Line Combos: If Marleau plays in the top nine, which forward from 16/17 Leafs is pushed down?

[Nithoniniel]

Hes a passenger nith. Really don't care about your rationalizations, he will be bumped down come october. I don't live in this fantasy land where all these "intangibles" are more valuable than the cold hard facts. Forget all the useless, subjective crap you said here, and answer to this.

Overall this season, Matthews has set Hyman up for 53 high danger chances that Hyman has put on net at five-on-five, the third-highest mark in the entire league after Connor McDavid and Matthews. Of those 53 high danger shots, Hyman has converted four of them. Considering that the expected shooting percentage from that area is 22.8 per cent, scoring on just 7.5 per cent of them is an incredible waste of opportunity.

and this

https://www.hockey-reference.com/players/m/matthau01/scoring/2017

what does this mean? hes the WORST in the league in converting, and he only is responsible for 9 primary assists for matthews this year. I don't want to hear one more thing about him not bringing matthews down. This fallacy where his "amazing effort" is somehow worth this devastating effect he is having on matthews is beyond lunacy.

the facts say he HAS TO GO!!!!!!!

Jeez.

First, learn what words mean if you are going to use them. Your opinion is not fact. Conjecture is not fact. Intangibles doesn't mean what you think it does either, as I've now told you three times.

Second, if you don't bother to read my posts, don't care about people's arguments, don't want to hear opinions that doesn't match yours, then you are better served to go talk with a mirror instead of spending time on a forum.

Not going to waste more time on you, as you make it quite clear that you don't have any interest in actually having a discussion.

 

[Polaris1010]

I'm telling you and everybody else Marleau was brought in to bump up the matchup line and help Kadri get to the next level. Brown as good as he is as tweener goal scorer he's limited in his effectiveness in that role. Marleua on the Kadri line will benefit the team in huge way towards the only stat that matters WINS.

Very intriguing idea.

I thought Marleau is going to beside Matthews in place of Hyman, for 2 reasons.

The price tag, you only get players at that price to be leaders on the teams. And Marleau and Hyman are similar in their physical play in that they are physical expect Marleau far more skilled. The price, and to improve on the current position is the reason to put Marleau besides Matthews.

However, your single reason, is equally compelling.

Either way is good. One of the better first lines in the league, or the best third line in the league.

 

[saltming]

Very intriguing idea.

I thought Marleau is going to beside Matthews in place of Hyman, for 2 reasons.

The price tag, you only get players at that price to be leaders on the teams. And Marleau and Hyman are similar in their physical play in that they are physical expect Marleau far more skilled. The price, and to improve on the current position is the reason to put Marleau besides Matthews.

However, your single reason, is equally compelling.

Either way is good. One of the better first lines in the league, or the best third line in the league.

I saw the price tag as a show of respect and to give him the clout he deserves in the dressing room.
As for the replacing the Hyman role, could be but as Trapper pointed out earlier, Marleau likes to shoot the puck a lot too.
I really like dimi's idea and I think in Babcock's mind late in the year Kadri was out top line. Maybe not the top producing line but the line that could go out at anytime.

 

[Mikeyg]

Jeez.

First, learn what words mean if you are going to use them. Your opinion is not fact. Conjecture is not fact. Intangibles doesn't mean what you think it does either, as I've now told you three times.

Second, if you don't bother to read my posts, don't care about people's arguments, don't want to hear opinions that doesn't match yours, then you are better served to go talk with a mirror instead of spending time on a forum.

Not going to waste more time on you, as you make it quite clear that you don't have any interest in actually having a discussion.

