FLPensFan Blog posts

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby longtimefan on Fri Oct 05, 2018 4:20 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
longtimefan wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
pens_CT wrote:Reaves has little hockey skill, and old Spronger has little hockey sense. So yeah these types of players aren’t going to get much ice time with Sullivan.

Other than PP positioning (which I don't know yet if that is him or where he is told to go), I didn't notice any issues at 5 on 5. He looked fine. Game 1, my initial fears came true. Lowest ice time on the team in game 1. I'm sure he's getting every opportunity to use his talents. :roll:

I mean, I guess he got benched in the 3rd period after that enormous blunder of a giveaway that led to the Oshie goal. Oh wait, yeah, that was Malkin the veteran that made that glaring mistake...... but, nope, can't trust Daniel Sprong in those situations. :roll:


It's not the egregious errors, it's his negative effect on the team. He had a team low CF% of 25. Next were Sheahan and Cullen, who were in the mid-30's. As a line, with Sprong, the 4th line produced zero scoring chances, and had six against. With Rust, the line produced 5 scoring chances for and 4 against. As a line, the CF% with Rust was 50%, with Sprong it was zero.

I was at the game, and tried to pay particular attention to both Sprong and Simon. I was happy that Sprong produced the PP assist, but really didn't see him noticable at other times. He just doesn't seem engaged in the team system. No, they aren't horrible mistakes. But not being where he can pressure the puck leads to loss of possession. He just wasn't supporting his linemates.

Contrast that to Simon, who led the team with a 78.9% CF. The lne with Brassard and Rust produced an 82.5% CF. He just seemed to be in the right spot constantly. Plus, he worked his a** off. On the Brassard goal, he was covering for Dumoulin and took the shot from the point. In short, I see why the coaches and players have raved about him. At least for last night.

Obviously, all sample sizes are small. But it fits with the scenario from traing camp, as well as the off season. Whether it's hockey sense or whatever, Sprong isn't capitilizing right now. Bourque suggested Derek Grant may force Sprong out of the lineup. He will be here, and it's doubtful they'd trade him. Like Cody Tucker's quote from a team souce saying you'd be lucky to get a 5th. So he's here. He has to earn his ice time. He disaapointed in camp. He was benched in the third period for a simple reason. He was hurting the team. The stats back it up. He'll get more chances. But he'll be on a short leash. Honestly, he's put himself into this postion on merit. He has great ability, and an incredible shot. But, as an all around hockey player, he's simply not that good right now. He has to change that.

You are right. It's too small of a sample size. I could point to the fact that, Sprong got one whole shift away from Cullen and Sheahan, early in the 3rd period. The line produced 2 shots for and none against, 100% CF. So, that means Sprong is fine and Sheahan and Cullen suck.

I didn't watch him closely, but, when I was watching, he seemed to be in the right position for breakout passes, and supporting the play correctly. I heard no negative feedback from Sullivan last night on Sprong. The only quote I heard was that, when mentioned Sprong got only 6:47 of ice time, Sullivan said he has to do a better job of getting him more minutes. Let's also ignore that Sprong got almost 50% of his ice time in the first period, when the Penguins team as a whole was outshot 10-4 at even strength.

Benched in the 3rd period for hurting the team.......but.....Geno......horrendous.....giveaway......wasn't? I'm exaggerating here, know Geno is a star and gets more leeway, but, we all know Geno makes TONS of boneheaded plays. Whether bad passes, clears, or dumb penalties, he does it.

Trust me, when I see mistakes, when I see Sprong be put in opportunities to succeed and fail, I will be the first one to admit it and jump off the Daniel Sprong train......but I'm not seeing it right now. I'd like to see him get a few more shifts with Brassard and Simon during a game as a start, versus 1 34 second shift he got.


I like the kid, but he was given a lot of opportuninty in the preseason. JR said he expected more. As I said, the sample size was small. But he shouldn't be playing ahead of Hornqvist, Kessel, or Rust. He's not as good right now. I did watch closely. The advantage of seeing the game in person. Just as I noticed Simon being on with everything, I noticed Sprong being somewhat tentative. Just not as engaged. It might be confidence, but he's not impressive. It's like he's afraid to fail. At this point, I put that more on him than the coaches. He came into camp on Crosby's line. They see him daily, not just in pre-season games. He didn't force their hand.

In terms of pointing out the Malkin gaffe, that's not a credible argument for obvious reasons. Geno also contributed 3 points and is a likely hall of famer. I suspect Sprong would get the same benefit of the doubt if he had a couple scoring championships under his belt. Sprong hasn't earned that rope. Or anything close.

All off season the talk was trying to find wingers to click with Brassard. It was one of the holy grails. He clicked big time with Rust. The line has been very impressive, and the best on the ice last night. I don't see any reason to mess with that chemistry, especially when you just found it. Especially not to see if Sprong fits. If the line struggles, then give him a chance. In the meantime, why on earth would you break up a line that has shown tremendous potential.

Sprong may well be a bust. It's not up to the Pens to give him enough ice time to prove it. It's up to him to perform. Bourque is the one who mentioned that maybe he was headed to the press box. He was the only forward not to register a shot. I'm tired of people wanting the Pens to cater to the kid. I think they did that when he opened camp on the top line. He's a great talent. He's got to perform when the oppotunities arise. He shouldn't be given any more or less opportunity than anyone else on the team.
longtimefan
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,530
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:33 pm

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Puck-Lurker on Fri Oct 05, 2018 5:03 pm

longtimefan wrote:He shouldn't be given any more or less opportunity than anyone else on the team.

