Speculation: 2019 Off Season Roster Discussion #4

[Jakey53]

Strome was never going to look good playing on the 4th line. He's never going to be a good 4th line defensive/checking center. He'll have to play in Europe or Russia if he can't be a scorer. What they were trying to accomplish with him here is beyond me. They weren't trying to utilize his skills. They weren't trying to showcase him for a trade and they definitely weren't trying to develop him unless they were dumb enough to try and develop him into a 4th line center.

Bingo. I blame RT 100% for the Strome fiasco, and Chayka did what RT wanted. It might end up ok when all is said and done, but it might not the next time.

 

[Jakey53]

You don’t think playing with literally your best friend in the world from junior hockey who you have crazy chemistry with plays a factor? It definitely does. Strome is ok - he’s not the player for this team and/or system...and I think it’s as clear as it possibly can be after 17 games, that Schmaltz is.

You may be right, but what could we have got in a trade if Strome, a C, on a ELC, was a regular in the line up and racking up pts. not sitting in the press box or playing with scrubs and getting scrub minutes. It may have been a player much better than Schmaltz. Why not see what you have in a player before you trade them, especially a young blue chip prospect? Poor asset management in my opinion. Hopefully, the trade will help both teams.

 

[_Del_]

I love the "he played with good linemates so his points don't count" argument.

I always liked the people who dismissed Kane -points, and Cat points because putting up 51 points in 58 games is easy for Strome with them -- but the same people are excited for giving 5.8M to the guy whose high in points is 52 in 78 games... Games which he played with... Kane and sometimes Cat.... Schmaltz had 63 points in his last 101 games in Chicago over two seasons playing with those guys. But his Chicago points count (enough to give him 5.8M!), and Strome's 51 in 58 don't. Just ignore those points.

 

[Matias Maccete]

You don’t think playing with literally your best friend in the world from junior hockey who you have crazy chemistry with plays a factor? It definitely does. Strome is ok - he’s not the player for this team and/or system...and I think it’s as clear as it possibly can be after 17 games, that Schmaltz is.

I'm not saying it's not a factor, it definitely is. It's just that often this turns into "yeah but he played with Debrincat so it doesn't really count". They count.

I would call Strome more than ok at this point, and if we can't fit a player that puts up points at the rate he does in our system or team, then system our system or team suck. Schmaltz was pretty good in those 17 games, I'm skeptical that he's a center long term, but I'd love to he proven wrong.

 

[SniperHF]

They count.

Perhaps a different though similar situation we heard last year:
Coyotes performance February-April doesn't count, won't carry over.

Coyotes next season post best point total in 5 years.



I'd be curious to look at some historical players but no data probably exists. Someone truly feeding off a top line talent(s) like Anson Carter or Jonathan Cheechoo.

What's the closest current example of an obvious situation like that?

 

[_Del_]

Coyotes performance February-April doesn't count, won't carry over.

that one was really odd to me because it was pretty obvious watching even the early games in the "worst hockey ever" that the team was playing much better than previous seasons. And the underlying metrics bore that out. That late streak was a peak above where they probably really were, but they were improving all year.

We should be somewhat improved again next season on paper.

Still concerned about our physical and mental make-up and our professionalism and leadership. Hopefully boy wonder finds an analytic for that soon.

 

[Matias Maccete]

Perhaps a different though similar situation we heard last year:
Coyotes performance February-April doesn't count, won't carry over.

Coyotes next season post best point total in 5 years.



I'd be curious to look at some historical players but no data probably exists. Someone truly feeding off a top line talent(s) like Anson Carter or Jonathan Cheechoo.

What's the closest current example of an obvious situation like that?

Cheechoo was the first one I thought out, I think I typed tootoo though. I can't think of a good one right now. Obviously playing with certain players like McDavid or Crosby are going to boost stats somewhat, but not to the degree that some scrub is going to put up ppg numbers.

 

[XX]

I'd be curious to look at some historical players but no data probably exists. Someone truly feeding off a top line talent(s) like Anson Carter or Jonathan Cheechoo.

What's the closest current example of an obvious situation like that?