Nith, my supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts. I read over your posts, there is just no real point in arguing the points of them that are purely subjective. I don't think hyman is worth keeping on matthews line, I used statistics to back it up. Now you are getting grumpy because I didn't respond to your praise of hymans work ethic and "stabilizing" based qualities? I'm in the results world man; binary. The stats say hyman must go, a few fans say his intangibles are more valuable. Sorry but i'll go with the stats every time on that one. Basically, you know that there are no stats that say that hyman is the BEST option to be paired with matthews for his benefit. The fact that I have stats supporting my argument, and the counterargument isn't defensible by stats is pretty sound logic. You can't get mad when you are arguing a subjective case against factual stats, it just doesn't make any sense.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Nith, my supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts. I read over your posts, there is just no real point in arguing the points of them that are purely subjective. I don't think hyman is worth keeping on matthews line, I used statistics to back it up. Now you are getting grumpy because I didn't respond to your praise of hymans work ethic and "stabilizing" based qualities? I'm in the results world man; binary. The stats say hyman must go, a few fans say his intangibles are more valuable. Sorry but i'll go with the stats every time on that one. Basically, you know that there are no stats that say that hyman is the BEST option to be paired with matthews for his benefit. The fact that I have stats supporting my argument, and the counterargument isn't defensible by stats is pretty sound logic. You can't get mad when you are arguing a subjective case against factual stats, it just doesn't make any sense.

Can you post a link to these stats supporting your argument?

 

[Nithoniniel]

Nith, my supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts. I read over your posts, there is just no real point in arguing the points of them that are purely subjective. I don't think hyman is worth keeping on matthews line, I used statistics to back it up. Now you are getting grumpy because I didn't respond to your praise of hymans work ethic and "stabilizing" based qualities? I'm in the results world man; binary. The stats say hyman must go, a few fans say his intangibles are more valuable. Sorry but i'll go with the stats every time on that one. Basically, you know that there are no stats that say that hyman is the BEST option to be paired with matthews for his benefit. The fact that I have stats supporting my argument, and the counterargument isn't defensible by stats is pretty sound logic. You can't get mad when you are arguing a subjective case against factual stats, it just doesn't make any sense.

I'm being grumpy because you write things as "I don't live in this fantasy land", "Forget all the useless, subjective crap you said", "I don't want to hear one more thing" which is not only disrespectful but also show I write in vain.

I'm grumpy because you claim you read my posts, but still insist on saying that very tangible things are intangibles, or demand an answer to a question that I already addressed on an earlier point. You argue as if I'm saying Hyman should be at Matthews' side next season, when I've clearly stated it should be Marleau in one of the posts you quoted, and when I've voted for Hyman in this thread.

And "supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts" is false. Your argument is still an argument. Here's an example: "Matthews' line was a top-end productive line with Hyman on it" is a fact. "This is despite Hyman" is an opinion. Learn the difference.

I'm not arguing against facts. Both of us include the facts in our analysis of him, but we differ in the inferences made from it. Learn the difference.

You talk about "the devastating effect he has on Matthews", but that wouldn't even be a fact if we had a big sample size of ice time with other players to draw on, where it's clear that Hyman tanks the result. We don't, making what you have a theory only.

As for the high-danger scoring chances, it definitely highlights the drawback with Hyman, but here's what you miss:

1) That he has so many is partially to his credit. Crosby and Thornton doesn't push their linemates up so high by themselves, so there's no reason to believe Matthews does.
2) The numbers you show are unsustainably low. Great. That means that the line could have had 5-6 more goals from Hyman, pushing it even higher among the best lines in the league. If a line is among the best in the league, it's absurd to say there was a problem with it. It's absurd to argue that we should have taken talent from other lines to try and "fix" a line that is performing extremely well.

Now I'm done with this. Your attitude and the way you summarily dismiss every point anyone brings up just shows that you are completely closed off to any arguments, so there's no point in talking with you.

 

[Trapper]

I saw the price tag as a show of respect and to give him the clout he deserves in the dressing room.
As for the replacing the Hyman role, could be but as Trapper pointed out earlier, Marleau likes to shoot the puck a lot too.
I really like dimi's idea and I think in Babcock's mind late in the year Kadri was out top line. Maybe not the top producing line but the line that could go out at anytime.