He isn't given more opportunity than others. Let's agree to that at least.
Puck-Lurker
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,855
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 2:49 am
Location: Is apparently an annoying poster.

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:52 pm

longtimefan wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
longtimefan wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
pens_CT wrote:Reaves has little hockey skill, and old Spronger has little hockey sense. So yeah these types of players aren’t going to get much ice time with Sullivan.

Other than PP positioning (which I don't know yet if that is him or where he is told to go), I didn't notice any issues at 5 on 5. He looked fine. Game 1, my initial fears came true. Lowest ice time on the team in game 1. I'm sure he's getting every opportunity to use his talents. :roll:

I mean, I guess he got benched in the 3rd period after that enormous blunder of a giveaway that led to the Oshie goal. Oh wait, yeah, that was Malkin the veteran that made that glaring mistake...... but, nope, can't trust Daniel Sprong in those situations. :roll:


It's not the egregious errors, it's his negative effect on the team. He had a team low CF% of 25. Next were Sheahan and Cullen, who were in the mid-30's. As a line, with Sprong, the 4th line produced zero scoring chances, and had six against. With Rust, the line produced 5 scoring chances for and 4 against. As a line, the CF% with Rust was 50%, with Sprong it was zero.

I was at the game, and tried to pay particular attention to both Sprong and Simon. I was happy that Sprong produced the PP assist, but really didn't see him noticable at other times. He just doesn't seem engaged in the team system. No, they aren't horrible mistakes. But not being where he can pressure the puck leads to loss of possession. He just wasn't supporting his linemates.

Contrast that to Simon, who led the team with a 78.9% CF. The lne with Brassard and Rust produced an 82.5% CF. He just seemed to be in the right spot constantly. Plus, he worked his a** off. On the Brassard goal, he was covering for Dumoulin and took the shot from the point. In short, I see why the coaches and players have raved about him. At least for last night.

Obviously, all sample sizes are small. But it fits with the scenario from traing camp, as well as the off season. Whether it's hockey sense or whatever, Sprong isn't capitilizing right now. Bourque suggested Derek Grant may force Sprong out of the lineup. He will be here, and it's doubtful they'd trade him. Like Cody Tucker's quote from a team souce saying you'd be lucky to get a 5th. So he's here. He has to earn his ice time. He disaapointed in camp. He was benched in the third period for a simple reason. He was hurting the team. The stats back it up. He'll get more chances. But he'll be on a short leash. Honestly, he's put himself into this postion on merit. He has great ability, and an incredible shot. But, as an all around hockey player, he's simply not that good right now. He has to change that.

You are right. It's too small of a sample size. I could point to the fact that, Sprong got one whole shift away from Cullen and Sheahan, early in the 3rd period. The line produced 2 shots for and none against, 100% CF. So, that means Sprong is fine and Sheahan and Cullen suck.

I didn't watch him closely, but, when I was watching, he seemed to be in the right position for breakout passes, and supporting the play correctly. I heard no negative feedback from Sullivan last night on Sprong. The only quote I heard was that, when mentioned Sprong got only 6:47 of ice time, Sullivan said he has to do a better job of getting him more minutes. Let's also ignore that Sprong got almost 50% of his ice time in the first period, when the Penguins team as a whole was outshot 10-4 at even strength.

Benched in the 3rd period for hurting the team.......but.....Geno......horrendous.....giveaway......wasn't? I'm exaggerating here, know Geno is a star and gets more leeway, but, we all know Geno makes TONS of boneheaded plays. Whether bad passes, clears, or dumb penalties, he does it.

Trust me, when I see mistakes, when I see Sprong be put in opportunities to succeed and fail, I will be the first one to admit it and jump off the Daniel Sprong train......but I'm not seeing it right now. I'd like to see him get a few more shifts with Brassard and Simon during a game as a start, versus 1 34 second shift he got.


I like the kid, but he was given a lot of opportuninty in the preseason. JR said he expected more. As I said, the sample size was small. But he shouldn't be playing ahead of Hornqvist, Kessel, or Rust. He's not as good right now. I did watch closely. The advantage of seeing the game in person. Just as I noticed Simon being on with everything, I noticed Sprong being somewhat tentative. Just not as engaged. It might be confidence, but he's not impressive. It's like he's afraid to fail. At this point, I put that more on him than the coaches. He came into camp on Crosby's line. They see him daily, not just in pre-season games. He didn't force their hand.

In terms of pointing out the Malkin gaffe, that's not a credible argument for obvious reasons. Geno also contributed 3 points and is a likely hall of famer. I suspect Sprong would get the same benefit of the doubt if he had a couple scoring championships under his belt. Sprong hasn't earned that rope. Or anything close.

All off season the talk was trying to find wingers to click with Brassard. It was one of the holy grails. He clicked big time with Rust. The line has been very impressive, and the best on the ice last night. I don't see any reason to mess with that chemistry, especially when you just found it. Especially not to see if Sprong fits. If the line struggles, then give him a chance. In the meantime, why on earth would you break up a line that has shown tremendous potential.

Sprong may well be a bust. It's not up to the Pens to give him enough ice time to prove it. It's up to him to perform. Bourque is the one who mentioned that maybe he was headed to the press box. He was the only forward not to register a shot. I'm tired of people wanting the Pens to cater to the kid. I think they did that when he opened camp on the top line. He's a great talent. He's got to perform when the oppotunities arise. He shouldn't be given any more or less opportunity than anyone else on the team.

