times the way we’re playing now, but between (Marc-Andre) Fleury and (Matt) Murray, they were phenomenal in goal and they were hard to score against,” Rutherford said. “That’s not what we’re getting now. We’re getting inconsistent goaltending.” 

He lamented a lack of secondary scoring. 

“It’s almost like the guys come to the game and say, ‘Let’s just let the top guys do it. Let Sid and Geno and Phil and Letang carry us and well just get through the game and move on to the next game,’ and forget about the work ethic it takes or forget about the role they play,” Rutherford said. 

He said the Daniel Sprong situation is not working out as intended. 

“We hoped Sprong would be in the top nine,” Rutherford said. “He hasn’t jumped ahead of anybody on the right side so he’s playing on the fourth line. It’s not ideal.” 

He noted that Monday’s call-ups of Zach Aston-Reese and Garrett Wilson served to send a message. 

“Once they start coming, I don’t need to tell anybody. Actions are louder than words,” Rutherford said. “This will be the first move of a few if we don’t get it going.” 

Rutherford said he didn’t see any players available on the open market that could help his team’s defense and he said the preference is always for the players in the room to work out their problems on their own. Still, the threat of roster changes was a theme he went back to on several occasions. 

“We have the players that can work through it,” Rutherford said. “Sometimes they can. Sometimes they can’t. I wonder if this group’s been together too long and if we need to change it up, but that’s what I’ll watch for here in the next few games.”

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, oldnews said:

can you name one?

Current top 6 wingers:

Tim Schaller Career .23 points per game

Jake Virtanen Career .23 points per game

Nikolay Goldobin Career .33 points per game

Loui Eriksson Canucks Career .40 points per game

Top 6 average is .29 points per game i was a little off but it was a guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, CanuckinEdm said:

Current top 6 wingers:

Tim Schaller Career .23 points per game

Jake Virtanen Career .23 points per game

Nikolay Goldobin Career .33 points per game

Loui Eriksson Canucks Career .40 points per game

Top 6 average is .29 points per game i was a little off but it was a guess.

LOL,

 

I won't ask what your definistion of a "top 6" forward is.   Clearly that would be a comical definition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...