Confirmed with Link: Coyotes trade Strome and Perlini for Nick Schmaltz - Part Deux

[Englishcoyote]

When we traded strome I was gutted because it hadn’t planned out but understood that something needed to be done, but to be fair I could score 20 goals in the nhl playing on a team with paddy Kane and I can’t skate that well!!!

 

[PuckLife]

Disclaimer: I’m an OHL fan that sees a lot of junior hockey, quite a bit of Chicago, and a few Coyotes games. But here’s my theory:

Strome and Debrinkat were magic on ice in Junior, and were tight off the ice too.

I suspect that Strome is a fragile kid confidence wise. Once things got down in Arizona, I don’t think he had the fortitude to work through and regain his confidence.

The trade to Chicago reunited him with his buddy, boosted his confidence that the Blackhawks wanted him, and set him up to play with good players.

This just couldn’t happen in Arizona. It’s not Chayka’s fault.

 

[Prarievarg]

I also believe the production boost on the hawks has to do with his confidence. He's always been a player who has been relied on offensively, and he has always thrived in that role. On the coyotes he got to play with a combination of 4th liners and AHL players, of course his confidence took some damage.

 

[Prarievarg]

As an organization and (especially) as a coach for a sports team you have to be able to help young players with their confidence. Especially when said player is the most important part of a rebuild.

 

[Guest]

Strome was what the Coyotes needed, but he was not going to do it the way the Coyotes were currently constructed. He was a good player to insert into an established lineup, but not a cornerstone to start building from because he could not do it himself.

From the fans standpoint I think there are just many pain points. We were all ticked that we missed out on the top two picks. We really needed Strome to develop into a top center that we didn't have. He was basically the first part of that plan because Maloney recognized the need for a top center and was trying to draft one. The problem was that we had no two way wingers that could score to put him with and cover up for his defensive lapses.

He did well with Domi last year for a brief period, he showed that potential at that point. I am curious how he would have done with Gally or Keller with some regular time, we may have seen more of the same, but from a coaches standpoint what was a defensive black hole.

As I previously said, the slate is wiped clean when you are with a new team. He went from being the Coyotes busting project to a #3 overall again for the Hawks. All they had to do was give an opportunity and reap the rewards, at at that point they were near the bottom of the West and they could afford to give that opportunity. With all of the injuries to the Coyotes this year he probably would have gotten that opportunity as well.

 

[BUX7PHX]

.....and Cobra and Bux will be making up more and more and more excuses.

What excuses am I making up?

The post by PuckLife is truly a lot of what I have been saying and implying:

Disclaimer: I’m an OHL fan that sees a lot of junior hockey, quite a bit of Chicago, and a few Coyotes games. But here’s my theory:

Strome and Debrinkat were magic on ice in Junior, and were tight off the ice too.

I suspect that Strome is a fragile kid confidence wise. Once things got down in Arizona, I don’t think he had the fortitude to work through and regain his confidence.

The trade to Chicago reunited him with his buddy, boosted his confidence that the Blackhawks wanted him, and set him up to play with good players.

This just couldn’t happen in Arizona. It’s not Chayka’s fault.



That's why this is so strange - when a trade for Galchenyuk occurs that basically tells a player that management wants to get more out of the position, you can respond in two ways: shrink like a violet or step up your game. How about you Jake - when someone is unhappy with your performance in your career, relationship, etc. - did you back away or did you focus on the ways to improve?

Why do we so often hear about players getting put on a lower line coming back and saying that they never want to be put in that situation again? And if this is how Strome shows his mental fortitude, then maybe that is the best thing we could ask for. We need mentally tough players on this team, and should Strome's confidence be lacking because he was placed on the 3rd line and expected to grow, then that exhibits a lack of mental toughness.

It is also possible that Chayka and his data/analytics saw a good player, but not an elite player in Strome. I wish I could find the interview that was done with him after the 2015 draft, when he was an assistant GM, but I remember this clearly. Chayka mentioned how there was a player at #3 that he was confident in ahead of other peers for the selection, but never specifically mentioned that player's name. Chayka was asked about picking Strome at #3, and he responded with, "Well, we collected and looked through all of our data and found that there was a player at #3 that we thought was ahead of the pack. We think we have a good player."

