Article: Jared Spurgeon Isn't Getting Enough Credit For His Impact This Year

[Phillip Garrett]

View full article

[FredJohnson]

Thanks for the article, Phillip. Spurge isn’t flashy but he is efficient. Good to see the numbers back it up.

[SkolWild73]

Nice article.  I do have a question though.  

Because the Wild have lost 380 of their 493 one-goal games since their founding,

Our record isn't 113-380 in games decided by one goal, correct?  That seems impossible.  Anyone have a few hours to check that?

[Imyourhuckleberry]

49 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

Because the Wild have lost 380 of their 493 one-goal games since their founding,

Our record isn't 113-380 in games decided by one goal, correct?  That seems impossible.  Anyone have a few hours to check that?

Actually, you can check this via NHL.com by going to team stats and selecting all-time, and Team Goal Shares. No idea where the stats from the article came from.

The Wild are 424 - 417 (.504 winning percentage )in one goal games for their history in the regular season. 188 are OT losses.  I'm not seeing how many are OT wins. In the playoffs, the win percentage for the Wild has plummeted to .302 for games decided by one goal.

Another note that may interest some. Partly due to the points change around 2000 that has been in place for the entirety of the Wild franchise, the Wild have the 5th highest points percentage in NHL history at .561. Vegas is #1 at .632 and Utah is 7th all-time at .543 despite finishing their only 82 game season with just 38 wins.

[Imyourhuckleberry]

I'm also seeing another correction or two that can be made now.

Quote

While Spurgeon may only be +7 this season, he has a respectable career plus/minus. He has been +30 three times and +124 three times. 

That +124 was supposed to be "for his career", as far as I can tell, but that number is now +125 after tallying a +1 last night to put him +8 for this season.

[Citizen Strife]

Spurgeon still has a lot to give, and the team would suffer without him.  Trading him early might be more bad than good (if the rumors end up being true).

[OldDutchChip]

Trade him and his 7.5 mm in the off season, it’s time, stop being a retirement community and start making shrewd and smart decisions

when it matters - spurgeon size is exploited and it has been proven every PO series

bye spurge

[RedLake]

Spurgeon was one of my favorite players the last 25 years. I'd hate to see him go but if Billy can package him with the upcoming Rossi trade that's  7.5 extra fixing our bottom 6 nightmare. There's 2 D-man in Iowa ready to start they're full-time NHL career plus Buuim. Writing is on the wall that both Rossi and Spurgeon will be elsewhere next September. Billy is gonna surprise us all with a total revamped top and bottom 6. We all give Billy shit but he's gonna take the Wild to the promise land. 

[SkolWild73]

Below is a link to an article about Spurg.  In the article it states that since the 20/21 season, Spurg is the best in the league in goals against per 60 minutes at 1.88.

https://thehockeywriters.com/montreal-canadiens-should-target-jared-spurgeon-in-the-2025-offseason/

Edited Thursday at 01:51 AM by SkolWild73

[SkolWild73]

Tried to find something about Spurg as far as playoff performance.  Only thing I found was Ai overview.  In 2021/22 the wild had a 2.65 goals against per 60, and a 2.01 with Spurg on the ice.  In 2022/23 the team was 2.66 and 2.40 with Spurg on the ice.  Maybe someone who is better at finding these things can help me out.

[OldDutchChip]

21 minutes ago, SkolWild73 said:

Tried to find something about Spurg as far as playoff performance.  Only thing I found was Ai overview.  In 2021/22 the wild had a 2.65 goals against per 60, and a 2.01 with Spurg on the ice.  In 2022/23 the team was 2.66 and 2.40 with Spurg on the ice.  Maybe someone who is better at finding these things can help me out.

what are we trying to prove with the stats? that he is not a liability against a more physically imposing teams that we face in the playoffs? or that he aged like a fine wine? or that he will likely be deployed as third pair D making 7.5 million next year? 

smart way of handling it - is to ship him out and pass his C onto Kap

Edited Thursday at 02:56 AM by OldDutchChip

[SkolWild73]

52 minutes ago, OldDutchChip said:

what are we trying to prove with the stats? that he is not a liability against a more physically imposing teams that we face in the playoffs? or that he aged like a fine wine? or that he will likely be deployed as third pair D making 7.5 million next year? 

smart way of handling it - is to ship him out and pass his C onto Kap

Not trying to prove anything.  It was an article about Spurgeon so posted some things I found about him to anyone that might be interested.  Never said anything about whether we should trade him or not, how he might be in a year or two when he ages or anything else.  If you don’t like it, you are more than welcome not to read it.