To me, you'd hope he comes into camp and lights it up. He didn't. But, name me one offensive player on this Penguins roster who had an impressive camp and preseason. The answer is nobody. Nobody stood out. The Penguins as a whole looked overmatched in 75% of their games. Camp scrimmages is not an adequate judge of what the kid can and can't do. In preseason games, while he may have had Guentzel on his other wing, he had our 6th, 7th, and 8th depth centers in between him.

As you say, I'll take the word of someone who seems the kid in person in terms of tentative play. The few shifts I really watched him at even strength, he looked fine to me. If he's tentative, I would take the opposite tact and say this is similar to Pouliot in some regards....having so much offensive talent, but it was like the Penguins stood behind him with a bullwhip every time he made a defensive blunder that he could never get his offensive game back to where it was, and his defensive game never got up to par. Pouliot had a decent season on a bad Vancouver team last year, and was off to a strong start this year.

It goes back to something I mentioned before that, an annual playoff team like the Penguins typically does not have the time or put in enough effort with young, talented players. They want to win, and don't want to teach much during the season. It's much easier to plug in a Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Rowney, Simon type, a guy who is a 3rd liner or at best a tweener. You have a guy like Guentzel who happened to be very gifted and picked things up right away. Not every young guy is going to be like that.

My main issue is, I'd like to see Sprong in a top 9 role, for 5-10 games, to see what he can do. I think based on Game 1, the best I can hope for is maybe a shift a period with Sprong and Rust swapped. Until I see something like that, I'll continue to say Sprong has not gotten his due chance.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Sigwolf on Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:53 pm

Puck-Lurker wrote:The only thing I can imagine now, is that Sheahan/Cullen are mentoring him so he doesn't become Letang-brained.


Thanks a lot for the college flash-back. From now on when I see 58 play, the only thing going through my head will be Cypress Hill... "Letang in the membrane, Letang in the brain!"
Sigwolf
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 2,038
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:10 pm
Location: north central Ohio

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby longtimefan on Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:34 am

FLPensFan wrote:My main issue is, I'd like to see Sprong in a top 9 role, for 5-10 games, to see what he can do. I think based on Game 1, the best I can hope for is maybe a shift a period with Sprong and Rust swapped. Until I see something like that, I'll continue to say Sprong has not gotten his due chance.


Who are you replacing? Unlike Simon, he can't switch sides. So he has to replace one of Hornqvist, Kessel, or Rust. The first two have proven for many years to be top six, and Rust had potentially the best camp among forwards, and found instant success with Brassard. If you think back, it's not so instant. I suggested several times I'd like to see Rust on Brassard's LW, with Kessel on the right. In limited time last spring, it was lights out. The problem there is Simon became Brassard's LW rather than Crosby's RW.

From what I read, the players seem very amused about our concerns about Simon. Who received almot univesal praise in the dressing room. From Letang and Murray, to Crosby, to Brassard saying he may be the best linemate he's ever had. Contrast to the talk about how the players speak about Sprong just needing to learn. Sestito's comment about his surprise seeing him having a picture taken in the defensive zone. JR saying we were hoping for more in camp.

I mentioned I watched the two last night, and it's an unfair comparison for Sprong. I came away with a much better understanding of what the team sees in Simon. He was full speed ahead, with no hesitation. He seemed to always be in the right place, and you could see how he and his linemates played off of one another. He's earned his spot in the top nine. So where do you put Sprong? The answer right now is nowhere. Eventually, he needs to show enough that he can get more time when someone either struggles or gets injured. Again, being limited to RW might make it difficult. For right now though, he doesn't deserve to play over any of the players in the top 9. They are hoping Cullen has a good influence on him, and they see it as a good way to try and keep in in the lineup. Which is odd, seeing as ZAR or even Grant are better fits on a 4th line. So you can make a case that they are trying to find a way to keep him in the lineup.

We agree, as JR has stated, Sprong has got to be in a top 9 role. The problem is, who do you take out of the current top 9? The Pens are a win at all cost team right now. They have what I believe to be unprecedented depth. The mistake they made with Sprong we've been over a million times. As the lineup is presently constituted, he belongs in WBS. But that can't happen. I don't know if it's fair to always say the team couldn't develop the player. Sometimes, the player just can't be developed. Cody Tucker suggested that Sprong needs to show that he really wants it, and that he may not. You reference Pouliot. But I don't think he's in the Pens top 7 right now. Even as a 24 year old. We'll see how his career progresses, but, sometimes, you just drafted the wrong player. It wasn't development. Maata came from the same draft.

To be clear, I'm rooting for Sprong. You can't teach the offensive talents he has. But I don't believe he should be catered to at the expense of anyone currently in the top 9. He'll be here all season. Sooner or later, he'll get his opportunity. In the meantime, he has to prove he can do some other things and play an unconventional role. He has to show them things at practice. He has to be ready to sieze the next opportunity. It's going to come. Until then, it's hard for me to get upset he isn't getting his chance. Again, at whose expense?
longtimefan
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,530
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 6:33 pm

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Hot Dog Vendor on Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:53 am

The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.
Hot Dog Vendor
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,059
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:48 am

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Daniel on Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:23 am

Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.
Daniel
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,131
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:14 pm

Daniel wrote:
Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.