I could be completely out to lunch (which isn't unusual for me), but I'm thinking back to the Grabner...Kadri...Komarov line in Babcock's first year. Imagine if Grabner had converted on a lot of the chances he had on that line. Marleau is a better finisher and can still skate at this level. While not Selke level, he can hold his own defensively. Both Marleau and Komarov can take faceoffs as well. If Kadri is your top matchup line, you've got 3 faceoff guys there.
Marleau could very will play with Matthews, but I think we balance extremely well with Marleau sliding on the Kadri line.
Brown is the type of player who can fit anywhere in the lineup so playing with Martin/Moore gives us a solid 4 lines. We will see.

 

[4thline]

Here's a fact-

Unless we abandon the source of much of our success -three line attack- the cap will make it a reality that Matthews spends much of his Leaf career with a Hyman class player on one wing and a run of the mill second liner on the other.

Babcock calls each of the 3 amigo's line drivers. Line driving = being the best player and getting more out of lesser linemates.

That being said my hope for Hyman is that is being groomed as future Komo and at some point will be moved to shutdown RW. Or at very least RW in general so he's not as much of a stumbling block in transition

 

[saltming]

I could be completely out to lunch (which isn't unusual for me), but I'm thinking back to the Grabner...Kadri...Komarov line in Babcock's first year. Imagine if Grabner had converted on a lot of the chances he had on that line. Marleau is a better finisher and can still skate at this level. While not Selke level, he can hold his own defensively. Both Marleau and Komarov can take faceoffs as well. If Kadri is your top matchup line, you've got 3 faceoff guys there.
Marleau could very will play with Matthews, but I think we balance extremely well with Marleau sliding on the Kadri line.
Brown is the type of player who can fit anywhere in the lineup so playing with Martin/Moore gives us a solid 4 lines. We will see.

It just makes so much sense. When I read it it almost slapped me in the face: Marleau Kadri komo.
I might be out to lunch too but at least in eating well!

 

[Erndog]

And Marleau and Hyman are similar in their physical play in that they are physical expect Marleau far more skilled.

How many times have you watched Patrick Marleau play?

 

[Larcos_Unal]

All I want is for Hyman not to play with Matthews. Is that too much to ask?

 

[Trapper]

All I want is for the Leafs to make the playoffs and go as far as they can.
I don't care if Matthews plays with Carleton the Bear if that happens.

 

[Mikeyg]

Can you post a link to these stats supporting your argument?

Yeah 2 posts ago, links there.

 

[Mr Hockey]

Yeah 2 posts ago, links there.

Matthews has set Hyman up for 53 high danger chances that Hyman has put on net at five-on-five, the third-highest mark in the entire league after Connor McDavid and Matthews. Of those 53 high danger shots, Hyman has converted four of them. Considering that the expected shooting percentage from that area is 22.8 per cent, scoring on just 7.5 per cent of them is an incredible waste of opportunity.

I was looking for the "high danger chances" stats you posted, I don't think you got them from hockey-reference com?

 

[Mess]

Leafs injury luck will run out this year as I don't think lightning will strike twice in regards to that much good fortunate.

That means we will see those 13, 14 and 15 forwards on the depth chart might see top 9 time situationally this season.

This question is only relevant under the "full health" scenario.

 

[Menzinger]

Very intriguing idea.

I thought Marleau is going to beside Matthews in place of Hyman, for 2 reasons.

The price tag, you only get players at that price to be leaders on the teams. And Marleau and Hyman are similar in their physical play in that they are physical expect Marleau far more skilled. The price, and to improve on the current position is the reason to put Marleau besides Matthews.

However, your single reason, is equally compelling.

Either way is good. One of the better first lines in the league, or the best third line in the league.

I agree, I very much will be surprised if he's NOT alongside Matthews.

He had multiple suitors and he didn't decide to come here to be used as a role player in defensive usage. And management didn't give him thr biggest salary on the team in terms of caphit to not give him prime scoring opportunities.

