The Great John Hayden Debate (& other ex-Hawks): Volume 6

[ChiHawks10]

Players aren't robots, they are affected by a major change, like trading your heart and soul. To act as if it had no affect is disingenuous.

And yes, I have done the stats a while ago.

Yes, Murphy has a better CF and FF, while getting more offensive zone starts (42% vs 35%), the difference is pretty negligible. Hjalmarsson has a better xGF%, and better Scoring Chance For % as well, about the same difference as Murphy has on Hammer in CF and FF. They are pretty much equal across the board, Chicago is the worse defensive team yes, but are by far the better offensive team.

But one Dman would have been better here especially in the first season of the trade. One knew Q's system to a tee, while the other guy didn't have a clue what he was doing (according to him). Right now, it's a sideways move.

No it's not. These guys are professionals. They know that anyone can be traded at any time, essentially. They know it's part of the business. The core has seen countless "heart and soul" type of guys come and go over the years... For you to make it out to have some kind of major impact is just silliness. Were they sad? Sure, probably for a week or two. Then they moved on, and got back to doing their jobs. You act like they can't talk, text, or see the guy anymore or some weird shit.

The stats pretty much favor Murphy. They're not really equal... Where are you even getting your numbers from? Murphy has an OZS% of 45% with the Hawks, and Hammer's is 40% with Arizona. Murphy's possession stats are better. Hammer's xGF% is 49%. Murphy's is 48%. The difference is negligible.

Murphy has a CF% of 51%, and a FF% of 50% with Chicago. Hammer has a CF% of 47%, and a FF% of 49% with Arizona. A little bit of a difference there in comparison to the xGF% numbers... in Murphy's favor.

And I wouldn't categorize Chicago as the "far better offensive team". Maybe a couple years ago. We had 18 more GF than Arizona last season. The couple seasons before? Sure. Last season wasn't that big of a difference.

This past season, Hammer played... 27 out of 70 games, with a CF% and FF% of 45%. And an xGF% of 44%. Whereas Murphy played 58 games out of 70, with a CF% of 50%, and a FF% of 50%, on a bad defensive team, and had an xGF% of 48%.

The numbers don't support your argument, man. Murphy has been better than Hammer in almost every aspect of the sport since coming over to the Hawks. Including durability. So for people to point this out as some awful move by Bowman is ridiculous, and I will continue to say that it's ridiculous. And that's without even getting into the offensive differences between the two, the fact that Murphy is cheaper, and the fact that he's younger, and trending up, whereas Hammer is older, beaten to hell, and trending down...

Even if you were to make the statement that their defensive contributions are almost equal, despite them not being that... how can one determine the trade is bad, when you got essentially an equal defender, double the offensive player, who is younger, on a cheaper contract, to replace an older, downward trending, beaten up veteran, on a more expensive contract?

I honestly hate that you're doing this too. Because I absolutely loved Hammer, and he was one of my favorite players of the Hawks run. I'm just able to see past bias against Bowman, and use the numbers and facts, whereas you have too much emotion tied into it, as well as a bias towards Bowman, that are clouding your judgement, IMO.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

No it's not. These guys are professionals. They know that anyone can be traded at any time, essentially. They know it's part of the business. The core has seen countless "heart and soul" type of guys come and go over the years... For you to make it out to have some kind of major impact is just silliness. Were they sad? Sure, probably for a week or two. Then they moved on, and got back to doing their jobs. You act like they can't talk, text, or see the guy anymore or some weird shit.

The stats pretty much favor Murphy. They're not really equal... Where are you even getting your numbers from? Murphy has an OZS% of 45% with the Hawks, and Hammer's is 40% with Arizona. Murphy's possession stats are better. Hammer's xGF% is 49%. Murphy's is 48%. The difference is negligible.

Murphy has a CF% of 51%, and a FF% of 50% with Chicago. Hammer has a CF% of 47%, and a FF% of 49% with Arizona. A little bit of a difference there in comparison to the xGF% numbers... in Murphy's favor

And I wouldn't categorize Chicago as the "far better offensive team". Maybe a couple years ago. We had 18 more GF than Arizona last season. The couple seasons before? Sure. Last season wasn't that big of a difference.

