Injury Report: Murphy out “a couple weeks”

[Hawkaholic]

Arizona also has scored more goals than we have - yes played 1 more game but that team over there is severely underrated and a team I think can still make the playoffs without Hammer. they are young and learning on the fly, goaltending and team defense has been great for them but that is a team that can roll 3 good scoring lines out there and there 5 more goals than us (in 1 more game played) is starting to show that.

My stats (except HDCA) didn't account for this year, because Hjalmarsson has only played 4 games and is out.

 

[AmericanDream]

My stats (except HDCA) didn't account for this year, because Hjalmarsson has only played 4 games and is out.

I understand, just speaking in terms of what the Yotes will be this year, people will use that narrative from last year and just think the Yotes will be this team struggling this season..I think they will be a good team on both sides of the puck - hard working and responsible with or without Hammer.

 

[Hawkaholic]

I understand, just speaking in terms of what the Yotes will be this year, people will use that narrative from last year and just think the Yotes will be this team struggling this season..I think they will be a good team on both sides of the puck - hard working and responsible with or without Hammer.

I agree. They will be a borderline playoff team like the Hawks, imo. I still think the Hawks will be quite a bit better offensively by the end of the season, but Yotes will be the better defensive team.

 

[Backyard Hockey]

I'm not a massive Murphy fan, but for a team that has had defensive issues over the last 4-5 years, this is a big deal.

Will JC trust Gilbert?

At the end of the day, it means Seabs probably plays more minutes which ain't good.

 

[Backyard Hockey]

I'll preface this comment with this, Murphy has been decent, not complaining about him as a whole. The trade has been OK, we have lost it IMO, but it hasn't been a failure.

But this leaves out the HDCA for both players:
Hjalmarsson: 360
Murphy: 424

It also helps Murphy that this team creates A LOT more offense than Arizona does, so Arizona is playing in their own end more often than Murphy is. (not by much, but it helps Murphy slightly more). And Hjalmarsson also starts in the D zone more often (72%) compared to Murphy (65%).

Hjalmarsson is obviously the better Dman of the two, but he is right, it's not as bad as some people (ahem @Blackhawks , and @Blackhawkswincup) say it is.

Unsure of contract/cap hit, but I'd bet a large reason for the trade was age.

Murphy is 26 and Hammer is 32. When you include Keith and Seabs, having another D man well into his 30s would need to change.

 

[BK]

I'll preface this comment with this, Murphy has been decent, not complaining about him as a whole. The trade has been OK, we have lost it IMO, but it hasn't been a failure.

But this leaves out the HDCA for both players:
Hjalmarsson: 360
Murphy: 424

It also helps Murphy that this team creates A LOT more offense than Arizona does, so Arizona is playing in their own end more often than Murphy is. (not by much, but it helps Murphy slightly more). And Hjalmarsson also starts in the D zone more often (72%) compared to Murphy (65%).

Hjalmarsson is obviously the better Dman of the two, but he is right, it's not as bad as some people (ahem @Blackhawks , and @Blackhawkswincup) say it is.

What were the HDCF numbers? I am just randomly curious. Also what is the minutes per game average for each player?

I am not questioning your take but I am genuinely curious.

 

[BK]

Unsure of contract/cap hit, but I'd bet a large reason for the trade was age.

Murphy is 26 and Hammer is 32. When you include Keith and Seabs, having another D man well into his 30s would need to change.

Hammer is on a 5.0 deal for 2 years (was 4.10 for 1 season) and Murphy is on a 3.85 AAV for 2 more years after this one.

 

[Hawkaholic]

What were the HDCF numbers? I am just randomly curious. Also what is the minutes per game average for each player?

I am not questioning your take but I am genuinely curious.

HDCF
Hjalmarsson: 383
Murphy: 347

Hjalmarsson played - 2196:43
Murphy played - 2120:16

 

[BK]

HDCF
Hjalmarsson: 383
Murphy: 347

Hjalmarsson played - 2196:43
Murphy played - 2120:16

Interesting. I wonder what the difference is with Q vs w/o Q for Murphy.

 

[ChiHawk21]

wonder what would have been last year if we played the year with DeHann from free agency and Hammer.

Keith-Hammer
Gus-DeHaan
Ruuta-Joki
Forsling-Seabrook

I wish i could have seen this to start the year.

 

[Melrose Munch]

ugh man

 

[Muffinalt]

wonder what would have been last year if we played the year with DeHann from free agency and Hammer.

Keith-Hammer
Gus-DeHaan
Ruuta-Joki
Forsling-Seabrook

I wish i could have seen this to start the year.

I really like Murphy but I did also wonder what if we kept Hammer (who's my second favorite player ever behind Toews). His decline wasnt that sharp at all, he is still pretty good especially defensively which we need (and not like Murphy is an offensive d).

But it's moot. We'd be worse off for only the fact that we'd have three old defenders in our core, instead of currently two. So I think that's what Stan wanted to avoid too, and the only one you could realistically trade was Hammer unfortunately.

Getting back a reliable, cost controlled and young Hammer-lite is pretty good outcome imo, not to mention Murphy is very quality in the lockeroom too.

 

[ChiHawk21]

I really like Murphy but I did also wonder what if we kept Hammer (who's my second favorite player ever behind Toews). His decline wasnt that sharp at all, he is still pretty good especially defensively which we need (and not like Murphy is an offensive d).

But it's moot. We'd be worse off for only the fact that we'd have three old defenders in our core, instead of currently two. So I think that's what Stan wanted to avoid too, and the only one you could realistically trade was Hammer unfortunately.

Getting back a reliable, cost controlled and young Hammer-lite is pretty good outcome imo, not to mention Murphy is very quality in the lockeroom too.

yea i think its a slight downgrade in what we needed/need for the D core but all and all wasnt a bad trade. I just cant see murphy being around that long either but what do i know.

 

[Muffinalt]

yea i think its a slight downgrade in what we needed/need for the D core but all and all wasnt a bad trade. I just cant see murphy being around that long either but what do i know.

You could easily be right, let's see how it plays out. But I do think he's pretty ideal to keep around next to our small offensive RDs, he'd be a nice 3rd pairing Rd.