Hmmm .... Zach Hyman

[hotpaws]

So don't you find it strange, that there is no outrage, or posts on trying someone other than Nylander on the other side of Matthews? I mean, it never entered his mind, that his line may work better with another player, other than Nylander?

Hey, by the way, can you please confirm, that Babcock has NEVER tried anyone else with Matthews, in practices, etc... to see if that works?

he has moved Willie off the line multiple times our the past 2 years , do you even follow the team ?

so running drills with different lines is same as playing games in your opinion? geez i guess not only do you not follow the team but you also don't understand the sport

 

[Shanty]

basically all your opinion comes down to is feeling the need to agree and defend Babcocks decision

if Hyman feel out of favor with Babs and he shifted Johnsson to AM's wing you wouldn't say a peep

Wow. Nope. Don't feel the need to agree with Babcock, just happen to see the logic in this decision. If you actually read what I'm saying, instead of twisting it every time, you might see that. Is this what it's like arguing with the GOP?

Hated Marleau - Kadri - Komarov, never thought Leo should play his offwing.

Hate Martin on the 4th line, utterly unnecessary player.

Asked for Kappy to be played all year.

Wanted Marner away from JVR and Bozak since LAST year, thought they were making him worse defensively.

But I agree with Babcock and Babcock only and I'm blind.

 

[Cor]

if i actually gave damn i'd dig up your old posts , lucky for you i don't

Funny you say that, because I literally just went through and did a search of all my posts containing “Clarkson” in them (or any replies to posts that had Clarkson in them)

There’s no instance of me “verbally attacking people who criticized Clarkson” as you once claimed.

There’s no instances of me blaming Clarkson’s play on his line mates, as you once claimed.

There’s no instances of me talking about his contract positively, as you once claimed.

The most damning thing you can find, is me saying that the Komarov-Santorelli-Clarkson line was our best like 5 games into Clarkson’s 2nd season, or me saying “Clarkson!!” after he scored. And another post around the same time saying that Clarkson’s possession was actually good early into that season.

There’s a post saying “Clarkson seems like the type of person who you want to route for, but his play... lol” in the summer between his two seasons.

There’s also a post saying to the effect of forgetting the 1st season for a short while and hope he bounces back in the upcoming season.

So yeah, I was a guy rooting for a player on the team. I openly admit that, and I openly admit that I was wrong. But that’s the extent of it. I was a guy who wanted him to succeed, I guess that’s awful.

But unless you can start to care enough to go back and find proof, you need to stop bringing up Clarkson because it’s irrelevant and you seem to think my views were a lot stronger than they are.

Not too mention bringing up someone’s opinion from 5 years ago instead of any valid stats, or evidence to back your opinion, isn’t that strong of anything.

I don’t use the ignore button at all, because I feel I can have discussions with everyone.

However, if you feel that one opinion from 5 years ago negates everything I have to say today, to the point that whenever you see something from me you disagree with, you throw it out, often with exaggerated or false claims of what I actually said, I urge you to put me on your ignore list.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

Babcock is smarter than scalded mitts when it comes to the game of hockey.

According to some in here Babcock is infallible and should not be questioned because:
1) he’s won a Stanley cup
2) coached a gold medal team
3) is a good ole Saskatchewan boy
4) likes fishing and moonlight walks
How dare we as fans question his lineup decisions

 

[hotpaws]

Wow. Nope. Don't feel the need to agree with Babcock, just happen to see the logic in this decision. If you actually read what I'm saying, instead of twisting it every time, you might see that. Is this what it's like arguing with the GOP?

Hated Marleau - Kadri - Komarov, never thought Leo should play his offwing.

Hate Martin on the 4th line, utterly unnecessary player.

Asked for Kappy to be played all year.

Wanted Marner away from JVR and Bozak since LAST year, thought they were making him worse defensively.

But I agree with Babcock and Babcock only and I'm blind.

did you feel this way before or after Babs changed the line up ?

if it was before then why do you feel Babs couldn't possibly be also wrong on his insistence on gluing Hyman to Mathews

and why is it those of us who want him replaced on our top line are haters who don't have a clue and think they know how to coach better than Babs ?