Rust - Developed, but bottom 6 player, top 6/top 9 tweener at best
Kuhnhackl - Once a somewhat offensively gifted player, had to change his game to defensive to make it to NHL. Steady decline in 3 years and no longer here
Wilson - Bottom 6 player who could barely break into the lineup
Maatta - Kid forced his way onto the team at 18 with the skills he already had; no AHL/ECHL or any other development for him. On the job training, and a top 6 d-man his entire career
Murray - Developed
Guentzel - Developed in NCAA; played half a season in WBS where he dominated constantly and could have been on NHL roster almost instantly if there was a spot.
Simon - Developed, but bottom 6 player
Sheary - At 25, not sure he really was developed by Penguins; Signed AHL only deal, played well, earned NHL contract, played well but inconsistent

The issue is, the Penguins don't know how to develop top end talent, or they don't have the patience to let them develop at the NHL level. Pouliot was seen as a top 4, possibly top 2 and PP specialist. Sprong was seen as a top 6 winger. I'd also say that, the Penguins now have a reputation of developing defenseman (which is 95% Gonchar), but don't have that same type of person on the forward side. It's been Recchi to some degree, and Guerin used to do it as well, but I don't think either of them do it as much as they used to with their current roles. Tocchet was another one that helped in this area.

I'll also add in not everyone has the same mindset when it comes to development. Some are better than others. Some are built to roll with the punches. Some are built to have criticism destroy their confidence. The Penguins as a team all get along and have great chemistry, but several veteran players (Hunwick and Brassard most recently) have said it was a bit hard to adjust, fit in, measure up to the immense expectations.

I do believe in earning your spot, but, sometimes, you also can help a kids confidence by showing some confidence in him and putting him in his element, on an actual scoring line. Several shifts, a game, etc. with even the 3rd line would help Sprong's confidence. Playing him in practices with Guentzel and Sid, getting to preseason games and removing Sid, and then finally getting to real games that matter and giving him no shot isn't the best direction.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Daniel on Sat Oct 06, 2018 12:29 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.

Rust - Developed, but bottom 6 player, top 6/top 9 tweener at best
Kuhnhackl - Once a somewhat offensively gifted player, had to change his game to defensive to make it to NHL. Steady decline in 3 years and no longer here
Wilson - Bottom 6 player who could barely break into the lineup
Maatta - Kid forced his way onto the team at 18 with the skills he already had; no AHL/ECHL or any other development for him. On the job training, and a top 6 d-man his entire career
Murray - Developed
Guentzel - Developed in NCAA; played half a season in WBS where he dominated constantly and could have been on NHL roster almost instantly if there was a spot.
Simon - Developed, but bottom 6 player
Sheary - At 25, not sure he really was developed by Penguins; Signed AHL only deal, played well, earned NHL contract, played well but inconsistent

The issue is, the Penguins don't know how to develop top end talent, or they don't have the patience to let them develop at the NHL level. Pouliot was seen as a top 4, possibly top 2 and PP specialist. Sprong was seen as a top 6 winger. I'd also say that, the Penguins now have a reputation of developing defenseman (which is 95% Gonchar), but don't have that same type of person on the forward side. It's been Recchi to some degree, and Guerin used to do it as well, but I don't think either of them do it as much as they used to with their current roles. Tocchet was another one that helped in this area.

I'll also add in not everyone has the same mindset when it comes to development. Some are better than others. Some are built to roll with the punches. Some are built to have criticism destroy their confidence. The Penguins as a team all get along and have great chemistry, but several veteran players (Hunwick and Brassard most recently) have said it was a bit hard to adjust, fit in, measure up to the immense expectations.

I do believe in earning your spot, but, sometimes, you also can help a kids confidence by showing some confidence in him and putting him in his element, on an actual scoring line. Several shifts, a game, etc. with even the 3rd line would help Sprong's confidence. Playing him in practices with Guentzel and Sid, getting to preseason games and removing Sid, and then finally getting to real games that matter and giving him no shot isn't the best direction.


They haven't had to develop many top end talent since Crosby/Malkin/Letang came on board, so it's pretty hard to judge. They are starting to develop players nicely and sometimes the players themselves need to take responsibility. You really can't take away the development of Guentzel because he went to college, he was taught the Penguins system and has developed into a legit top line player, playing with top end talent both 5x5 and 2nd unit PP. You have to give the Pens credit for Maatta, he might have learned on the job but he was still developed by the team. Sheary played a pretty good role in the cup wins and absolutely should be considered a positive for the Penguins development process. I'd consider Sheary and Maatta top end talent, Guentzel also. Maybe not hall of famers, but legitimate productive NHL players.

The one thing good teams do is develop players to fit their system, bad teams don't. Pouliot had a nice season last year, but the Canucks still had a top 10 pick, so we'll see how well he is after. Heck, using your Guentzel comment, if Pouliot does do well, wouldn't the Penguins have developed him. :wink:

This is exactly where I said Sprong would be a month ago, 4th line to learn, 2nd unit PP to produce. If we're still having this conversation in Feb something is seriously wrong. I think you'll eventually see him on the 3rd line replacing Rust or Simon (with Rust moving to LW).
Daniel
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 4,131
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:10 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Hot Dog Vendor on Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:35 pm

Daniel wrote:
Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.


Look.....Daniel.......take a deep breath. It's going to be ok.

Boy, you sure did latch right on to "trade Sprong to the Canucks" real quick, didn't you? That was pretty weird, where did that lot come from?

Now lets look at some of your points - and I'm going to incorporate some of the points that FLPF made subsequently if that's cool with him - and offer counterpoints:

Bryan Rust - Legit AHL development. It's my honest belief that Rust is the prototype for what they're insistent on trying to force Sprong to become.