Matt Moulson comes to mind.

 

[_Del_]

Chris Simon had that miracle 30 goal year with Oates. but that was a long time ago. And Simon before that was a decent player for what he was, though obviously not an offensive player. People only remember the old broken down Simon though.


ETA: looked it up. It was only 29 goals haha 75 games 29-20-49, 146PIM

Had 16-18-34 in 68 games in Colorado a fee years earlier, paced well most seasons (for an enforcer).

 

[Foggy1097]

You may be right, but what could we have got in a trade if Strome, a C, on a ELC, was a regular in the line up and racking up pts. not sitting in the press box or playing with scrubs and getting scrub minutes. It may have been a player much better than Schmaltz. Why not see what you have in a player before you trade them, especially a young blue chip prospect? Poor asset management in my opinion. Hopefully, the trade will help both teams.

If Strome was racking up points he likely would have never been dealt. He was never given sufficient time with our best skill guys, for whatever reason, we’ll never know. Sometimes guys don’t fit or don’t work out...it is what it is. I’m excited to see Schmaltzy this season.

 

[Jamieh]

Perhaps a different though similar situation we heard last year:
Coyotes performance February-April doesn't count, won't carry over.

Coyotes next season post best point total in 5 years.



I'd be curious to look at some historical players but no data probably exists. Someone truly feeding off a top line talent(s) like Anson Carter or Jonathan Cheechoo.

What's the closest current example of an obvious situation like that?

Rob Brown is an example that comes to mind, he scored 49 goals in less than a season riding shotgun with Mario. Also had over 100 points. Always got decent points in Pitt but could barely play in the League anywhere else.

 

[BUX7PHX]

You may be right, but what could we have got in a trade if Strome, a C, on a ELC, was a regular in the line up and racking up pts. not sitting in the press box or playing with scrubs and getting scrub minutes. It may have been a player much better than Schmaltz. Why not see what you have in a player before you trade them, especially a young blue chip prospect? Poor asset management in my opinion. Hopefully, the trade will help both teams.

As someone said, we probably don't trade him. But, you are also answering your own question - if he was that talented and doing everything that could be done, why play him with scrubs or give him scrub minutes? Yes, Tocchet and Strome may have had different personalities, but having two different personalities is fine, provided that each side is putting in the effort.

What part of Strome's game in Arizona showcased him as being elite? An 11 game stretch at the end of the 2017-18 season when we could theoretically play outside the system because we were out of the playoff picture since the first 20 games of the season? Until that point, everything pointed to Strome's game being not up to par for his pick status. Chemistry is real and it did not exist with Strome and other players here. It does exist with DeBrincat for him. Good for Strome that he was able to be in that position and good for us for getting a better return on Strome than what he had shown thus far. Countless people had mentioned how they thought that there was no way Schmaltz would have been available.

I think that the trade helps both teams in the long run as well, but poor asset management? Asset management is a 2-way street. Even if the GM and coach make mistakes in that regard, the player isn't immune, either.

 

[BUX7PHX]

LOL

Well thank goodness he had two years left on his ELC before Chayka would have to pay out a $5.8M AAv contract. (That is the going rate between Chayka and a guy who scores 25 pts in a contract year, right?)

Apparently we don't have any money to spend so the answer was to dump all our ELC guys we don't want to develop and overpay all our RFA's and not have enough left over to actually improve the roster?

I like where this is headed! Who should we get to oversee rebuild 3.0 next summer?

Unfortunately, you aren't thinking this in the manner that contracts wind up going these days.

To use an NFL example, do you think that Russell Wilson is a top 3 QB in the league? I certainly don't. I believe that Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Patrick Mahomes, Tom Brady, Philip Rivers, and other players like Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Andrew Luck are at the very least, equal to Wilson, if not better. Yet, when you look at the highest-paid QB in the league, guess whose name is at the top? Wilson. I didn't even name 2 of the top 5 highest paid QBs - Roethlisberger at #2 and Cousins at #5. Definitely a different story without RFA status, but when you get to Strome, here is what I would see his agent's talking points:

#1. Players are looking to sign longer term deals at the ages of 20, 21, 22, so he would already be looking long-term. How do we justify giving someone 6 or 7 years when the player hasn't exactly put up the numbers?