 

[White Shadow]

So Hyman is the hockey equivalent of Scarlett? Yikes! I see him more as a Patricia Heaton (a homely woman you settle for when you know you can’t find better.)

The line is.

 

[diceman934]

so you don't fine it strange that Babs glued Hyman to Mathews from the second we drafted him and is so sure that is the best combination possible that it's never entered his mind AM and his line may work better with another player other than Hyman ?

but yet needs to juggle other lines to see what works best ?

I said Babcock has made many line changes and because he has not made the only one you care about you are pissed calling him his son etc. The guy happens to be a good hockey player and with all the talk on here you would think he is a scrub.

I am fine with the lines that we choose to use and if that means Hyman plays on another line I will be fine with that as well. I simply want to win and we are doing so better then most teams in the NHL in the. Last 25 games even without Mathews!

 

[Fogelhund]

he has moved Willie off the line multiple times our the past 2 years , do you even follow the team ?

so running drills with different lines is same as playing games in your opinion? geez i guess not only do you not follow the team but you also don't understand the sport

As expected. Instead of addressing the topic, it's spin, and personal attacks. That says it all right there.

For what it's worth, Hyman hasn't ALWAYS been on Matthews line. He's played without him, and Hyman has played on other lines the last two years as well. But, you don't see people jumping to discredit your points based upon such minutia, or personally attacking you. But, so noted....

 

[diceman934]

According to some in here Babcock is infallible and should not be questioned because:
1) he’s won a Stanley cup
2) coached a gold medal team
3) is a good ole Saskatchewan boy
4) likes fishing and moonlight walks
How dare we as fans question his lineup decisions

He has won a cup and coach team Canada to back to Back Gold. He is from Saskatchewan and I have no ideas about him liking moonlight walks and fish.

I would also add if you are making a list:

He has coached us to back to back playoff appearances and is going to coach us to the most wins in a season ever along with most points in a season.

This thread is specifically about only one of his decisions and despite the fact that Mathews won rookie of the year and got 40 goals many want Hyman off his line so that he can score more or get more points etc. Which to me is a joke as we should want us to win and we are doing so with the lines the way they are intact even without Mathews we are winning among the best teams in the NHL in the last 25 games.

So looking at facts and not wishes we are doing very well coached by a coach who has a great record of coaching winning teams let’s enjoy the ride.

 

[hotpaws]

As expected. Instead of addressing the topic, it's spin, and personal attacks. That says it all right there.

For what it's worth, Hyman hasn't ALWAYS been on Matthews line. He's played without him, and Hyman has played on other lines the last two years as well. But, you don't see people jumping to discredit your points based upon such minutia, or personally attacking you. But, so noted....

wtf are you talking about , i addressed his post his post and why shouldn't i question whether he follows the team when he didn't know Nylander has been moved off AM's line multiple times

you're right they have played the odd shift apart and the back half of the Mon game where Mathews scored 2 goals playing with Martin

but they have started every game together and have played the vast majority of time together excluding half the Montreal game and when Mathews has been injured

 

[Daisy Jane]

I don’t use the ignore button at all...
.

oh sweet summer child.
it makes life a lot less aggravating.

 

[White Shadow]

How do we explain that lines success without Matthews? I mean if it's supposedly all tied to Matthews, shouldn't they be failing miserably without him?

In the 9 most recent games without Matthews 5 vs 5 venue & adjusted:

Nylander CF% 56.17 GF% 60.42 SCF% 62.65 HDCF% 68.64
Hyman CF% 54.17 GF% 55.31 SCF% 58.32 HDCF% 58.83

This includes games against Tampa, Boston, Pittsburgh, Washington and a hot Florida team.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

He has won a cup and coach team Canada to back to Back Gold. He is from Saskatchewan and I have no ideas about him liking moonlight walks and fish.

I would also add if you are making a list:

He has coached us to back to back playoff appearances and is going to coach us to the most wins in a season ever along with most points in a season.

This thread is specifically about only one of his decisions and despite the fact that Mathews won rookie of the year and got 40 goals many want Hyman off his line so that he can score more or get more points etc. Which to me is a joke as we should want us to win and we are doing so with the lines the way they are intact even without Mathews we are winning among the best teams in the NHL in the last 25 games.

