Zach Hyman 1st 50 goal season

[snag]

So, your assertion is that McDavid has somehow magically transferred his goal scoring ability to Hyman.

This is incredible.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

I wasn't wrong. I didn't make any predictions. When Hands was in Toronto and his first year in EDM he was trash. I haven't seen him much this year but it would appear that McDavid (64 goals last year to 26 so far this year) is just transferring his goals to Hands.

Says he wasn't wrong. Proceeds to be wrong.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

That's all you've got? Here's some more. Last season Hands and McDavid scored 100 goals between them. This season they have 77 so far. How do you explain that?

A slight drop from .62 to .56 goals per game, largely due to McDavid playing like trash (relative to his standards) for the first part of the season - a period during which Hyman was the only consistently productive player on the team.

 

[Saltcreek]

And I stand by all of it. McDavid has assisted on 38 of Hands 51 goals but the cost was that McDavid's goal production and Hands assists went way down. The Leafs could have had Marner and Matthews try to feed him more goals but it would have hurt them too so they replaced him with Bunting for $4M less who performed about the same.

Go create a poll asking HF who they would prefer including contacts. Hyman or Bunting. I’ll wait right here.

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Imagine using "Hands" as a pejorative against a 50+ goal scorer.

 

[666]

Go create a poll asking HF who they would prefer including contacts. Hyman or Bunting. I’ll wait right here.

All I'm saying is that Matthews scored his rocket 60 goals the season right after Hands left. The point is that losing Hands did not hurt the Leafs at all and most definitely helped due to the huge increase in salary that Edm gave him. Now shirley, losing a true 51 goal scorer and replacing him with Bunting should have at least hurt a little bit.

 

[bossram]

cool, but that shouldn't be the narrative...cause there are tons of rich folks who try to buy their sons a ticket to the NHL

cause money doesn't buy you hard work

It's possible to have a nuanced conversation. If you want to ignore the actual point, you do you. If you want to invent a narrative I'm not saying, you do you.

I'm not saying money guarantees you an NHL job or that Hyman doesn't work hard (it's clear he's worked very hard to improve essentially every year he's been playing high-level hockey).

All I'm saying is a factual statement that being wealthy confers many advantages, in sports and life generally, that people with less means simply will not have.

 

[MessierII]

All I'm saying is that Matthews scored his rocket 60 goals the season right after Hands left. The point is that losing Hands did not hurt the Leafs at all and most definitely helped due to the huge increase in salary that Edm gave him. Now shirley, losing a true 51 goal scorer and replacing him with Bunting should have at least hurt a little bit.

They went from abject playoff failures to…..still abject playoff failures.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

It's possible to have a nuanced conversation. If you want to ignore the actual point, you do you. If you want to invent a narrative I'm not saying, you do you.

I'm not saying money guarantees you an NHL job or that Hyman doesn't work hard (it's clear he's worked very hard to improve essentially every year he's been playing high-level hockey).

All I'm saying is a factual statement that being wealthy confers many advantages, in sports and life generally, that people with less means simply will not have.

sure it's "facts"....but who cares?

him having "privileges" as a kid other didn't have isn't some unique situation in the NHL

 

[bossram]

sure it's "facts"....but who cares?

him having "privileges" as a kid other didn't have isn't some unique situation in the NHL

Apparently you care enough to reply and pretend I'm arguing things that I'm not?

Regarding the bolded, not it's not unique, but it is factually true. And some people can't seem to accept this.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I don't know why you're bringing these other guys up. I didn't mention them. And again, they are irrelevant to the argument that, "money helps". Yes, the others guy had money and NHL connections thanks to their NHL dads. Is that fair? No, but that's how it is.

Hyman's dad bought a league for him to play. What you're saying is that in no way helped his career. That is a bizarre take.

Yes, rich people use their money to get themselves ahead. That's just the way it is. To deny that it is helping is very strange.

His dad bought the League, Hyman was the best player in that League. The fact that you glean from this that means he "bought a league for him" is a bit strange, not gonna lie. I don't even know what conclusion you're drawing other than one that amounts to about as much insight as "water is wet". Did his dad pay off the other kids in the League to let Hyman score nearly a goal per game his last year there? Did he buy the University of Michigan to offer him a spot? Why didn't the buying of leagues get any of Zach's other brothers anywhere beyond Junior A?

Perhaps it really just is the case that Stuart Hyman is what he says, a guy who is really passionate about youth hockey fortunate enough to have the money to spend on that passion. No doubt his sons involvement helped spur that passion but the insinuation that Zach's career is somehow a... lesser is just odd.

 

[CantHaveTkachev]

Apparently you care enough to reply and pretend I'm arguing things that I'm not?

Regarding the bolded, not it's not unique, but it is factually true. And some people can't seem to accept this.

everyone accepts this

what we can't accept is it being the narrative

 

[Kerberos]

Apparently you care enough to reply and pretend I'm arguing things that I'm not?

Regarding the bolded, not it's not unique, but it is factually true. And some people can't seem to accept this.

It's the "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" adage... which often, unsurprisingly, comes from those who have convinced themselves that society confers the same advantages to everyone.

They see it as a personal attack on their person, invalidation of their work ethic or accomplishments when it's not but their lack of empathy frames that perception. Not sure how, exactly, in a world where nepo babies and legacy admissions get huge headstarts, anybody can convince themselves these inequities don't exist and function to create huge disparities. But I guess willful ignorance knows no bounds.

