SeanMoneyHands
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2019
- 13,537
- 11,805
Keller is the better player in a vacuum so I voted him, but if you get to build a realistic contender under the salary cap, Hyman would be one of the best options at what he brings. Meanwhile, I would certainly pick other offensive stars to lead my attack over Keller. That's the best way I can try to put it.
I think that's an interest way to frame it.
Essentially, Keller might be the more pure skilled "play driver" to lead the attack...but if Keller is your "best player" you've got holes in your roster. Whereas Hyman as well, if he's your best player...well you're in trouble. But i think the context of this comparison makes it fair to consider it as though you're going to have other top skill guys better than Keller. Because otherwise, what are you really building with either of the two?
If you're ranking these guys based on who is around them, then you're really ranking the players that are around them. Take everyone else away, Keller is the better choice. It takes a very specific addition of players to suddenly make Keller superfluous and tilt the decision to Hyman.
In a vacuum it's pretty clearly Keller, but they're very different players so I could see certain scenarios where you'd prefer to have Hyman.
Everyone, because that would define who is actually better between the two players. Being a puck retrieval guy that crashes the crease means you have chemistry with a specific pairing of players, but that doesn't make you better. Otherwise Holmstrom would considered better than a ton of guys he really shouldn't because he brought a unique skillset to play with the Wings' skill guys.Right but ultimately who cares who’d be the better forward as the best player on a team going nowhere? Players don’t exist in a vacuum and teams are made up of more than one guy so part of an evaluation should probably be how they’d fit in while building a team. Versatile players who can retrieve the puck, play well with skill guys, be a net front presence, etc, are important. I’d argue he’s a better possession driver too. If Keller is more valuable to Arizona than Hyman would be but Hyman is more valuable to Edmonton, then is Keller actually better? Or is it team dependent? I don’t know if the players needed to swing things are that specific tbh. I’d say most playoff teams would be better with Hyman.
Everyone, because that would define who is actually better between the two players. Being a puck retrieval guy that crashes the crease means you have chemistry with a specific pairing of players, but that doesn't make you better. Otherwise Holmstrom would considered better than a ton of guys he really shouldn't because he brought a unique skillset to play with the Wings' skill guys.
Hyman was a 0.54 point per game forward until he got to join the McDrai show at the age of 28. And it's not like he was playing on a team bereft of talent.I think that's hugely reductive regarding Hyman's skillset. He's not just a specialist net front garbage man. He's a legitimately talented high IQ high skill forward in his own right, who just happens to have a bit more of a "grinder" mentality than Keller. It's really more of a "stylistic" issue.
Where Keller might be better suited to be the primary puck possessor /puck handler on a line...that puts him in a situation where he's going to be at his best when he's the "best player on his line". But i'm not sure if he's good enough to be the "best player on the best line" on a contender.
Whereas Hyman's style of play doesn't require him to have the puck on his stick nearly as much to be his most effective self. It's more about digging up pucks, getting open supporting play, and just generally playing responsible complementary hockey. The perfect complement to the "best player on the best line of a contender". A more natural fit than Keller who is potentially going to be dueling with that linemate for puckhandling time to play his most effective game.