#2. Although the numbers are not there, the agent would probably say that he is developing and needed more time than other players (which is a fairly accurate statement). When the players taken around him in the same draft year are signing deals for $10 M AAV, that agent is going to use that information to say that Strome will eventually be that type of player, but it is a guessing game as to when he breaks out. Maybe because the numbers haven't been there, he won't get $10 M, but maybe his AAV would be starting with a $6. It is the same situation with Wilson - it is not that he is inherently that much better, but players of a similar position are getting a certain value attached to their name. Likewise, players of the same age whom we lumped Strome with are producing at a fantastic rate. Therefore, at some point in time, Strome will produce similar stats to them.

Which would you have been happier with - dealing Strome on the day that we dealt him, or announcing that very day that we just extended Strome on a 7 year deal for $44 M total (AAV of $6.28 M)? I could easily see that being the way things go down, and now that he had one productive timeframe with the Blackhawks, I wonder how that changes the total AAV going forward?

 

[_Del_]

We just a string of RFA's get pretty reasonable contracts.
And Strome had less than 25 games played in his career "on that day" and was two years away from getting a new contract. So I think your numbers are ludicrous.
You can invent as many fantasy delusions as you'd like to justify the trade.

If Strome puts up another 51pts in 58 games, I'd be thrilled to give him Schmaltz's money and then some. Probably because I've seen Schmaltz play more than 17 games, so I have some doubts that he's turned a magic corner.
And that isn't dumping on Schmaltz, but he was ass at C 5v5-- I don't care how dingle-dangly he looked while doing it. He's soft, unwilling to go to the tough areas of the ice, allergic to contact, doesn't shoot enough, and is a liability defensively (we have another one of these guys already). Maybe he'll look better at wing, but most of those criticisms are the same ones he had in Chicago.
We desperately need more offensive talent. Even guys with warts, so welcome aboard. He also has room to improve. But you can't hide that many small, one-dimensional guys and be successful. They aren't cornerstones.
And it doesn't make the trade or contract any less foolish. I don't need to invent fantasy scenarios, err, delusions to defend my position.

 

[Jakey53]

If Strome was racking up points he likely would have never been dealt. He was never given sufficient time with our best skill guys, for whatever reason, we’ll never know. Sometimes guys don’t fit or don’t work out...it is what it is. I’m excited to see Schmaltzy this season.

How do you rack up pts. playing fourth line minutes, with fourth line players? It was clear that Strome would be traded and a few of us said as much. Hope the trade works for both teams.

 

[Jakey53]

As someone said, we probably don't trade him. But, you are also answering your own question - if he was that talented and doing everything that could be done, why play him with scrubs or give him scrub minutes? Yes, Tocchet and Strome may have had different personalities, but having two different personalities is fine, provided that each side is putting in the effort.

What part of Strome's game in Arizona showcased him as being elite? An 11 game stretch at the end of the 2017-18 season when we could theoretically play outside the system because we were out of the playoff picture since the first 20 games of the season? Until that point, everything pointed to Strome's game being not up to par for his pick status. Chemistry is real and it did not exist with Strome and other players here. It does exist with DeBrincat for him. Good for Strome that he was able to be in that position and good for us for getting a better return on Strome than what he had shown thus far. Countless people had mentioned how they thought that there was no way Schmaltz would have been available.

I think that the trade helps both teams in the long run as well, but poor asset management? Asset management is a 2-way street. Even if the GM and coach make mistakes in that regard, the player isn't immune, either.

How do you get to show your talent when you don't get minutes and not put in a position to succeed? Strome had chemistry with Domi, and now DeBrincat, both players with talent. It takes talent to play with talent. Maybe RT should have tried him with Keller for 20 games, or some other player that can accept a pass and shoot. Trades happen and I understand that, all I'm saying is that management has to or should be patient with young kids and should try to put them in a position to succeed.