Tom Kühnhackl - An offensive powerhouse in junior hockey, developed into a defensive forward (something he never was) by the Penguins, regressed during every NHL season, not even sure I know where he is now.....Islanders, Sabres, AHL...?

Scott Wilson - I'm not sure you can claim development on a player who's probably below NHL replacement-level.

Olli Määttä - One can make a solid argument that since he forced his way immediately into the lineup as an 18-year-old rookie, he has never reached the level of play that he exhibited that first season. Maybe even has regressed to varying degrees each season since. How's that for development?

Matt Murray - Another easy-to-argue case for regression each of the past 2 years with the big club.

Tristan Jarry - Is he even developed? Asking for a friend?

Jake Guentzel - As FLPF pointed out, Jake joined WBS after graduating from college, ransacked the AHL, and forced his way into the Pens top-6. I would argue that Jake Guentzel was going to be a top-6 NHL player with whatever team he ended up on, regardless of system. He's just a good hockey player that didn't require much development.

Dominik Simon - *shrug*.....we'll see. I mean, I'll give credit for development up to this point. But, I'm not sure I'm convinced right now that he's anything but replacement-level.

Conor Sheary - I'll give developmental credit to this one, also. However, one cannot deny that he really only looked good next to Crosby. Time will tell if he's been developed to the point that he can play in another system or not, or if he's just another Scott Wilson.
Hot Dog Vendor
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,059
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2016 7:48 am

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Puck-Lurker on Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:22 pm

Hot Dog Vendor wrote:Tom Kühnhackl - An offensive powerhouse in junior hockey, developed into a defensive forward (something he never was) by the Penguins, regressed during every NHL season, not even sure I know where he is now.....Islanders, Sabres, AHL...?

Islanders, cleared waivers but is stayed up. Forward 13 or 14 now on that team. Which is alright for a player of TK's calibre.

That said, the Isles aren't exactly talent-stocked at the bottom six. And Tommy didn't get a spot on the fourth line, which says something.
Puck-Lurker
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,855
Joined: Sun Nov 29, 2015 2:49 am
Location: Is apparently an annoying poster.

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Jim on Sat Oct 06, 2018 2:58 pm

Everyone knows that you leave a kid in the AHL, even if he has potential, until it is obvious that he is ready for the NHL. Otherwise you are putting him in over his head and stunting his development. It's obvious.

Another thing that is obvious...

Everyone knows that you give a kid a real shot in the NHL, when he has potentia, and it is obvious that his upside in too good for the AHL. Otherwise you are wasting his talents against lesser opponents and stunting his development. It's obvious.

So with any kid that has potential, it is obvious that you give him top time in the NHL right away and leave him in the AHL until he is ready. How can the Penguin management screw that up?
Jim
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,597
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 9:18 pm
Location: Pittsburgh

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Sat Oct 06, 2018 3:36 pm

Daniel wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.

Rust - Developed, but bottom 6 player, top 6/top 9 tweener at best
Kuhnhackl - Once a somewhat offensively gifted player, had to change his game to defensive to make it to NHL. Steady decline in 3 years and no longer here
Wilson - Bottom 6 player who could barely break into the lineup
Maatta - Kid forced his way onto the team at 18 with the skills he already had; no AHL/ECHL or any other development for him. On the job training, and a top 6 d-man his entire career
Murray - Developed
Guentzel - Developed in NCAA; played half a season in WBS where he dominated constantly and could have been on NHL roster almost instantly if there was a spot.
Simon - Developed, but bottom 6 player
Sheary - At 25, not sure he really was developed by Penguins; Signed AHL only deal, played well, earned NHL contract, played well but inconsistent

The issue is, the Penguins don't know how to develop top end talent, or they don't have the patience to let them develop at the NHL level. Pouliot was seen as a top 4, possibly top 2 and PP specialist. Sprong was seen as a top 6 winger. I'd also say that, the Penguins now have a reputation of developing defenseman (which is 95% Gonchar), but don't have that same type of person on the forward side. It's been Recchi to some degree, and Guerin used to do it as well, but I don't think either of them do it as much as they used to with their current roles. Tocchet was another one that helped in this area.

I'll also add in not everyone has the same mindset when it comes to development. Some are better than others. Some are built to roll with the punches. Some are built to have criticism destroy their confidence. The Penguins as a team all get along and have great chemistry, but several veteran players (Hunwick and Brassard most recently) have said it was a bit hard to adjust, fit in, measure up to the immense expectations.

I do believe in earning your spot, but, sometimes, you also can help a kids confidence by showing some confidence in him and putting him in his element, on an actual scoring line. Several shifts, a game, etc. with even the 3rd line would help Sprong's confidence. Playing him in practices with Guentzel and Sid, getting to preseason games and removing Sid, and then finally getting to real games that matter and giving him no shot isn't the best direction.


They haven't had to develop many top end talent since Crosby/Malkin/Letang came on board, so it's pretty hard to judge. They are starting to develop players nicely and sometimes the players themselves need to take responsibility. You really can't take away the development of Guentzel because he went to college, he was taught the Penguins system and has developed into a legit top line player, playing with top end talent both 5x5 and 2nd unit PP. You have to give the Pens credit for Maatta, he might have learned on the job but he was still developed by the team. Sheary played a pretty good role in the cup wins and absolutely should be considered a positive for the Penguins development process. I'd consider Sheary and Maatta top end talent, Guentzel also. Maybe not hall of famers, but legitimate productive NHL players.