So looking at facts and not wishes we are doing very well coached by a coach who has a great record of coaching winning teams let’s enjoy the ride.

I generally agree with what you’re saying and am pleased where we are in our rebuild. Babcock definitely has played a part in what we’ve accomplished thus far. But, I as a fan, reserve the right to question some of his decisions, particularly this one involving Hyman. He’s a good coach, but not perfect and his stubborness has been well documented. Every coach wants to win and feel their decisions are right. But even Babcock has made changes that readers pushed for long before he decided to (Komarov to the 4th line, Martin to the press box). Eventually he’ll come around on this one too.

 

[Maple Leaf]

I question Babcock's decision making

 

[IBeL34f]

According to some in here Babcock is infallible and should not be questioned because:
1) he’s won a Stanley cup
2) coached a gold medal team
3) is a good ole Saskatchewan boy
4) likes fishing and moonlight walks
How dare we as fans question his lineup decisions

I think you're missing that many people have questioned Babcock's decisions (whether of their own accord, or because their line of thinking was challenged by someone else's point of view) and have simply either agreed with those decisions based on some philosophy or another, or have been enjoying the successes of this campaign and our players so much that nitpicking of this magnitude just comes across as ridiculous and over the top.

I haven't seen one poster simply say that Babcock can do no wrong and leave it at that, without any further analysis, or statistical or anecdotal evidence.

I've seen many people post dribble like your post here.

 

[CabanaBoy5]

I think you're missing that many people have questioned Babcock's decisions (whether of their own accord, or because their line of thinking was challenged by someone else's point of view) and have simply either agreed with those decisions based on some philosophy or another, or have been enjoying the successes of this campaign and our players so much that nitpicking of this magnitude just comes across as ridiculous and over the top.

I haven't seen one poster simply say that Babcock can do no wrong and leave it at that, without any further analysis, or statistical or anecdotal evidence.

I've seen many people post dribble like your post here.

I think you mean “drivel” and you’re entitled to your opinion. I think more than a few are on the “trust in Babcock, who are you to question” bandwagon when it comes to Hyman.

 

[2legit2quit]

I made a thread about Zack Hyman.

Person a) Argues: 1) Zack Hyman has progressed into a better scorer from last year. 2) Zack Hyman is a good enough Offensive player to be on the 1st line 3) Zack Hyman is balancing Leaf Lines
4) Hyman is too good on the first line, and, the Leafs Orginzation would be complete morons to even think about removing Hyman from AM34/Nylander's wing

Person b) Argues: 1) Hyman isn't very good offensively. 2) Leafs have enough depth to keep Hyman on the 4th line 3) There are players with better offensive/defensive talent that could play on the 1st line instead of Hyman.

Now ... With the emergence of Andreas Johnsson and Kasperi Kapanen

Why should Hyman (when AM34 returns) continue to play on the 1st LINE?

On pace for 40 points this year, playing no PP, BUT, playing with AM34/Willie isn't good enough.
Most of his ES points are from secondary assists / empty net poitns

// ----- Andreas Johnsson / Kapanen; undoubtedly have better offensive abilities while playing good defense.

Play Hyman on the 4th line. But give him PK time. What is the harm in trying Hyman on the 4th line in place of Johnsson/Kapanen?

Kapanen/JOHNSSON - Matthews - Nylander

Marleau - Kadri - Marner

JVR - Bozak - Kapanen/Brown

Hyman - Pleks/Komarov - Komarov/Brown


The point of argument to place Hyman on the 4th line is

1) Hyman has never played apat from AM34/Willie. And his offensive production with them is not very good.

2) It is clear that Johnsson/Kapanen are better than Hyman offensively

3) SO WHY NOT TRY-OUT Johnsson/Kapanen inplace of Hyman?

 

[hotpaws]

Funny you say that, because I literally just went through and did a search of all my posts containing “Clarkson” in them (or any replies to posts that had Clarkson in them)

There’s no instance of me “verbally attacking people who criticized Clarkson” as you once claimed.

There’s no instances of me blaming Clarkson’s play on his line mates, as you once claimed.

There’s no instances of me talking about his contract positively, as you once claimed.