The ability to play on Matthews wing was probably one of the biggest selling points to get him to leave his home team to come here.

I do think one could make a case to put him on another line, but in practical terms I just can't see it happening. Ideally he would get sheltered usage alongside Marner and replace JVR but that isnt happening until a trade happens

 

[Mikeyg]

I'm being grumpy because you write things as "I don't live in this fantasy land", "Forget all the useless, subjective crap you said", "I don't want to hear one more thing" which is not only disrespectful but also show I write in vain.

I'm grumpy because you claim you read my posts, but still insist on saying that very tangible things are intangibles, or demand an answer to a question that I already addressed on an earlier point. You argue as if I'm saying Hyman should be at Matthews' side next season, when I've clearly stated it should be Marleau in one of the posts you quoted, and when I've voted for Hyman in this thread.

And "supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts" is false. Your argument is still an argument. Here's an example: "Matthews' line was a top-end productive line with Hyman on it" is a fact. "This is despite Hyman" is an opinion. Learn the difference.

I'm not arguing against facts. Both of us include the facts in our analysis of him, but we differ in the inferences made from it. Learn the difference.

You talk about "the devastating effect he has on Matthews", but that wouldn't even be a fact if we had a big sample size of ice time with other players to draw on, where it's clear that Hyman tanks the result. We don't, making what you have a theory only.

As for the high-danger scoring chances, it definitely highlights the drawback with Hyman, but here's what you miss:

1) That he has so many is partially to his credit. Crosby and Thornton doesn't push their linemates up so high by themselves, so there's no reason to believe Matthews does.
2) The numbers you show are unsustainably low. Great. That means that the line could have had 5-6 more goals from Hyman, pushing it even higher among the best lines in the league. If a line is among the best in the league, it's absurd to say there was a problem with it. It's absurd to argue that we should have taken talent from other lines to try and "fix" a line that is performing extremely well.

Now I'm done with this. Your attitude and the way you summarily dismiss every point anyone brings up just shows that you are completely closed off to any arguments, so there's no point in talking with you.

Okay so let me get this straight here. You're grumpy first of all because I insinuated that stats are worth more to me than intangibles, and that you are mad because I insulted you in whatever way you perceived my comments to be insulting. Okay? we're all adults here, its nothing personal man, no need to get your feelings hurt over someone disagreeing with you.

Anyways, my problem is that you keep saying this "supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts" is false. Your argument is still an argument".

I just don't understand how this could even be conceivably correct. Facts are statements which have objective backing. I produced two pieces of statistical information that portray the negative impacts which hyman is having on the line. Instead of looking at that from the perspective of "wow hyman really is a offensive blackhole" you literally claimed that it was an outlier and that we can't expect him to remain that low. I just can't respect that argument given all the information we know about hyman.

I also don't like how you are kind of limiting matthews output by saying this like "we don't need to fix whats already working well". I fundamentally disagree with that as well. In the very near future, by the nature of how the cap works, we won't be able to stay a deep forward team, we will start to hemorrhage players, at which time matthews is going to be responsible for accounting for a disproportionately higher percentage of the offence going forward. By not at least TRYING different combinations for a reasonable period of time, you are quite literally doing the team a disservice. Matthews isn't a good player who just needs to perform well, hes a superstar that is going to have to carry this team.

 

[Liferleafer]

No way it should be Brown
The guy scored 20 goals as a rookie on a checking line

I'd like to see the Kadri line stay as is as well




The Matthews line was bloody good the last 3rd of the season and into the playoffs
Hyman played his part in that as limited as he may be

Marleau is pretty solid on the defensive end, so with his much better offense, he's a much better choice on that line.

 

[nuck]

I agree, I very much will be surprised if he's NOT alongside Matthews.

He had multiple suitors and he didn't decide to come here to be used as a role player in defensive usage. And management didn't give him true biggest salary on the team in terms of caphit to not give home prime scoring opportunities.