The one thing good teams do is develop players to fit their system, bad teams don't. Pouliot had a nice season last year, but the Canucks still had a top 10 pick, so we'll see how well he is after. Heck, using your Guentzel comment, if Pouliot does do well, wouldn't the Penguins have developed him. :wink:

This is exactly where I said Sprong would be a month ago, 4th line to learn, 2nd unit PP to produce. If we're still having this conversation in Feb something is seriously wrong. I think you'll eventually see him on the 3rd line replacing Rust or Simon (with Rust moving to LW).

I've got a much different view of player development than you have. Crosby, Malkin, Letang, Staal, Maatta.......those guys all had high end talent on their own. The Penguins did very, very little to develop those players. The Oilers didn't develop Connor McDavid, nor did the Leafs develop Austin Matthews. All these players are high end, top talent, elite, or generational level talent. Sure, they learned some things along the way, but for the most part, they grew as a player and got better, without being developed per se. Letang was a mid round pick, but he had much more talent than anticipated and forced his way on to the team. So did Staal. So did Maatta. Those guys didn't play in the AHL, under the Penguins control where the team worked with them to develop further skills, learn systems, etc.

Bottom 6 guys and bottom pairing defenseman aren't very hard to develop. Most 2nd/3rd and late round picks, if they develop at all, are most likely going to be bottom 6/bottom pairing guys.

In my view, Alex Goligoski was the last top 4 defenseman the Penguins developed. Drafted in a non-lottery and non 1st round pick, (2nd rounder), played about a season and a quarter in WBS. You could still argue this one a bit, as he stayed in college as well, so developed a bit more outside the Penguins system. I literally can't find a top 6 forward in over 20 years. Malone played 4 years of college, then straight to NHL. Morozov played in Russia, then the NHL. You've got Beau Bennett, who, by all accounts, was supposed to a high end talent, and didn't pan out. That's both on the player, his injuries, and the Penguins botching of his development by screwing up and playing him very little in the AHL.....kind of like what happened to Sprong.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Oct 10, 2018 12:58 pm

A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby LimerickPensFan on Wed Oct 10, 2018 1:30 pm

FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/

So why all the concern and worry about Murray’s injury, being too injury prone, etc. The numbers say it is because prior to 2015-2016 season, the Penguins just didn’t have many injuries at goaltender position. Marc-Andre Fleury, prior to the 2015-2016 season, only missed 4 regular season games (going back to 2009-2010). Injuries to the Penguins main starter has never been an issue for over a decade. Now, the Penguins are falling more in line with the league in terms of goalie injuries.


As I've said, Pens fans are spoiled.
LimerickPensFan
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 362
Joined: Fri May 04, 2018 10:04 am
Location: Unfortunately, Philadelphia suburbs

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby dark_forces on Wed Oct 10, 2018 3:24 pm

Does anyone know what is being written about in the latest TIOPS?
dark_forces
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 219
Joined: Sun Aug 02, 2015 10:48 am

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Ericf on Wed Oct 10, 2018 5:04 pm

FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/


You looked at the total number of games Murray missed due to injury, but I think, since he’s a young goalie, you need to look at games out due to injury per games played healthy...I’d be interested to know, as a ratio, since Murray hasn’t played a lot of games, how his number of injured per health games compares to other goalies....do you have those numbers? Thanks
Ericf
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:32 pm

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby ville5 on Wed Oct 10, 2018 6:41 pm

Hot Dog Vendor wrote:
Daniel wrote:
Hot Dog Vendor wrote:The comparison to Derrick Pouliot is right on the money. Like Pouliot, Daniel Sprong's natural game has been neutered. Just like Pouliot, Sprong shows hesitance because he's being forced to be something he's not, and he knows he's gonna get beaten with a shoe again for any little mistake. As we've seen again & again.

Like Pouliot, he needs to just be traded to a team who'll work with his natural talents instead of against them.


Let me understand your logic here. The Penguins should trade Sprong to a team like the Canucks, that will work with his natural talents, because Sprong hasn't adapted to the Penguin system yet? The player development juggernaut that has made the playoffs once in the last 5 years? Compared to the Penguins who develop players on the fly and have made the playoffs for the past how many years? The same Canucks team that has had several top 10 picks and still can't make the playoffs, compared to the Penguins developing numerous lower picks and UDFAs while making the playoffs yearly?

Rust, Kuhnhackl, Wilson, Maatta, Murray, Jarry, Guentzel, Simon, Sheary, and I am sure I'm missing some, have been developed over the past few years and, for the most part, key contributors to two Stanley Cup wins. BUT, let's harp on Pouliot as the example of how awful they are at developing players, the same Pouliot that had an attitude about being demoted and was caught drunk in public. Or let's harp on the the still in development Sprong who is exactly where he needs to be at this point and time. If you think they aren't giving him a shot at developing, consider they sent a more capable 4th liner to WBS in ZAR.

I admit this team doesn't have the greatest track record at developing players, but I'd say over recent years that has changed dramatically and we're seeing an upswing in the quality of players coming from WBS. If Sprong can't adapt to the Penguins system, eventually he has to take the blame.


Look.....Daniel.......take a deep breath. It's going to be ok.

Boy, you sure did latch right on to "trade Sprong to the Canucks" real quick, didn't you? That was pretty weird, where did that lot come from?

Now lets look at some of your points - and I'm going to incorporate some of the points that FLPF made subsequently if that's cool with him - and offer counterpoints:

Bryan Rust - Legit AHL development. It's my honest belief that Rust is the prototype for what they're insistent on trying to force Sprong to become.

Tom Kühnhackl - An offensive powerhouse in junior hockey, developed into a defensive forward (something he never was) by the Penguins, regressed during every NHL season, not even sure I know where he is now.....Islanders, Sabres, AHL...?