The most damning thing you can find, is me saying that the Komarov-Santorelli-Clarkson line was our best like 5 games into Clarkson’s 2nd season, or me saying “Clarkson!!” after he scored. And another post around the same time saying that Clarkson’s possession was actually good early into that season.

There’s a post saying “Clarkson seems like the type of person who you want to route for, but his play... lol” in the summer between his two seasons.

There’s also a post saying to the effect of forgetting the 1st season for a short while and hope he bounces back in the upcoming season.

So yeah, I was a guy rooting for a player on the team. I openly admit that, and I openly admit that I was wrong. But that’s the extent of it. I was a guy who wanted him to succeed, I guess that’s awful.

But unless you can start to care enough to go back and find proof, you need to stop bringing up Clarkson because it’s irrelevant and you seem to think my views were a lot stronger than they are.

Not too mention bringing up someone’s opinion from 5 years ago instead of any valid stats, or evidence to back your opinion, isn’t that strong of anything.

I don’t use the ignore button at all, because I feel I can have discussions with everyone.

However, if you feel that one opinion from 5 years ago negates everything I have to say today, to the point that whenever you see something from me you disagree with, you throw it out, often with exaggerated or false claims of what I actually said, I urge you to put me on your ignore list.

sorry , you don't get to play the victim , you started this with your smart ass 9/11 comment

you like to go around throwing out what you believe are witty little one line shots but then get defensive when it gets tossed back at you

 

[IBeL34f]

I think you mean “drivel” and you’re entitled to your opinion. I think more than a few are on the “trust in Babcock, who are you to question” bandwagon when it comes to Hyman.

I did, thank you. Though, "to dribble" also means to drool, so you could feel free to infer what you'd like there...

 

[CabanaBoy5]

I did, thank you. Though, "to dribble" also means to drool, so you could feel free to infer what you'd like there...

Lol

 

[griffon1]

And this is something that I again and again correct, because it's an assumption that vastly overestimates how much points someone in Hyman's position actually get. Among players who get to play on a top line with two great players, the ones that outperform Hyman are mostly line-driving stars themselves. The rest doesn't produce much more than him, most produce less. The example I always refer to is TJ Oshie, who played with Bäckström and Ovechkin and didn't put up much more points at even strength than Hyman.

I feel like this is where people go wrong. They build expectations on what a guy in that spot should be able to do that isn't realistic, and when Hyman doesn't reach them they turn on him.

Some turn on him, I just realistically assess him.

 

[Liminality]

Most of his ES points are from secondary assists / empty net poitns

Huh?

Hyman has 13 goals and 22 assists. Of those 22 assists 15 of them are primary assists.

Oh sorry ES points.

At ES Hyman has 12 goals and 21 assists. Of those 21 assists 15 are primary assists.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

If people think that the Hyman-Matthews-Nylander line is so perfect we can't risk taking Hyman away from it, why are you okay with Babcock taking Nylander away sometimes? Is it okay to tinker with it as long as it's not Hyman coming off? Or is Babcock wrong to replace Nylander with brown?

 

[White Shadow]

If people think that the Hyman-Matthews-Nylander line is so perfect we can't risk taking Hyman away from it, why are you okay with Babcock taking Nylander away sometimes? Is it okay to tinker with it as long as it's not Hyman coming off? Or is Babcock wrong to replace Nylander with brown?

It's not just Hyman that he hasn't moved, it's the LWs in general. Aside from the Leo move, that is the extent of his line juggling that doesn't involve injury.

JVR had a very brief stint on the 4th line but has been stapled to Bozak. Marleau only gets moved to play center, otw he's stapled to Kadri.

Marleau hasn't played with Bozak or Matthews except for those stacked lines coming off the PK. Same can be said for JVR...he doesn't play with Matthews or Kadri.

 

[Cor]

sorry , you don't get to play the victim , you started this with your smart ass 9/11 comment

you like to go around throwing out what you believe are witty little one line shots but then get defensive when it gets tossed back at you

What about the half dozen other times you throw it out there in the past month?

I don't constantly harass you with your opinions of 5 years ago, let alone exaggerate them with false claims in order to slander your reputation on a freakin message board.

You do it to try and show others "haha don't listen to Cor, he was wrong about this thing! He's stupid!" because you have an issue with me for whatever reason.

Quite frankly, you owe me an apology