Think about that relative to how glowing his reviews were towards Keller and Hayton. He never directly stated, "We found that player in Strome," or something that lends a belief that Strome was the player that the consensus was built around. Sounds to me like the Coyotes did not take the player that Chayka viewed as the sure-fire #3 pick, and that he was just stating the same thing that would be stated pre-draft: we have a top X pick and expect to get a good player out of it. When looking at how quickly Marner and Hanifin (the next most obvious choices at #3) assimilated to the NHL, maybe that was part of his reasoning - Strome may take longer to reach that top level and may need other dynamic players to help him on his journey, whereas Marner and Hanifin were already dynamic players that could guide the ship from the start.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

I am so conflicted about all this, and I need to lie down.

Because Strome is one of ours and Schmaltz is not yet. Funny old thing, emotional attachment. It will take many points and plays for Schmaltz to replace the HOPE and promise that offered Strome whilst witnessing him growing up.

Because this almost feels a bit of a repeat of Domi and Gally. Twice in a row, oh boy. Is there enough salt for this ever growing wound?

Because bold pick Barrett Hayton is around and even if I am a Zadina sort of guys, and do believe Zadina will eventually get it done, I do think Barrett will do wonders for us. That was bold but as much as I honestly often enjoy Chayka talk, some of his words are too decisive at times and things he said at the draft or during the trades, I could have done without - so alienating on hindsight.

Because Chayka.... well I sort of still like him. Sorry. How conflicting it is to feel that I want to be patient rather than hopeful with this gentleman! But hey, just guts talk. He signed RT for 4 years, this is year 2. I have hated that they gave up on Strome before a full NHL season, and lesson here is that project needs not aborting too early; so I hope we will see year 3 of the RT Chayka combo.

But man, even RT is so hard to follow. It is unbelievable that this team is still in playoffs range despite all those injuries. Yet this lad is composing what seems like ridiculous lines and playing times. Is there some RT's brilliance in this or is it just a coincidence with this mad Western conference season?

I am so conflicted about all this. Though I believe it won't take long to get final clarity in all this. Another trade, another injury, another contract, another random line combo..... Let's roll year 3 and see.

Ps. Of course I am also expecting the team to be bought, Chayka to be fired and we will never see year 3. Then next season I will probably write about how conflicting I am about not seeing year 3. Life of a Coyote fan, Yes, Again and forever. Not a bad fan life really.

BRING BACK THE KACHINA FULL TIME

You need to take a nap.

 

[BUX7PHX]

I also believe the production boost on the hawks has to do with his confidence. He's always been a player who has been relied on offensively, and he has always thrived in that role. On the coyotes he got to play with a combination of 4th liners and AHL players, of course his confidence took some damage.

Yet he was successful in the AHL (over a PPG) playing with 4th liners and AHL players as well, so why was there such a difference?

I have mentioned this quite often - if the quality of players that were matched up on Strome's line was fairly similar between the AHL and NHL, then it is more evident that the problems were not who Strome was lining up with, but with Strome throwing a pity party for himself and/or not adjusting in the proper ways to get the most out of himself for the team.

 

[Kaibur]

Why didn't the Coyotes draft Alex DeBrincat in 2016 with the 37th overall instead of trading it to Tampa for DeAngelo? By that point, they had watched DeBrincat play with Strome for 2 years and he put up 50G, 100+ points in both pre-draft seasons. It's not like their scouts didn't get long looks at him.

 

[Jakey53]

Why didn't the Coyotes draft Alex DeBrincat in 2016 with the 37th overall instead of trading it to Tampa for DeAngelo? By that point, they had watched DeBrincat play with Strome for 2 years and he put up 50G, 100+ points in both pre-draft seasons. It's not like their scouts didn't get long looks at him.

Good point.

 

[The Feckless Puck]

Why didn't the Coyotes draft Alex DeBrincat in 2016 with the 37th overall instead of trading it to Tampa for DeAngelo? By that point, they had watched DeBrincat play with Strome for 2 years and he put up 50G, 100+ points in both pre-draft seasons. It's not like their scouts didn't get long looks at him.

IIRC, the Coyotes' scouts at the time thought DeBrincat was too small to succeed in the league. I may be wrong, though.

 

[Grimes]

I could be wrong as well but I dont remember many have DeBrincat being a high 2nd. Maybe our thought was grab DeAngelo and get him with our next pick. Plan foiled by Chicago taking him at 37.

I still remember being thrilled getting DeAngelo for a 2nd. Thought that was an absolute steal of a move by Chyaka.

Edit: McKenzie had him at 32. Still can't deny getting DeAngelo for a 2nd but the chemistry with Strome and DeBrincat was undeniable and would have been encouraging to our most important prospect at the time.

 

[Prarievarg]

Yet he was successful in the AHL (over a PPG) playing with 4th liners and AHL players as well, so why was there such a difference?