Zach Hyman deserves all the credit in the world for his success. He's a phenomenal human being, at least from what we can ascertain, and has put in a lot of hard work to get where he is but it would be wonderful if we lived in a world where others who have that same innate work ethic and natural talent could also be afforded a fraction of the same opportunity.

 

[GOilers88]

Impressive to say the least. But to think he hasn't benefitted from playing with McDrai is ridiculous. Take Hyman and put him in the Habs. Does he score 50? Does he even score 40? 30? Would he immediately become the Habs best player? Lol....no. no he wouldn't. He doesn't come close to Suzuki.

Good on him though. A solid contributing piece. Much like Cheechoo was when he scored 56 riding shotgun to Jumbo. Right player at the right time.

You could do this exercise with virtually any player.

Does Matthews score 60 in San Jose?
Does MacK put up 120pts in Columbus?

 

[KevinRedkey]

For Zach Hyman, yes. If we were talking prime Ovechkin, no. It's not just a static 8 goals either, Matthews is still playing. If Matthews never scores again it's 8 goals... but it's 8 goals + whatever Matthews scores.

People are just getting greedy. He got to 50 and now they're saying 60 and the Rocket. Kreider was 8 goals behind Matthews too. Unexpected seasons happen.

That's no different than Mattews vs cathcing Kucherov.

Either way - neither is happening.

 

[BMacLeafs]

Elon Musk with the OT winner.

He'd fit right in with the modern NHL.

 

[Tobias Kahun]

And I stand by all of it. McDavid has assisted on 38 of Hands 51 goals but the cost was that McDavid's goal production and Hands assists went way down. The Leafs could have had Marner and Matthews try to feed him more goals but it would have hurt them too so they replaced him with Bunting for $4M less who performed about the same.

Or maybe his 64 goal season was an outlier?

 

[bossram]

everyone accepts this

what we can't accept is it being the narrative

Apparently you can't accept that.

That hockey is a prohibitively expensive sport for the only the extremely wealthy should be a narrative.

 

[666]

Or maybe his 64 goal season was an outlier?

It doesn't change the fact the McDavid has pretty well the lowest goals per game of his career while achieving the highest assists and at the same time it's the opposite for Hands. It's pretty clear that McDavid is sacrificing goals for assists and Hands is the benefactor.

 

[bossram]

His dad bought the League, Hyman was the best player in that League. The fact that you glean from this that means he "bought a league for him" is a bit strange, not gonna lie. I don't even know what conclusion you're drawing other than one that amounts to about as much insight as "water is wet". Did his dad pay off the other kids in the League to let Hyman score nearly a goal per game his last year there? Did he buy the University of Michigan to offer him a spot? Why didn't the buying of leagues get any of Zach's other brothers anywhere beyond Junior A?

Perhaps it really just is the case that Stuart Hyman is what he says, a guy who is really passionate about youth hockey fortunate enough to have the money to spend on that passion. No doubt his sons involvement helped spur that passion but the insinuation that Zach's career is somehow a... lesser is just odd.

If your dad was a very wealthy guy who owned the league you play in...I think you would get some preferable treatment. Given how much politics there is in hockey, this is obvious.

Go read my other posts in this thread. I am in no way saying Hyman has not worked extremely hard (he clearly has, as he's improved essentially every season he's been in high-level hockey) nor does he not deserve to be in the NHL.

What I am saying is a plain fact: Wealth confers many advantages, in hockey and life generally, that people of lesser means simply won't have. Hyman worked extremely hard to get to where he is. He also had every asset and opportunity possibly available to make that happen.

What is actually clear is that many here are incapable of nuanced thought or the ability to hold two thoughts in their head at once.

 

[WarriorofTime]

What I am saying is a plain fact: Wealth confers many advantages, in hockey and life generally

What is actually clear is that many here are incapable of nuanced thought

Exhibit A

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Super cool how McDavid mind-assisted from the bench on the OT winner last night. Hyman basically did nothing on that play.

 

[waitin425]

You could do this exercise with virtually any player.

Does Matthews score 60 in San Jose?
Does MacK put up 120pts in Columbus?

Possibly. Those are two guys that make the players around them better. Like McDavid, who has made Hyman better. Like Thornton, who made Cheechoo better. Hyman is a great wing man for McDavid, no doubt. But his value is over inflated because of it. That 5.5 is good value. But, he is probably nothing more than a 5.5 mil player anyways.

 

[bossram]

Exhibit A

I mean, it's a fact. If you want to deny that, go ahead it. It's obvious you are the one incapable of nuanced thought or logic. As you have shown to be unable to engage or argue with any of my points, and instead crop a tiny snippet and reply with a two-word glib response.

But sure, according to you it must be a coincidence that children born into wealthy families, are on average richer and healthier adults than children born to poor families. No advantages whatsoever.

 

[WarriorofTime]

I mean, it's a fact.

Ok

If you want to deny that, go ahead it.

Nobody denied it.

It's obvious you are the one incapable of nuanced thought or logic.

The guy who keeps coming back to "wealth confers advantages" is the one incapable of nuance on this topic.

Or is it just a coincidence that children born into wealthy families, are on average richer and healthier adults than children born to poor families?

No, nobody said it was.