The ability to play on Matthews wing was probably one of the biggest selling points to get him to leave his home team to come here.

I do think one could make a case to put him on another line, but in practical terms I just can't see it happening. Ideally he would get sheltered usage alongside Marner and replace JVR but that isnt happening until a trade happens

I am pretty certain he starts the season on Matthews wing and stays there until JVR moves. He has to put up some numbers to justify his deal and the farther down the lineup he plays, the harder to do that. Zero chance Hymen was signed to his new deal to play 4th line so Babcock will give him all of his minutes top 9. If I had to pick the real casualty it is like to be Koma, at least until JVR is resolved.

 

[Battle Lin]

that new deal he signed at 2ish mill is a 4th line player, thats how much good 4th liners make

and depending on situation game to game, like if we up 1 in 3rd...im sure babs might bump hyman up to hold leads

 

[Nithoniniel]

Okay so let me get this straight here. You're grumpy first of all because I insinuated that stats are worth more to me than intangibles, and that you are mad because I insulted you in whatever way you perceived my comments to be insulting. Okay? we're all adults here, its nothing personal man, no need to get your feelings hurt over someone disagreeing with you.

Anyways, my problem is that you keep saying this "supporting arguments with actual statistics are facts" is false. Your argument is still an argument".

I just don't understand how this could even be conceivably correct. Facts are statements which have objective backing. I produced two pieces of statistical information that portray the negative impacts which hyman is having on the line. Instead of looking at that from the perspective of "wow hyman really is a offensive blackhole" you literally claimed that it was an outlier and that we can't expect him to remain that low. I just can't respect that argument given all the information we know about hyman.

I also don't like how you are kind of limiting matthews output by saying this like "we don't need to fix whats already working well". I fundamentally disagree with that as well. In the very near future, by the nature of how the cap works, we won't be able to stay a deep forward team, we will start to hemorrhage players, at which time matthews is going to be responsible for accounting for a disproportionately higher percentage of the offence going forward. By not at least TRYING different combinations for a reasonable period of time, you are quite literally doing the team a disservice. Matthews isn't a good player who just needs to perform well, hes a superstar that is going to have to carry this team.

1) It takes skill to so purposefully misunderstand in the way you do. Ask yourself this, do I usually have an issue with people disagreeing with me? Most people will say that I keep civil to the extreme. So why do you think this is an exception? Because most people, even when disagreeing with me, don't just toss anything I say in the garbage and continue to prove they don't even read my posts.

2) Here's a definition of fact for you: "a thing that is known or proved to be true."

Every argument with something tangible behind it isn't known or proven to be true. I reiterate, learn what words mean if you're going to use them.

Fact: Hyman was not effective as a shooter from high scoring areas last season.
Opinion with factual basis: This means he's an ineffective finisher.
Conjecture: This means he is an awful linemate for Matthews.

3) This part is funny: "I just can't respect that argument given all the information we know about hyman."

Hyman has been above average in his shooting percentage in most of his years going back half a decade, and now put up numbers that would put him as the least effective finisher at high scoring chances in the history of the league*. And you not only disagree with but can't respect the opinion that Hyman isn't actually a worse finisher than Colton Orr and every other facepuncher we've had.

I changed my mind when I read that. Please do go on, because this is outright hilarious.

* For as long back as we track these numbers, no player with a fair sample size has a career shooting percentage worse than Hyman did in high scoring areas last season.

 

[Nithoniniel]

I agree, I very much will be surprised if he's NOT alongside Matthews.

He had multiple suitors and he didn't decide to come here to be used as a role player in defensive usage. And management didn't give him thr biggest salary on the team in terms of caphit to not give him prime scoring opportunities.

The ability to play on Matthews wing was probably one of the biggest selling points to get him to leave his home team to come here.