Yes, same quality of linemates but in a different context. Those players were probably able to be creative and make use of their skills better against a lesser competition and lower tempo that is in the AHL. My belief is that Strome needs to be relied upon offensively. Part of that is a confidence thing, but also for him to be effective he needs a creative environment.

 

[hbk]

You know I watched part of the Oilers game last night and noticed how our speed was just killing Edmonton as they couldn’t exit their zone and we outshot them 21-6 after Edmonton had a 6-3 shots of goal lead to start the game. That’s our system. It’s predicated on speed and quick plays and that quite frankly isn’t Strome’s style.

This trade comes down to a change in coaching philosophy. Whether we think our coach should be flexible on adapting his system to the players on the roster is the real debate. We have chosen (right or wrong) to build our roster to fit a coaching philosophy.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

There is no doubt it was a trade based on philosophy...that being said, if we knew all along he was the square peg for the round hole, we should have traded him sooner for more/better assets. Not that I don't like Schmaltz, I do, but Strome is obviously more valuable than Schmaltz, and because they waited so long, his diminished value only hurts the organization as a whole.

 

[Imaravencawcaw]

You know I watched part of the Oilers game last night and noticed how our speed was just killing Edmonton as they couldn’t exit their zone and we outshot them 21-6 after Edmonton had a 6-3 shots of goal lead to start the game. That’s our system. It’s predicated on speed and quick plays and that quite frankly isn’t Strome’s style.

This trade comes down to a change in coaching philosophy. Whether we think our coach should be flexible on adapting his system to the players on the roster is the real debate. We have chosen (right or wrong) to build our roster to fit a coaching philosophy.

There is no doubt it was a trade based on philosophy...that being said, if we knew all along he was the square peg for the round hole, we should have traded him sooner for more/better assets. Not that I don't like Schmaltz, I do, but Strome is obviously more valuable than Schmaltz, and because they waited so long, his diminished value only hurts the organization as a whole.

This is why I'll always scoff at anyone who blames Chayka for trading Strome. Tocchet is the one who decided to play Strome as a 4th line grinder with AHL linemates, limited TOI, and very little PP time based on his defensive performance/compete level. You can certainly argue with that coaching philosophy, but Chayka had no choice but to get something for an expiring asset once it was pretty clear what his trajectory was in Tocchet's system

 

[cobra427]

It is worrisome that Domi and Strome are having way more success when they aren't coached by Tocc any more. That didn't happen with Tip, in fact the opposite with most players. I wonder if Tocc is getting the best out of his players? The good news is we got 2 good players in return for them and the team is playing pretty well given all the injuries, time of year etc...I'm eating some crow on Strome, given his production so far but I still see a poor player without the puck in the O zone. Was it Tocc's use of Strome, was he just a bad fit, did he have a poor attitude, or is he in a perfect situation to succeed with Debrict and Kane (PP) lately on a team that leas the NHL in GAA(D play not important)? Was it Chayka or Tocc or both wanting to get rid of Strome?

 

[BUX7PHX]

Yes, same quality of linemates but in a different context. Those players were probably able to be creative and make use of their skills better against a lesser competition and lower tempo that is in the AHL. My belief is that Strome needs to be relied upon offensively. Part of that is a confidence thing, but also for him to be effective he needs a creative environment.

Possibly, I guess that I would also like to think that if you are putting your top 2 D and best defensive line out against a 3rd line, you may be doing a disservice. I would envision that a top line in the AHL is also going against the top defensive matchup on the opposition, which is basically the equivalent of a bottom pairing D at the NHL level, and what Strome would likely see anyhow.

The creativity aspect is actually a reasonable point, although I am not certain that every shift is measured on the coach saying to any one of its members, "Be creative with the puck." Usually I see that happening in rare instances where there is no other option or you recognize that you can do a spin-o-rama because you set that up with your plays in the 1st and 2nd period. But, I could see how that could hurt from the perspective of those skilled players being able to drive the play.

If the statement is being made that he was successful against players in the AHL as a result of the fact that they are lesser competition and have a slower tempo to play, then you are kind of making the argument as to why Strome was correctly played and should have been at a lower line to start and let him progress from there in the NHL, as opposed to putting him on the top line immediately, because it might have been overwhelming

 

[BUX7PHX]

You know I watched part of the Oilers game last night and noticed how our speed was just killing Edmonton as they couldn’t exit their zone and we outshot them 21-6 after Edmonton had a 6-3 shots of goal lead to start the game. That’s our system. It’s predicated on speed and quick plays and that quite frankly isn’t Strome’s style.

