|
|
Post by L'il Boy on Apr 9, 2017 23:40:25 GMT -4
There is no doubt he is the best player in franchise history id say Chlapik is a close second. Best point producer..... absolutely. Best player in franchise history.... nope. If I was building a team and had a choice to pick one of Chlapik or Sprong it would be Chlapik hands down. Total team player that can put up big numbers, play all special teams, can hit and don't mind dropping the gloves. Sprong gives you a few more points and that's all he brings. He don't hit, can't kill penalties, and if I was a betting man he cant even spell defensive zone. Sprong is -21 over his Q career, Chlapik is -7. Sprong has a 1.31 ppg average while Chlapik is 1.27 ppg average. Using +\- has to be the weakest argument ever, especially considering Sprong played a full season on a bad team before Chlapik arrived here. I'd take Sprong before Chlapik, and that's not a criticism on Chlapik. Sprong is a game breaker most nights. If not for Sprong, Chlapik probably doesn't have the rookie season he had. If I'm using your criteria to choose though, I'd take Josh Currie before Chlapik any day. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2017 18:14:24 GMT -4
Best point producer..... absolutely. Best player in franchise history.... nope. If I was building a team and had a choice to pick one of Chlapik or Sprong it would be Chlapik hands down. Total team player that can put up big numbers, play all special teams, can hit and don't mind dropping the gloves. Sprong gives you a few more points and that's all he brings. He don't hit, can't kill penalties, and if I was a betting man he cant even spell defensive zone. Sprong is -21 over his Q career, Chlapik is -7. Sprong has a 1.31 ppg average while Chlapik is 1.27 ppg average. Using +\- has to be the weakest argument ever, especially considering Sprong played a full season on a bad team before Chlapik arrived here. I'd take Sprong before Chlapik, and that's not a criticism on Chlapik. Sprong is a game breaker most nights. If not for Sprong, Chlapik probably doesn't have the rookie season he had. If I'm using your criteria to choose though, I'd take Josh Currie before Chlapik any day. Could it be that sprong is somewhat over rated ? |
|
|
|
Post by switchback on Apr 10, 2017 18:33:34 GMT -4
Sprong is the best player in the Q 30 seconds left in a game your team needs to score a goal theres nobody id rather have on the ice than #11
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 10, 2017 18:43:28 GMT -4
Sprong is the best player in the Q 30 seconds left in a game your team needs to score a goal theres nobody id rather have on the ice than #11 Yes I agree he's the man in the Q but he really doesn't belong here, how would he measure up in the show ? Mctn would have the same argument if Garland would have stayed, same question holds true for him how's he making out at the next level. I also realise they are not the same type of players but they did/are dominate at the Q level. |
|
|
|
Post by islandred on Apr 10, 2017 18:59:25 GMT -4
Sprong is the best player in the Q 30 seconds left in a game your team needs to score a goal theres nobody id rather have on the ice than #11 Yes I agree he's the man in the Q but he really doesn't belong here, how would he measure up in the show ? Mctn would have the same argument if Garland would have stayed, same question holds true for him how's he making out at the next level. I also realise they are not the same type of players but they did/are dominate at the Q level. Personally think Chabot is better than Sprong.. however Conor Garland and Daniel Sprong don't even remotely compare to each other. Sprong had 7 points in 10 AHL PLAYOFF games while Garland, a year older, has only 11 points in over 50 regular season games. Sprong has already played in the show and did not look one bit out of place in the games I seen him play, despite only scoring two goals in the 18 games he played. 18 more games than Garland will ever play in the NHL |
|
|
|
Post by hockeydog on Apr 10, 2017 19:10:51 GMT -4
Yes I agree he's the man in the Q but he really doesn't belong here, how would he measure up in the show ? Mctn would have the same argument if Garland would have stayed, same question holds true for him how's he making out at the next level. I also realise they are not the same type of players but they did/are dominate at the Q level. Personally think Chabot is better than Sprong.. however Conor Garland and Daniel Sprong don't even remotely compare to each other. Sprong had 7 points in 10 AHL PLAYOFF games while Garland, a year older, has only 11 points in over 50 regular season games. Sprong has already played in the show and did not look one bit out of place in the games I seen him play, despite only scoring two goals in the 18 games he played. 18 more games than Garland will ever play in the NHL Well said Red. Garland couldn't wear Sprongs skate in my opinion. Chabot on the other hand, jeeez, hard to say. he is so nice to watch, effortless for him to play the game. I think hands down Sprong is the most talnted player in the league, Chabot is obviously the best and most talented dman. Close call. |
|
|
|
Post by L'il Boy on Apr 10, 2017 19:42:05 GMT -4
Personally think Chabot is better than Sprong.. however Conor Garland and Daniel Sprong don't even remotely compare to each other. Sprong had 7 points in 10 AHL PLAYOFF games while Garland, a year older, has only 11 points in over 50 regular season games. Sprong has already played in the show and did not look one bit out of place in the games I seen him play, despite only scoring two goals in the 18 games he played. 18 more games than Garland will ever play in the NHL Well said Red. Garland couldn't wear Sprongs skate in my opinion. Chabot on the other hand, jeeez, hard to say. he is so nice to watch, effortless for him to play the game. I think hands down Sprong is the most talnted player in the league, Chabot is obviously the best and most talented dman. Close call.