This past season, Hammer played... 27 out of 70 games, with a CF% and FF% of 45%. And an xGF% of 44%. Whereas Murphy played 58 games out of 70, with a CF% of 50%, and a FF% of 50%, on a bad defensive team, and had an xGF% of 48%.

The numbers don't support your argument, man. Murphy has been better than Hammer in almost every aspect of the sport since coming over to the Hawks. Including durability. So for people to point this out as some awful move by Bowman is ridiculous, and I will continue to say that it's ridiculous. And that's without even getting into the offensive differences between the two, the fact that Murphy is cheaper, and the fact that he's younger, and trending up, whereas Hammer is older, beaten to hell, and trending down...

I honestly hate that you're doing this too. Because I absolutely loved Hammer, and he was one of my favorite players of the Hawks run. I'm just able to see past bias against Bowman, and use the numbers and facts, whereas you have too much emotion tied into it, as well as a bias towards Bowman, that are clouding your judgement.

Bowman has been far from perfect since the last Cup. If you want to criticize Bowman for not trading Panarin for futures, that's fine. Also, there was a lot of question about just how good Panarin would be away from Kane, as well as the fact that it was pretty clear he was going straight to UFA after his second contract. He was a two year rental for whoever acquired him, which hurt his value.

Teravainen was a reclamation project when they traded him to unload Bickell, and you can't predict a career ending disease like that. Bickell was just starting to come into his own when he got sick. Shit happens. I was honestly surprised they got a 2nd/3rd for TT+Bickell. Also, as I said earlier Teravainen was a misfit in the Hawks top 6 at the time. He had no chemistry with Toews and there's only one puck to go around between he and Kane.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Bowman has been far from perfect since the last Cup. If you want to criticize Bowman for not trading Panarin for futures, that's fine. Also, there was a lot of question about just how good Panarin would be away from Kane, as well as the fact that it was pretty clear he was going straight to UFA after his second contract. He was a two year rental for whoever acquired him, which hurt his value.

And I agree with that. 100%. I just don't think it's remotely logical to shit on Bowman for the Hammer/Murphy trade. That is not anywhere close to a trade that you can criticize him for. Criticize him for Danault all day. Criticize him for bringing Shaw back. Sure. Criticize him for any number of things. Not for the Murphy/Hammer trade, though. That's not a negative.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

And I agree with that. 100%. I just don't think it's remotely logical to shit on Bowman for the Hammer/Murphy trade. That is not anywhere close to a trade that you can criticize him for. Criticize him for Danault all day. Criticize him for bringing Shaw back. Sure. Criticize him for any number of things. Not for the Murphy/Hammer trade, though. That's not a negative.

Bergevin has absolutely owned Bowman in his trades. I don't think Bowman should answer his calls anymore, lol.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

And I agree with that. 100%. I just don't think it's remotely logical to shit on Bowman for the Hammer/Murphy trade. That is not anywhere close to a trade that you can criticize him for. Criticize him for Danault all day. Criticize him for bringing Shaw back. Sure. Criticize him for any number of things. Not for the Murphy/Hammer trade, though. That's not a negative.

I think he gets too much shit for Panarin/TT. Those were shit happens trades and neither guy was staying here.

He absolutely deserves shit for the following deals:
Danault
Ladd
Shaw re-acquisition(which I hated at the time and hate more now)
and most importantly, re-signing Seabrook.

 

[DisgruntledHawkFan]

I swear to god BWC knows some gypsy magic that causes some of you to type paragraph after paragraph over some long dead subject on a moments notice.

 

[ChiHawks10]

Bergevin has absolutely owned Bowman in his trades. I don't think Bowman should answer his calls anymore, lol.

I mean, he did fine getting the two 2nds from Bergevin, originally... and then blew it by overpaying to get Shaw back...

He got fleeced on the Danault trade, in hindsight, but I at least understand the concept behind that one. He was all-in for another Cup that season.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I swear to god BWC knows some gypsy magic that causes some of you to type paragraph after paragraph over some long dead subject on a moments notice.

LOL

 

[ChiHawks10]

I swear to god BWC knows some gypsy magic that causes some of you to type paragraph after paragraph over some long dead subject on a moments notice.

So true.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I mean, he did fine getting the two 2nds from Bergevin, originally... and then blew it by overpaying to get Shaw back...