I do think one could make a case to put him on another line, but in practical terms I just can't see it happening. Ideally he would get sheltered usage alongside Marner and replace JVR but that isnt happening until a trade happens

Yeah. I'm very skeptical about Marleau as a player at this point in his career, especially for that contract, but one thing he's got going for him is that he fits perfectly in that role next to Matthews. I'd be very surprised if he didn't play there, and Hyman gets moved to the fourth line.

 

[ShaneFalco]

Hyman becomes an expensive 4th liner if he moves there though

 

[81Leafs50]

Nylander showed flashes of sheer awesomeness when paired with Matthews, so I'm assuming that sticks.

JVR-Bozak-Marner sticks too i'm sure, until someone decides to pay up for JVR.

Kapanen was already a 4th liner.

If you take into account Komarov-Kadri-Brown being a consistent scoring and shutdown line then you have to stick with the chemistry....so Hyman is the off man out.

more interesting question who becomes the healthy scratch off the 4th line?
Leivo
Kappy
Martin
Hyman
Moore

 

[Mikeyg]

1) It takes skill to so purposefully misunderstand in the way you do. Ask yourself this, do I usually have an issue with people disagreeing with me? Most people will say that I keep civil to the extreme. So why do you think this is an exception? Because most people, even when disagreeing with me, don't just toss anything I say in the garbage and continue to prove they don't even read my posts.

2) Here's a definition of fact for you: "a thing that is known or proved to be true."

Every argument with something tangible behind it isn't known or proven to be true. I reiterate, learn what words mean if you're going to use them.

Fact: Hyman was not effective as a shooter from high scoring areas last season.
Opinion with factual basis: This means he's an ineffective finisher.
Conjecture: This means he is an awful linemate for Matthews.

3) This part is funny: "I just can't respect that argument given all the information we know about hyman."

Hyman has been above average in his shooting percentage in most of his years going back half a decade, and now put up numbers that would put him as the least effective finisher at high scoring chances in the history of the league*. And you not only disagree with but can't respect the opinion that Hyman isn't actually a worse finisher than Colton Orr and every other facepuncher we've had.

I changed my mind when I read that. Please do go on, because this is outright hilarious.

* For as long back as we track these numbers, no player with a fair sample size has a career shooting percentage worse than Hyman did in high scoring areas last season.

See now you're just putting words in my mouth. I couldn't care less if people liked me or disliked me on here. But you know what I do care about? getting the calls right. You can hate me, dislike me, despise me all you want, but the one thing that you CANNOT take away from me is that I get the extreme calls correct more than anyone on here. I'm not talking about getting the liljegren call right, or even the chychrun call right, i've been making these huge calls on here (against consensus 95% of the time) for years and years and years. The grabovski buyout call: ME, The babcock call: ME, The Marleau call: ME, The Dion call: ME, so how dare you define my actions by means of committee approval? i'm not a groupthink guy, i'm an ideas guy. I'm not saying all this stuff for some kind of credit or stardom, trust me, I have a high enough achieved status in life to not care about meager things like that. I brought it up because your insistence that I need to "fit in" or "fight less with people" or "get people to like me more" is a huge crock of ****. I say what I say because I believe it, not because i'm trying to fit in with some internet yes men, don't confuse it.

ANYWAYS

I don't understand how you just wrote the definition of the word fact, yet somehow don't understand that the production of statistics to support an argument is the very damn definition of "known or proven to be true". How do we know medicines work? we test them through statistical analysis. If you aren't willing to believe that facts are proven and supported through statistical inference, then this is simply ignorance on your part.

The facts are the facts, you say hyman's production is an outlier and should be higher, I say the simpler solution is that he just isn't an offensively skilled player. Its on you to prove that its an outlier, not on me, thats something you aren't understanding. You just seem to be completely oblivious to how standard deviations and any form of statistics work at all. If, as you say he had the worst rank in history in that category, that would put him so so so many standard deviations away from the mean that chance couldn't possibly explain it. That is a COLOSSAL deviation, not a mere sampling error.