Edited Thursday at 03:49 AM by SkolWild73

[Enforceror]

Hell yeah, playoff time. Hope our chippiness passes on to our team. 😉

 

[M_Nels]

11 hours ago, RedLake said:

Writing is on the wall that both Rossi and Spurgeon will be elsewhere next September.

Writing on what wall? Yours? Rossi, sure because he is not signed and it seems like Guerin isn't sold on him. I haven't seen any writing on the wall about Spurgeon though. 

[Scalptrash]

Nothing against him, he is a solid and reliable defenseman, but he is not a leader. He doesn't have the stature or personality. Foligno would have been much better this whole time as captain.

[Citizen Strife]

Sure, if you can find a trade that a GM wants (not the GM mode trades we constantly hear about here), sure.  Maybe a Rossi/Spurgeon package MIGHT be beneficial.  The issue is finding the right guy teams want to part with.  If it's just for someone with lackluster stats or  injury history (like a Josh Norris), forget it.

Edited Thursday at 01:54 PM by Citizen Strife

[Pewterschmidt]

15 hours ago, Citizen Strife said:

Spurgeon still has a lot to give, and the team would suffer without him.  Trading him early might be more bad than good (if the rumors end up being true).

I'd be very surprised is Spurgzy has any trade market value.  Why? age, injury history, contract.  Take your pick.

[Pewterschmidt]

14 hours ago, OldDutchChip said:

start making shrewd and smart decisions

the next one by bill will be the first

[Citizen Strife]

That's what I've been saying.  Spurgeon hasn't shown the Goligoski cliff yet.  If you can't package him to get money savings, just keep him and see what happens when his contract is done.  Either he retires, gets traded or let go, or kept for a much cheaper price tag.  No one's going to come with those fantasy Thompson or Tkachuk ideas without dumping a lot more than Rossi and Spurgeon...

Edited Thursday at 02:04 PM by Citizen Strife

[OldDutchChip]

10 hours ago, SkolWild73 said:

Not trying to prove anything.  It was an article about Spurgeon so posted some things I found about him to anyone that might be interested.  Never said anything about whether we should trade him or not, how he might be in a year or two when he ages or anything else.  If you don’t like it, you are more than welcome not to read it.

I didn’t realize it was informative only

 

[OldDutchChip]

23 minutes ago, Citizen Strife said:

Sure, if you can find a trade that a GM wants (not the GM mode trades we constantly hear about here), sure.  Maybe a Rossi/Spurgeon package MIGHT be beneficial.  The issue is finding the right guy teams want to part with.  If it's just for someone with lackluster stats or  injury history (like a Josh Norris), forget it.

Not exactly the right approach. A good trade might be to trade him for a prospect or just picks and reuse the money saved

Would a trade to oilers or hawks for picks interest them?

[Citizen Strife]

Fletcher's main issue (and the one with the Nyquist one this year) was selling away any and all picks for "depth" in years that the Wild weren't realistically contenders.  If the Chicago pick is high enough, and the player you'd get with the Rossi and Spurgeon savings was on the market, sure.  If by some miracle a Pastrnak is rumored, do that.  I have heard no such player since Rantanen though, so FAs like Marner, Boeser, or Ehlers is the crop at large.

The Wild aren't all in next year, despite the allure of it.  The approach of building a ceiling is all well and good until you remember the floor is still made of loose wood.

10-20 pt D and 20-40 pt F are expendable.  30-40 pt D and 50-60 pt F are not.  Vegas and St Louis have the floor of players the Wild don't.

[OldDutchChip]

2 hours ago, Citizen Strife said:

Sure, if you can find a trade that a GM wants (not the GM mode trades we constantly hear about here), sure.  Maybe a Rossi/Spurgeon package MIGHT be beneficial.  The issue is finding the right guy teams want to part with.  If it's just for someone with lackluster stats or  injury history (like a Josh Norris), forget it.

The trade doesn’t always need to bring a player back of equal value - which is what one of the options should be. If you can unload Spurge and not take back money, then you can reuse that money

[M_Nels]

1 hour ago, OldDutchChip said:

The trade doesn’t always need to bring a player back of equal value - which is what one of the options should be. If you can unload Spurge and not take back money, then you can reuse that money

Would it be worth it to retain 30-50%? Don't think you're just going to be able to unload him without incentive.

[OldDutchChip]

1 hour ago, M_Nels said:

Would it be worth it to retain 30-50%? Don't think you're just going to be able to unload him without incentive.

hoping not to do that, but you are correct. would columbus entertain spurge and freddy for nothing?