Forum 40 Line up of the year award

[Lawson of Anarchy]

I made up my own poll - but voted on here, you're welcome.

I chose players less than $1M

Crouse - Archibald - Keller
Bush

Honourable mention - Connor Garland

 

[BUX7PHX]

That happened in exactly four of those games. He was outstanding in those four games.

In the other thirteen we were 4-9 and he was a negative nine along with Keller. He was good for the powerplay, though.

Further debunking the myth:
We were outscored 45-32 in those thirteen games.
That's 2.46 GF/G and 3.46 GA/G.
Our season average without Schmaltz is 2.48 GF/G and 2.61 GA/G.
Even if we include the four outstanding games he had when he first came over, we were outscored 47-50 while he was in the lineup. That gets us to 2.76 GF/G but 2.94 GA/G.
We gained .28 goals per game and gave up .34 more goals with him in the lineup counting all his games. Not a massive benefit (if any, we lost value in goal differential). If the real Schmaltz is the player we saw in the last 13 games he played and not the first four games, we scored .02 FEWER goals with him in the lineup and gave up .85 goals MORE with him in the lineup.

Sucks to go 4-9 when the following injuries (which affect the entire team) occur in that 17 game streak:

Michael Grabner (out during game on 01DEC and did not return until March 7th)
Alex Galchenyuk (out after 08DEC game, returns on 16DEC)
Vinnie Hinostroza (out in middle of 06DEC game, returns on 29DEC)
Antii Raanta (left Schmaltz' first game on 27NOV and out for year)

I think I counted 40 man games lost by those 4 players (assuming Raanta would not start all 17 games, maybe 12 or 13 of them), and lineup changes all over the place to accommodate. If you are planning on using a sample size of performance in which the injuries happened within 6 games of acquiring Schmaltz and affected some fairly key players, then you do you. Strome sure wasn't going to do enough to make us better than 4-9 at that point, either.

 

[_Del_]

Absolutely none of that supports the contention that the team with him in the lineup was performing night-and-day differently, as was alleged.

 

[Bandit34]

Crouse/Richardson/Stepan
OEL/Hammer

 

[Bonsai Tree]

Nick Cousins. Seriously. He held the line together, never took a game off. On a team which had the fewest goals in the league 5 on 5, Cousin's importance is magnified.

 

[BUX7PHX]

Absolutely none of that supports the contention that the team with him in the lineup was performing night-and-day differently, as was alleged.

Except the stats that you chose to represent include his 4 solid games and the 13 games where you are stating that you saw no real benefit to his placement on the team. You are looking at it in the Schmaltz vacuum as if he alone could solve the issue of playing with 4 fewer frequent contributors over the same 17 game span that you used for the data set.

Your case was made on the team record and our goals for/against with Schmaltz in 13 out of 17 games. Bringing up that 4 players are missing from the lineup is incredibly relevant in the contention that the team was performing night and day better. When discussing record and goals for/against, to put that on one player when 4 contributors are out is mind-boggling, unless you are expecting Schmaltz alone to make up for the combination of elements that those players brought. I don't even know how I am supposed to respond at this point.

Let me ask you this - when Strome was on the ice for Arizona, did he ever give you a sense that something crucial was about to happen for us, such as a timely goal, great pass, or sustained pressure on the puck?

When Schmaltz arrived, did he do those same things that I listed above? If you go back and read some of the comments from those games, many posters state how Schmaltz finally makes it look like we have a legit top line with Keller and Galchenyuk. There was also the same shit about our PP and other items that have also been sources if trouble for the team and may be causal to why the team suffered even though Schmaltz looked good. For the first time in a long time, no one complained about the top line of the roster. If that isn't stating that people were comfortable with Schmaltz and him making a night and day difference by being in the lineup, then I don't know what else is. Not his problem that we were missing some key pieces when he arrived and couldn't muster offense. He had 14 points in those games, so he wasn't part of the problem, he was part of the solution, for the most part.

 

[_Del_]

So the real Schmaltz isn't the guy he was in all the games in Chicago this season or 13 games where he was -9. The real Schmaltz is the four game showing.
Bold.

Also, "noone complaining about the top line" ignores the people who noticed how awful the line was at 5v5 at the time...

 

[BUX7PHX]

So the real Schmaltz isn't the guy he was in all the games in Chicago this season or 13 games where he was -9. The real Schmaltz is the four game showing.
Bold.

I think he is a 0.6-0.8 ppg player for us. Same as Strome could have been. Hopefully, both wind up toward the top of that and beyond. The fit wasn't there with Strome and the team looked crisper with Schmaltz in the lineup.

If the locker room is being able to play "Coyote Hockey" (which may have different meanings with each year and progresses over time), and Schmaltz fits that mantra better Strome, then probably good for both sides.