He got fleeced on the Danault trade, in hindsight, but I at least understand the concept behind that one. He was all-in for another Cup that season.

Did they get the DeBrincat second for Shaw, or was that from the Bickell/TT deal?

 

[ChiHawks10]

Did they get the DeBrincat second for Shaw, or was that from the Bickell/TT deal?

Cat was from the Shaw trade.

 

[BK]

I think he gets too much shit for Panarin/TT. Those were shit happens trades and neither guy was staying here.

He absolutely deserves shit for the following deals:
Danault
Ladd
Shaw re-acquisition(which I hated at the time and hate more now)
and most importantly, re-signing Seabrook.

One of these things is not like the other.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

One of these things is not like the other.

I know what they were doing but they paid too much for that one.

 

[BK]

I know what they were doing but they paid too much for that one.

Bullshit.

Laad was a top 6 forward built for the playoffs. This was the market cost.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

Bullshit.

Laad was a top 6 forward built for the playoffs. This was the market cost.

We'll have to agree to disagree there.

 

[BK]

We'll have to agree to disagree there.

I will agree that you are wrong.

 

[Jay haller]

And I agree with that. 100%. I just don't think it's remotely logical to shit on Bowman for the Hammer/Murphy trade. That is not anywhere close to a trade that you can criticize him for. Criticize him for Danault all day. Criticize him for bringing Shaw back. Sure. Criticize him for any number of things. Not for the Murphy/Hammer trade, though. That's not a negative.

i don’t know if you can criticize him for Shaw, I mean he could’ve said hey we need a Shaw type and McDonough would be like okay, I can deal with a Shaw type how about Andrew Shaw!

 

[Jay haller]

Bullshit.

Laad was a top 6 forward built for the playoffs. This was the market cost.

ladd was fine. He was basically adding a Brandon saad to the roster.

 

[Hawkaholic]

No it's not. These guys are professionals. They know that anyone can be traded at any time, essentially. They know it's part of the business. The core has seen countless "heart and soul" type of guys come and go over the years... For you to make it out to have some kind of major impact is just silliness. Were they sad? Sure, probably for a week or two. Then they moved on, and got back to doing their jobs. You act like they can't talk, text, or see the guy anymore or some weird shit.

The stats pretty much favor Murphy. They're not really equal... Where are you even getting your numbers from? Murphy has an OZS% of 45% with the Hawks, and Hammer's is 40% with Arizona. Murphy's possession stats are better. Hammer's xGF% is 49%. Murphy's is 48%. The difference is negligible.

Murphy has a CF% of 51%, and a FF% of 50% with Chicago. Hammer has a CF% of 47%, and a FF% of 49% with Arizona. A little bit of a difference there in comparison to the xGF% numbers... in Murphy's favor.

And I wouldn't categorize Chicago as the "far better offensive team". Maybe a couple years ago. We had 18 more GF than Arizona last season. The couple seasons before? Sure. Last season wasn't that big of a difference.

This past season, Hammer played... 27 out of 70 games, with a CF% and FF% of 45%. And an xGF% of 44%. Whereas Murphy played 58 games out of 70, with a CF% of 50%, and a FF% of 50%, on a bad defensive team, and had an xGF% of 48%.

The numbers don't support your argument, man. Murphy has been better than Hammer in almost every aspect of the sport since coming over to the Hawks. Including durability. So for people to point this out as some awful move by Bowman is ridiculous, and I will continue to say that it's ridiculous. And that's without even getting into the offensive differences between the two, the fact that Murphy is cheaper, and the fact that he's younger, and trending up, whereas Hammer is older, beaten to hell, and trending down...

Even if you were to make the statement that their defensive contributions are almost equal, despite them not being that... how can one determine the trade is bad, when you got essentially an equal defender, double the offensive player, who is younger, on a cheaper contract, to replace an older, downward trending, beaten up veteran, on a more expensive contract?

I honestly hate that you're doing this too. Because I absolutely loved Hammer, and he was one of my favorite players of the Hawks run. I'm just able to see past bias against Bowman, and use the numbers and facts, whereas you have too much emotion tied into it, as well as a bias towards Bowman, that are clouding your judgement, IMO.

It absolutely is disingenuous to say it had no affect. yes, they are professional athletes that know people can be traded, it's a bit different when you have a core of players you went to war with for 7+ years and then your GM trades one of your top players for basically no reason. We'll agree to disagree on that.