Scott Wilson - I'm not sure you can claim development on a player who's probably below NHL replacement-level.

Olli Määttä - One can make a solid argument that since he forced his way immediately into the lineup as an 18-year-old rookie, he has never reached the level of play that he exhibited that first season. Maybe even has regressed to varying degrees each season since. How's that for development?

Matt Murray - Another easy-to-argue case for regression each of the past 2 years with the big club.

Tristan Jarry - Is he even developed? Asking for a friend?

Jake Guentzel - As FLPF pointed out, Jake joined WBS after graduating from college, ransacked the AHL, and forced his way into the Pens top-6. I would argue that Jake Guentzel was going to be a top-6 NHL player with whatever team he ended up on, regardless of system. He's just a good hockey player that didn't require much development.

Dominik Simon - *shrug*.....we'll see. I mean, I'll give credit for development up to this point. But, I'm not sure I'm convinced right now that he's anything but replacement-level.

Conor Sheary - I'll give developmental credit to this one, also. However, one cannot deny that he really only looked good next to Crosby. Time will tell if he's been developed to the point that he can play in another system or not, or if he's just another Scott Wilson.

Rust was developed by Hunchback U. He only played 63 games at W-B over 3 seasons.
I dont know if I'd call Kuhnhackl an offensive powerhouse. He averaged a point per game in the OHL in 67 games. As a reference, 47 of the top 100 scorers in the OHL averaged a point per game last year. And many, many more were within a point or two.
And Kuhn was 19 and 20 when he played there. The age range for the O is 16-21.
ville5
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,933
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:17 pm
Location: getting body slammed by kelly kelly

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:59 pm

Ericf wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/


You looked at the total number of games Murray missed due to injury, but I think, since he’s a young goalie, you need to look at games out due to injury per games played healthy...I’d be interested to know, as a ratio, since Murray hasn’t played a lot of games, how his number of injured per health games compares to other goalies....do you have those numbers? Thanks

Doing that kind of ratio is really difficult for two reasons:

1) There is no set number of games for a goalie. While a position player could play in 82 games, there is no set number of games for a goalie to start. A true starter probably gets about 60 games per season, but that can fluctuate. Add in the fact some teams use split starters, and it is really hard to set a good standard value for number of games to use in the ratio.

2) Murray only played 13 regular season games in 2015-2016, which would also make it hard to accurately provide a ratio for him.

What I can expand on, though, is over the past 3 years, take a look at goalies of similar age, how many games they have played, and how many they have missed.

Matt Murray, John Gibson, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Connor Hellebyuck would all be good goalies to compare Murray with. And, only looking at the past 3 years.

Murray has played in 113 NHL regular season games. He has missed 24 regular season games, with 5 different injuries.
John Gibson has played in 181 NHL regular season games. He has missed 27 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 8 different injuries.
Andrei Vasilevskiy has played in 156 NHL regular season games. He has missed 12 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 1 injury.
Connor Hellebyuck has played in 152 NHL regular season games. He has not missed any regular season games due to injury in the last 3 years.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:08 pm

dark_forces wrote:Does anyone know what is being written about in the latest TIOPS?

On Murray, really nothing new. Just talking about his injury history.

On Maatta, says he was told Tuesday he would be a scratch against Vegas. Penguins feel Vegas speed will be a good test for Riikola. Says if Maatta continues to be a scratch for long, teams will quickly start calling. Says Maatta stock has fallen some, but in the right system, like Ottawa, he would be a good fit.

That's about it.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Ericf on Wed Oct 10, 2018 8:48 pm

FLPensFan wrote:
Ericf wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/


You looked at the total number of games Murray missed due to injury, but I think, since he’s a young goalie, you need to look at games out due to injury per games played healthy...I’d be interested to know, as a ratio, since Murray hasn’t played a lot of games, how his number of injured per health games compares to other goalies....do you have those numbers? Thanks

Doing that kind of ratio is really difficult for two reasons:

1) There is no set number of games for a goalie. While a position player could play in 82 games, there is no set number of games for a goalie to start. A true starter probably gets about 60 games per season, but that can fluctuate. Add in the fact some teams use split starters, and it is really hard to set a good standard value for number of games to use in the ratio.

2) Murray only played 13 regular season games in 2015-2016, which would also make it hard to accurately provide a ratio for him.

What I can expand on, though, is over the past 3 years, take a look at goalies of similar age, how many games they have played, and how many they have missed.

Matt Murray, John Gibson, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Connor Hellebyuck would all be good goalies to compare Murray with. And, only looking at the past 3 years.

Murray has played in 113 NHL regular season games. He has missed 24 regular season games, with 5 different injuries.
John Gibson has played in 181 NHL regular season games. He has missed 27 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 8 different injuries.
Andrei Vasilevskiy has played in 156 NHL regular season games. He has missed 12 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 1 injury.
Connor Hellebyuck has played in 152 NHL regular season games. He has not missed any regular season games due to injury in the last 3 years.


Thanks! This does indicate that he’s missed more games per time played than his peers, which is what I surmised.
Ericf
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 81
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2016 6:32 pm

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Luckybreak on Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:08 am

FLPensFan wrote:
Ericf wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/


You looked at the total number of games Murray missed due to injury, but I think, since he’s a young goalie, you need to look at games out due to injury per games played healthy...I’d be interested to know, as a ratio, since Murray hasn’t played a lot of games, how his number of injured per health games compares to other goalies....do you have those numbers? Thanks

Doing that kind of ratio is really difficult for two reasons:

1) There is no set number of games for a goalie. While a position player could play in 82 games, there is no set number of games for a goalie to start. A true starter probably gets about 60 games per season, but that can fluctuate. Add in the fact some teams use split starters, and it is really hard to set a good standard value for number of games to use in the ratio.