 

[Ebb]

Trades happen and I understand that, all I'm saying is that management has to or should be patient with young kids and should try to put them in a position to succeed.

I'm not too saddened by the loss of Strome, he often looked anemic out there (play-wise). Admittedly, he did get messed with quite a bit during his stay with the Coyotes. I think both DT and RT kind of messed with his head (but probably mostly RT). It seems like he can be successful if surrounded with the right players, but that quality of player was never on the roster while he was here (and still isn't, although perhaps he could have played well with Kessel, but I doubt it).

While it's important to find the right lines, I think it's also important that the player give 100%. To me, Strome seemed to be dogging it a bit (probably because of how he was treated). It's one of the weaknesses of our system, we tend to force players to fit a system rather than adapt the system to the players strengths and weaknesses. Still, I think Strome needed to prove more to stay here, but I kind of doubt he really wanted to be here long-term (again based on how the team developed him).

Sure we probably should have made moves to acquire better players for him, but that's not how this team tends to roll. You have to play into the system or, you'll either be buried in the lines/pairings or moved. I'm pretty sure there's also a carryover from previous management/coaching/drafting as well. That's somewhat of another flaw, FO trying to define themselves separately from the previous folks. As I reflect back, I think I was leaning towards Marner in 2015 (I followed draft stuff more back then), but was okay with Strome (it's not like there were too many other choices besides those three after McEichel were gone) over Hanifin (I was worried about the whole college thing more back then)

 

[BUX7PHX]

How do you get to show your talent when you don't get minutes and not put in a position to succeed? Strome had chemistry with Domi, and now DeBrincat, both players with talent. It takes talent to play with talent. Maybe RT should have tried him with Keller for 20 games, or some other player that can accept a pass and shoot. Trades happen and I understand that, all I'm saying is that management has to or should be patient with young kids and should try to put them in a position to succeed.

Maybe because the player wasn't doing enough in the offseason, practices, strength and conditioning, or even games to warrant receipt of minutes.

For so long, people on these boards have been saying, "Earn your spot and earn your time. Don't just give time to someone for the sake of." Now, we actually did that with Strome by starting him on lower lines with the ability to move him up the lineup so long as he is following the system and way that we are coaching him to perform. And people are screaming, "No, we weren't practicing patience with him and we needed to put him with elite players to see where he is at."

Those two thought processes are polar opposites of each other. While a little more patience may have been okay, we are also not going to jeopardize the idea of playing someone who hasn't earned the right for more minutes by not buying in. People complain about why Nick Cousins was used higher up in the lineup - maybe that is because while he may have 1/10th the talent of Strome, he was willing to buy in and do all of the things that Strome may not have.

To use an analogy - how many people, on the first day that they received their learner's permit, had their parents take them on to the highway immediately? And how many people had them driving parking lots and neighborhood roads to get them comfortable? If I can't handle driving 25 mph in a residential neighborhood, how am I supposed to handle a 65 mph speed limit?

People try and turn this into being all Chayka and Tocchet's fault (and there is some blame there, certainly). But as many have said, Strome did not do himself any favors, either. As Chayka said, we actually were pretty patient with him. Hard to do when the players taken immediately around him in the draft at #1, 2, and 4 have combined to average over 1 point per game. But we also can't "hope" for him to suddenly turn it around. Strome wasn't happy here and his play showed it. He moves on to a place that was more interesting to him and has a player whom he has chemistry with in DeBrincat, and his play rises.

 

[hbk]

Is this board of the opinion that Chayka lost the Strome deal and Schmaltz will always be an inferior player (ie that the decision on who won this trade is final and there is zero chance of it changing in time)?

I personally think we need to see how this season plays out before that decision is made.

I’ve also never seen a fan base more angry after a 16 point improvement. This was a team that worked its ass off every night and I loved watching every second of it.

 

[Jakey53]

Is this board of the opinion that Chayka lost the Strome deal and Schmaltz will always be an inferior player (ie that the decision on who won this trade is final and there is zero chance of it changing in time)?

I personally think we need to see how this season plays out before that decision is made.

I’ve also never seen a fan base more angry after a 16 point improvement. This was a team that worked its ass off every night and I loved watching every second of it.