Of course he couldn't.....he's much smaller than Sprong! 
However, as a major junior hockey player, Garland was as good as Sprong, and had nothing to prove by coming back to the Q. His size is probably what holds him back n the pros. Big difference between playing against peers the same age and younger vs playing against mostly bigger men. I'm not certain that Garland would have much success playing CIS hockey (I think he probably would). But to say that he couldn't wear Sprongs skates is laughable.
Sprong's numbers as a 19 year old, extrapolated to 68 games, works out to 129 points....Garland's works out to 140. |
|
|
|
Post by L'il Boy on Apr 10, 2017 19:52:41 GMT -4
Using +\- has to be the weakest argument ever, especially considering Sprong played a full season on a bad team before Chlapik arrived here. I'd take Sprong before Chlapik, and that's not a criticism on Chlapik. Sprong is a game breaker most nights. If not for Sprong, Chlapik probably doesn't have the rookie season he had. If I'm using your criteria to choose though, I'd take Josh Currie before Chlapik any day. Could it be that sprong is somewhat over rated ? 32 goals in 31 games.....is that overrated? Sprong is a major junior star, quick, agile, with good vision and an NHL shot; Chlapik is a prototypical power forward...big, strong, smooth skater with a good release, but doesn't have the vision that Sprong has. Two totally different hockey players. Sprong is one of those guys that you watch play and wonder How he got that pass through to that guy; Chlapik you wonder how he didn't get knocked off of the puck. |
|
|
|
Post by lewis94 on Apr 15, 2017 0:23:37 GMT -4
Sprong is the best offensive player in franchise history, no doubt, but for overall game I take Chlapik easily. Sprong has a lot of bad habits to get rid of before he plays consistently in the NHL.
|
|
|
|
Post by braccoloo on May 1, 2017 20:24:34 GMT -4
So Sprong is set to join the Pens as a black ace. With Crosby going down and possibly injured, does he crack the line up at all? I don't really pay much attention to the Pens so I have no idea what they have for depth to fill in their injuries.
|
|
|
|
Post by juliansteed on May 1, 2017 20:44:57 GMT -4
Looks like he just missed being able to join the WBS Pens. I don't really pay too much attention to the AHL but just happened to notice yesterday that WBS was still playing so I assumed Sprong would join them for their next game. Now I see that there was no next game for them as they were facing elimination and lost by one goal. He may or may not have been able to make a difference to keep them alive had he been able to join them in time.
|
|
|
|
Post by DangleSprong on May 1, 2017 23:55:20 GMT -4
Raise the number to the rafters
|
|
|
|
Post by bois on May 2, 2017 8:47:08 GMT -4
So Sprong is set to join the Pens as a black ace. With Crosby going down and possibly injured, does he crack the line up at all? I don't really pay much attention to the Pens so I have no idea what they have for depth to fill in their injuries. he'd have a better chance of replacing Sheary if he was to miss time... considering Sprong can't play center he's not replacing Crosby |
|
|
|
Post by raymerwins on May 2, 2017 9:48:45 GMT -4
Raise the number to the rafters Do we have any retired numbers? Just curious. |
|
|
|
Post by bois on May 2, 2017 9:51:14 GMT -4
Raise the number to the rafters Do we have any retired numbers? Just curious. PA Bureau (22) thos balmas wore it a couple of times after the rebranding OOOPS and #9 the Rocket was retired |
|