2) Murray only played 13 regular season games in 2015-2016, which would also make it hard to accurately provide a ratio for him.

What I can expand on, though, is over the past 3 years, take a look at goalies of similar age, how many games they have played, and how many they have missed.

Matt Murray, John Gibson, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Connor Hellebyuck would all be good goalies to compare Murray with. And, only looking at the past 3 years.

Murray has played in 113 NHL regular season games. He has missed 24 regular season games, with 5 different injuries.
John Gibson has played in 181 NHL regular season games. He has missed 27 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 8 different injuries.
Andrei Vasilevskiy has played in 156 NHL regular season games. He has missed 12 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 1 injury.
Connor Hellebyuck has played in 152 NHL regular season games. He has not missed any regular season games due to injury in the last 3 years.


Great points and comparison! Based purely on injuries it seems pretty standard around the NHL. Anyone else think that is concerning in itself? Makes me wonder if the reduction on goaltender equipment size has or will play a part, and if more should be done to prevent collisions with goalies?

A goalie in the butterfly position means contact is more likely to be with their head, and that their knees or groin could be damaged during a collision. Or am I just a dirty goalie sympathiser?! :-)

I still think drilling into the injury data would be really interesting - what were the injuries?

Is missing 24 games with multiple concussions a greater concern than missing 24 games with a virus? Is a recurring groin or knee injury to blame or was it a broken finger?

One type of injury is more likely to result in repeat (still unsure on if this is applicable to concussions?). I know disclosure is somewhat murky but not all injuries are equal - not a knock on your data FLPF, I just think the nature of the injury is potentially as important as the fact of the injury itself!
Luckybreak
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,288
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Farnham UK

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Oct 11, 2018 8:51 am

Luckybreak wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:
Ericf wrote:
FLPensFan wrote:A look at NHL goalie injuries, and how Matt Murray injuries stack up against the rest of the NHL:

https://randomhockeyguy.wordpress.com/2018/10/10/nhl-goalie-injuries-an-in-depth-look-at-goalie-injuries-in-the-nhl/


You looked at the total number of games Murray missed due to injury, but I think, since he’s a young goalie, you need to look at games out due to injury per games played healthy...I’d be interested to know, as a ratio, since Murray hasn’t played a lot of games, how his number of injured per health games compares to other goalies....do you have those numbers? Thanks

Doing that kind of ratio is really difficult for two reasons:

1) There is no set number of games for a goalie. While a position player could play in 82 games, there is no set number of games for a goalie to start. A true starter probably gets about 60 games per season, but that can fluctuate. Add in the fact some teams use split starters, and it is really hard to set a good standard value for number of games to use in the ratio.

2) Murray only played 13 regular season games in 2015-2016, which would also make it hard to accurately provide a ratio for him.

What I can expand on, though, is over the past 3 years, take a look at goalies of similar age, how many games they have played, and how many they have missed.

Matt Murray, John Gibson, Andrei Vasilevskiy, and Connor Hellebyuck would all be good goalies to compare Murray with. And, only looking at the past 3 years.

Murray has played in 113 NHL regular season games. He has missed 24 regular season games, with 5 different injuries.
John Gibson has played in 181 NHL regular season games. He has missed 27 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 8 different injuries.
Andrei Vasilevskiy has played in 156 NHL regular season games. He has missed 12 regular season games (in the past 3 years), with 1 injury.
Connor Hellebyuck has played in 152 NHL regular season games. He has not missed any regular season games due to injury in the last 3 years.


Great points and comparison! Based purely on injuries it seems pretty standard around the NHL. Anyone else think that is concerning in itself? Makes me wonder if the reduction on goaltender equipment size has or will play a part, and if more should be done to prevent collisions with goalies?

A goalie in the butterfly position means contact is more likely to be with their head, and that their knees or groin could be damaged during a collision. Or am I just a dirty goalie sympathiser?! :-)

I still think drilling into the injury data would be really interesting - what were the injuries?

Is missing 24 games with multiple concussions a greater concern than missing 24 games with a virus? Is a recurring groin or knee injury to blame or was it a broken finger?

One type of injury is more likely to result in repeat (still unsure on if this is applicable to concussions?). I know disclosure is somewhat murky but not all injuries are equal - not a knock on your data FLPF, I just think the nature of the injury is potentially as important as the fact of the injury itself!

I'll provide an update on the actual injuries here a little later. Not all are accurate thought. Some will say concussion, for example, while other known concussions may just say upper body injury.
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby Luckybreak on Thu Oct 11, 2018 10:47 am

Thanks FLPF, good luck with the investigation!
Luckybreak
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,288
Joined: Mon Jun 21, 2010 8:57 am
Location: Farnham UK

Re: FLPensFan Blog posts

Postby FLPensFan on Thu Oct 11, 2018 3:57 pm

In 9 years, the following are the top 10 listed reasons that goalies missed games:

- Lower body, 149
- Groin, 90
- Upper body, 54
- Illness, 50
- Knee 49,
- Concussion, 33
- Undisclosed, 28
- Flu, 27
- Back, 21
- Head, 13
FLPensFan
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,984
Joined: Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: South Florida

PreviousNext

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests


e-mail