I'm not saying that, at all. What I'am saying is that Strome was not given a chance to succeed by RT. Trades happen all the time, you win some, you lose some, but I would want to know what I have in a young, blue chip prospect before trading him. They gave Perlini more of a chance, and Fischer much more of a chance. Luckily, we got a pretty good player with Schmaltz in that trade. Time will tell who won this trade.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Is this board of the opinion that Chayka lost the Strome deal and Schmaltz will always be an inferior player (ie that the decision on who won this trade is final and there is zero chance of it changing in time)?

I personally think we need to see how this season plays out before that decision is made.

I’ve also never seen a fan base more angry after a 16 point improvement. This was a team that worked its ass off every night and I loved watching every second of it.

For some people, it is.

I think that Strome's stat lines make it appear that we lost the trade, but as you said, there is a lot of time to figure that out.

We don't know the entire story of how everything will play out. In 3-5 years time, we may realize that our group has a far greater level of camaraderie, Schmaltz's contract is actually good value, and Strome is also doing well in Chicago being with different players and a style that fits his game better.

It is easy to point fingers at certain individuals like Chayka or Tocchet. But it is so much more than just those two that affected the decision. I can imagine that any and every player on our roster has been brought up in trade talks. Many are an easy "no." A few are actually quality deals with legs that we can go forward with. I would imagine that for the first year or two, Strome may have fallen into the easy "no" category. Then, we don't quite see the development and maybe not enough of the willingness to do certain things that fit our system. That easy "no" now becomes "it is a maybe, but it has to be the right deal" type of thing.

All I know is that the only time we saw Strome do what we thought he could in a Coyotes uniform was when he was brought up from the AHL and rewarded with more NHL time. He did everything that we asked in the AHL, and that right there is proof that we are capable of rewarding a player with better time and moving them up the lineup, based on what he had done to improve his game in the AHL. The expectation was that it would carry over through the offseason and he would set himself up to do more of the same, regardless of linemates. I guess that expectation wasn't met.

Bottom line, even though we traded Strome, I think we are a better team after that trade.

 

[Jakey53]

Maybe because the player wasn't doing enough in the offseason, practices, strength and conditioning, or even games to warrant receipt of minutes.

For so long, people on these boards have been saying, "Earn your spot and earn your time. Don't just give time to someone for the sake of." Now, we actually did that with Strome by starting him on lower lines with the ability to move him up the lineup so long as he is following the system and way that we are coaching him to perform. And people are screaming, "No, we weren't practicing patience with him and we needed to put him with elite players to see where he is at."

Those two thought processes are polar opposites of each other. While a little more patience may have been okay, we are also not going to jeopardize the idea of playing someone who hasn't earned the right for more minutes by not buying in. People complain about why Nick Cousins was used higher up in the lineup - maybe that is because while he may have 1/10th the talent of Strome, he was willing to buy in and do all of the things that Strome may not have.

To use an analogy - how many people, on the first day that they received their learner's permit, had their parents take them on to the highway immediately? And how many people had them driving parking lots and neighborhood roads to get them comfortable? If I can't handle driving 25 mph in a residential neighborhood, how am I supposed to handle a 65 mph speed limit?

People try and turn this into being all Chayka and Tocchet's fault (and there is some blame there, certainly). But as many have said, Strome did not do himself any favors, either. As Chayka said, we actually were pretty patient with him. Hard to do when the players taken immediately around him in the draft at #1, 2, and 4 have combined to average over 1 point per game. But we also can't "hope" for him to suddenly turn it around. Strome wasn't happy here and his play showed it. He moves on to a place that was more interesting to him and has a player whom he has chemistry with in DeBrincat, and his play rises.