My numbers are from all 3 seasons, not just this past season where Hammer had an unfortunate injury that gave him a small sample size.

For the past 3 seasons it has been a sideways move at best. It wasn't a win, and when you trade a player like Hammer, you better out right win the trade, not make a sideways move, or fans will not be happy. I never said it was an awful move, just unnecessary at the time, and I believe it set the team back even more.

 

[ChiHawks10]

It absolutely is disingenuous to say it had no affect. yes, they are professional athletes that know people can be traded, it's a bit different when you have a core of players you went to war with for 7+ years and then your GM trades one of your top players for basically no reason. We'll agree to disagree on that.

My numbers are from all 3 seasons, not just this past season where Hammer had an unfortunate injury that gave him a small sample size.

For the past 3 seasons it has been a sideways move at best. It wasn't a win, and when you trade a player like Hammer, you better out right win the trade, not make a sideways move, or fans will not be happy. I never said it was an awful move, just unnecessary at the time, and I believe it set the team back even more.

My numbers are 100% from the last 3 seasons...

Done with this now, though. Bored with it.

 

[BK]

Haha. Murphy has been a better player than Hammer. This trade was a win.

Love Hammer but it was the right time to trade him.

Murphy is a good dman and the type of player we need going forward.

 

[SnakePlissken]

Haha. Murphy has been a better player than Hammer. This trade was a win.

Love Hammer but it was the right time to trade him.

Murphy is a good dman and the type of player we need going forward.

I get that the numbers comparison favors Murphy and that Hammer has been hurt a good portion of his time in AZ. It's not that I mind Murphy, maybe it's just that he pales in comparison to the memory of Hammer. There were so many times I was in awe of Hammer's gap or his ability to pick the puck off the boards and hit a guy for a middle breakout. Those moments seem much rarer with Murphy, for whatever reason. He's a guy without much offensive upside who isn't anything special on the PK. I don't think I'll miss him when he's gone.

 

[BK]

I get that the numbers comparison favors Murphy and that Hammer has been hurt a good portion of his time in AZ. It's not that I mind Murphy, maybe it's just that he pales in comparison to the memory of Hammer. There were so many times I was in awe of Hammer's gap or his ability to pick the puck off the boards and hit a guy for a middle breakout. Those moments seem much rarer with Murphy, for whatever reason. He's a guy without much offensive upside who isn't anything special on the PK. I don't think I'll miss him when he's gone.

The past Hammer means nothing as you compare the trade for the players and how they play post trade and not walking down memory lane.

 

[Brightwing]

so Nylander has a chance to be a 65 point 1st line winger but joki ceiling is a 4?? sounds like rationalizing a bad trade. Nylander was on a 32 point pace this year and Joki is already a 4 or 5. Joki is younger then nylander at a tougher position to excell young. Mitchell and Joki are very on par as prospects. You can make sense of the trade because of all of the right d coming up but it doesnt excuse the return. bowman needed someone on an entry level contract because he botched the seabrook deal and didnt get the play from saad that he thought he was going to get for the money. It would have been just as easy to sign a ufa to get 40-50 points a year but they needed the cap discount and it cost the team a good prospect.

Even if Mitchell and Joki are on par it makes sense to trade Joki because Mitchell will be expansion draft protected and Joki is not. It's easier to protect a forward if you need to and we already have to protect Keith and Seabs. That leaves just one dman slot. My favourite part about "we should have gotten more" comments is if there was more to be had, wouldn't we have taken it? Same thing with the Lehner trade. We needed depth in forward and we traded for it. People love to jump on trades and say so and so won, but it's not always immediately evident. Look at everyone who said Montreal lost the Subban trade.

 

[SnakePlissken]

The past Hammer means nothing as you compare the trade for the players and how they play post trade and not walking down memory lane.

Yeah I wasn't really commenting on the merits of the trade. I understand what Stan was trying to do there.

I was more reacting to the idea that Murphy is the type of guy we need going forward. I like his reasonable cap hit and he's signed for a year longer than I originally thought. I thought he would slot cleanly into the top 4 when we got him, but Q didn't want him there for whatever reason and he's felt like more of a 4/5 since then when I had hoped he'd become a 2/3. Maybe my expectations were too high.