This trade comes down to a change in coaching philosophy. Whether we think our coach should be flexible on adapting his system to the players on the roster is the real debate. We have chosen (right or wrong) to build our roster to fit a coaching philosophy.

True, but at some point, that argument is going to fall flat. It happens in the NFL all the time. Coaching change happens, and the defensive philosophy changes from a 4-3 to a 3-4, or vice-versa. Well, the 3-4 doesn't run very well with 270 lb. defensive ends unless they have the coverage and quickness to convert from a 3 point stance DL to a stand up LB.

Eventually, you will run out of roster room to carry the number of players needed to run every single style of system. Look at it this way, if we want line 1 to be up-tempo, and line 2 to be good with the neutral zone trap and less effective on offense, line 3 is dump and chase/good in corners, and line 4 is heavy hitters who can throw weight around (all reasonable at playing D), what do we do if we start out the season not scoring any goals and we move the members of each line around. All of a sudden, the same player that did this on line 1 may do the wrong thing on line 2, and the neutral zone player who is now on line 3 struggles to adjust to being good in the corners. Now, we have to further change our philosophies and what needs to be preached to the lines, as opposed to staying consistent and applying the same ideas across the board.

I think that having a different system for each player may be harder to manage than one may think.

 

[BUX7PHX]

It is worrisome that Domi and Strome are having way more success when they aren't coached by Tocc any more. That didn't happen with Tip, in fact the opposite with most players. I wonder if Tocc is getting the best out of his players? The good news is we got 2 good players in return for them and the team is playing pretty well given all the injuries, time of year etc...I'm eating some crow on Strome, given his production so far but I still see a poor player without the puck in the O zone. Was it Tocc's use of Strome, was he just a bad fit, did he have a poor attitude, or is he in a perfect situation to succeed with Debrict and Kane (PP) lately on a team that leas the NHL in GAA(D play not important)? Was it Chayka or Tocc or both wanting to get rid of Strome?

Probably a varying percentage of all of the above.

 

[hbk]

True, but at some point, that argument is going to fall flat. It happens in the NFL all the time. Coaching change happens, and the defensive philosophy changes from a 4-3 to a 3-4, or vice-versa. Well, the 3-4 doesn't run very well with 270 lb. defensive ends unless they have the coverage and quickness to convert from a 3 point stance DL to a stand up LB.

Eventually, you will run out of roster room to carry the number of players needed to run every single style of system. Look at it this way, if we want line 1 to be up-tempo, and line 2 to be good with the neutral zone trap and less effective on offense, line 3 is dump and chase/good in corners, and line 4 is heavy hitters who can throw weight around (all reasonable at playing D), what do we do if we start out the season not scoring any goals and we move the members of each line around. All of a sudden, the same player that did this on line 1 may do the wrong thing on line 2, and the neutral zone player who is now on line 3 struggles to adjust to being good in the corners. Now, we have to further change our philosophies and what needs to be preached to the lines, as opposed to staying consistent and applying the same ideas across the board.

I think that having a different system for each player may be harder to manage than one may think.

Fair comments. It all comes down to whether or not Strome is a skilled enough player to build your team around. With a draft pedigree of 3OV he should have been. Don't get me wrong I love the way Schmaltz plays and am as frustrated on certain levels as others but Strome didn't fit our desired style of play. I'm still interested in seeing this play out.

 

[Jakey53]

Fair comments. It all comes down to whether or not Strome is a skilled enough player to build your team around. With a draft pedigree of 3OV he should have been. Don't get me wrong I love the way Schmaltz plays and am as frustrated on certain levels as others but Strome didn't fit our desired style of play. I'm still interested in seeing this play out.

I will say it again. I'm not mad about the trade, rather the way they handled Strome. RT did not want Strome and that is fine, but why not showcase him and put him in a position to succeed. A C playing his first full NHL team and is on a projection of 45-55 pts. is worth a hell of a lot more than a player playing on the fourth line with a projection of 24 pts. Poor asset management. I have to admit, Chayka was damn lucky to get a player like Schmaltz in that deal, but next time he may not be so lucky.

 

[Vinny Boombatz]

Poor asset management. I have to admit, Chayka was damn lucky to get a player like Schmaltz in that deal, but next time he may not be so lucky.

This x1000

 

[_Del_]

Chayka had no choice

He's the General Manager. He could have managed. His coach.

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Clearly Strome's success in Chicago is going to weigh heavily on an evaluation of Chayka's performance. The local cheerleaders/hockey reporters are lauding Chayka's work but this is a results oriented league. Schmaltz is on the shelf and Strome is tearing it up.