I know you don't like Strome, that is your opinion, but you keep on speculating why he was traded. Most times it's the players fault when something like this occurs, and my only beef with this whole Strome thing is how in hell do you trade a 3OA pick without putting him into a position to succeed. Strome was drafted to put up pts. and I couldn't give a damn about his 200' ft. game, which was not too bad. We didn't draft Keller because of his 200' ft. game or to win board battles etc. RT kept on putting Stepan on the PP because he was "sticky" and he kept on failing. Why wasn't Strome given the opportunity to see what he could do? Sure in hell couldn't do any worse than Stepan's 3 PP points. Strome and Debrinct have chemistry that there is not doubt, but both have talent to make it work. Strome and Domi had chemistry and made it work. Put Domi and DeBrincat with Archibald and Cousins and see what happens.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I'm not saying that, at all. What I'am saying is that Strome was not given a chance to succeed by RT. Trades happen all the time, you win some, you lose some, but I would want to know what I have in a young, blue chip prospect before trading him. They gave Perlini more of a chance, and Fischer much more of a chance. Luckily, we got a pretty good player with Schmaltz in that trade. Time will tell who won this trade.

Perlini received the same chances Strome got, or do you not recall that he started off in the AHL, and started to light fire with scoring there, same as Strome? He was brought up, he bought in for that year, and it continued for the remainder of the year. At that point, he was "in" the NHL, but maybe that is a problem for some of the players - they have a honeymoon period where by making it, that's it and they are guaranteed time and a roster spot for the next 4-12 years.

Sometimes, that is a bigger target on the back, though. The same way that an employee who gets a pay raise at work is also going to be the first one severed from a company if their work is of a similar quality to the people who are paid 10% less than that same employee.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I know you don't like Strome, that is your opinion, but you keep on speculating why he was traded. Most times it's the players fault when something like this occurs, and my only beef with this whole Strome thing is how in hell do you trade a 3OA pick without putting him into a position to succeed. Strome was drafted to put up pts. and I couldn't give a damn about his 200' ft. game, which was not too bad. We didn't draft Keller because of his 200' ft. game or to win board battles etc. RT kept on putting Stepan on the PP because he was "sticky" and he kept on failing. Why wasn't Strome given the opportunity to see what he could do? Sure in hell couldn't do any worse than Stepan's 3 PP points. Strome and Debrinct have chemistry that there is not doubt, but both have talent to make it work. Strome and Domi had chemistry and made it work. Put Domi and DeBrincat with Archibald and Cousins and see what happens.

All that we have is speculation on why he was traded. You are speculating that he was traded because Tocchet and Chayka simply didn't like him, and had no bearing on what his practice habits or other habits were.

I had an old coach who had this story:

At a "Meet the coaches" night for parents, a parent asked the coach (who was new to the school), "I have heard that you play favorites with the players. Is that true?" The coach looked at the parent and responded with this:

"Yes - that is true. I do play favorites. My favorites are the players who show up on time, put forth the solid effort in practice and in school, don't get into trouble away from the sport, and commit themselves to continually being better. They don't give excuses for failure, but learn and get better from it. If your child doesn't work hard, has issues with authority, doesn't stick to lifting and eating healthy, isn't in shape, and doesn't give the idea that he is buying in and caring, then that child probably isn't my favorite."

Align that message with the way Tocchet and many other coaches probably subscribe to. That doesn't mean that Strome is a bad person, but as you said, if you commit yourself to pick the player 3rd overall and he isn't being given meaningful time, is that because the coaches simply don't like him, or is the player giving coaches a reason not to like him? I think the latter is true in 99.9% of the cases.

 

[_Del_]

Is this board of the opinion that Chayka lost the Strome deal and Schmaltz will always be an inferior player (ie that the decision on who won this trade is final and there is zero chance of it changing in time)?

Who knows? Maybe Schmaltz manages to become more than a fifty point scorer or learns how to play defence or learns how to play center in year four.
What I do know is that if Strome is successful -- regardless of what Schmaltz does or does not do-- based on Chayka's post-trade comments, our GM/staff cannot recognize talent. That's scary. Like real scary. Like "we had him at #3"-scary. Like *insert your favourite curse word* scary.


I also know we just gave a guy with fewer than 35 career goals in three seasons a $5.8M contract while the guy we publicly shat on after fewer than 50 career games has another year on his ELC. For a team that's broke (and ironically near-caplocked now) that's sort of a factor to me, too.