Zach Hyman appreciation thread

[Shanty]

the thread was 4 months old with barely any posts , why did you think a poster like Salt bumped it if not to drive traffic and stir things up ?

1. Sees post calling him out.

2. Mentions another poster who has posted in the thread to deflect the point of the first post.

Rinse, repeat.

 

[hotpaws]

1. Sees post calling him out.

2. Mentions another poster who has posted in the thread to deflect the point of the first post.

Rinse, repeat.

calling me out for what exactly ? and why wouldn't everyone question the reason to bump a thread from over 4 months ago?

 

[IBeL34f]

no, but i know it's a list that seems hard to get on. however, when you're a guy that plays most of his minutes with two great even strength producers, doesn't score points on the pp or pk, and has no offensive skills, then you should be able to produce at that clip if you want to be deemed "passable" on the top line. if hyman got points on the special teams, then i would lower the even strength point total that would deem him passable. hyman has less total points than matthews and nylander had of even strength points.

newsflash, people talk about different things in a thread.

And players provide different roles on a line.

We have 2 superstar talents on each of our top 2 lines, and the benefits of having a guy like a Hyman as the 3rd wheel on a unit like that should be pretty obvious at this point (not to mention the benefits of having other skilled players, such as Kadri, Kapanen, and Johnsson playing deeper in your lineup). Not only did that line put up excellent 5v5 production last year, but they were also defensively responsible (combining for one of the highest goal differentials of any 3-man unit in the League) and often had someone first in on the puck in the offensive zone, mucking it up in the corners and helping their linemates retrieve pucks or stay open.

That that grinder was still able to put up 40 points without PP time should be a testament to how well this line structure can work, as it frees up other players to take advantage of oppositions' lesser depth, creating balance through your lineup and a match-up nightmare for other teams.

Is Hyman's production bolstered by playing with superstar talent? Undoubtedly. Is this inherently a bad thing that should be used to tear down a player who exemplifies all of the hard work and determination that people were clamouring for during the days of the 'Muskoka 5' and Salute-Gate? Not in the slightest. To put a higher standard on this player's production simply because they don't receive PP time leads me to believe you're looking for reasons to judge this player more harshly than is necessary, which seems pretty unfair (especially when you compare his numbers to Matthews and Nylander, whom he has no right to be competing with production-wise).

That people can't simply let others appreciate what this player offers to our team is crazy to me - Some even asked why superior players didn't have appreciation threads like this (to which, the answer is, of course, that those players aren't so underappreciated that an appreciation thread is necessary).

 

[rent free]

Yes, it appears that you do have the right to post random thoughts in random threads.



Yes I'm aware of that option. I like to give people many "second chances" but there does eventually come a time ...

Have a nice life.

then don't complain when people do that.

 

[Shanty]

calling me out for what exactly ? and why wouldn't everyone question the reason to bump a thread from over 4 months ago?

You have an agenda against Hyman. I don't know why, I won't bother trying to pretend to know why. But you can't let a positive comment about him go by without adding a "but" remark.

I don't understand what questions would come of bumping a player appreciation thread. I wouldn't be flabbergasted and feel the need to post inflammatory remarks in a thread about a player I didn't like if their appreciation thread popped back up to the top of the pile.

 

[hotpaws]

You have an agenda against Hyman. I don't know why, I won't bother trying to pretend to know why. But you can't let a positive comment about him go by without adding a "but" remark.

I don't understand what questions would come of bumping a player appreciation thread. I wouldn't be flabbergasted and feel the need to post inflammatory remarks in a thread about a player I didn't like if their appreciation thread popped back up to the top of the pile.

why would i have an agenda against Hyman ?

and why bump an appreciation thread when the player hasn't played a game in months other than the poster was fairly certain it would help drive traffic ?

 

[rent free]

Wait..why? How does that make sense?

the more point hyman gets on the special teams, the less he would need to obtain at even strength, in order to be considered passable on the first line.

 

[Shanty]

the more point hyman gets on the special teams, the less he would need to obtain at even strength, in order to be considered passable on the first line.

 

[IBeL34f]

the more point hyman gets on the special teams, the less he would need to obtain at even strength, in order to be considered passable on the first line.

Wait, why? How does that make sense?

 

[Boutette]

the more point hyman gets on the special teams, the less he would need to obtain at even strength, in order to be considered passable on the first line.

So your real complaint finally reveals your true appreciation for Hyman. You are upset that Babcock isn't providing the opportunity for Hyman to earn first line point totals because the isn't putting him on the power play. Got it.

 

[Liminality]

the more point hyman gets on the special teams, the less he would need to obtain at even strength, in order to be considered passable on the first line.

Yes you said that before. That doesn't make sense though if he doesn't play on the powerplay. If Matthews didn't get any powerplay time you'd want him to get 80+ even strength points to stay at his current status? Even if Hyman does play on the powerplay on let's say the 2nd unit, how does that affect his status on the first line? It's just some arbitrary conditions.

 

[ToMaLe]

My Opinion:

1. I appreciate Zach Hyman

2. I dont appreciate Zach Hyman on the first or second line.

 

[Gary Nylund]

My Opinion:

1. I appreciate Zach Hyman

2. I dont appreciate Zach Hyman on the first or second line.

It seems that a number of people feel this way. There is something to be said for a balanced attack though and when players like Hyman can step up and do a credible job on the top line it enables us to have more scoring on other lines.

I'm not sure it matters that much one way or the other but I am quite sure that there will be people complaining no matter what line combos we use.

 

[ToMaLe]

It seems that a number of people feel this way. There is something to be said for a balanced attack though and when players like Hyman can step up and do a credible job on the top line it enables us to have more scoring on other lines.

I'm not sure it matters that much one way or the other but I am quite sure that there will be people complaining no matter what line combos we use.

I dont think its so much as people complaining, its more stating their opinion. When there is a number of people like you say that feel that way, there is reasoning for it. Some like a balanced attack as you say, others like myself think there is enough fire power on this team that they do not have to go that route. Its just opinions, not everyone is going to agree with each other. For one thing we are ALL Leafs fans. what some of you cant grasp for some reason is that there are always going to be different opinions on things, Hyman with Matthews is one of them. Nobody is going to change anyones minds in here, its a vicious circle repeated over and over. You got your opinion, I respect it since its yours. Maybe people in here should do the same.

 

[ACC1224]

My Opinion:

1. I appreciate Zach Hyman

2. I dont appreciate Zach Hyman on the first or second line.

Wouldn't the discussion of #2 belong in a Babcock appreciation thread?

 

[ToMaLe]

Wouldn't the discussion of #2 belong in a Babcock appreciation thread?

there too.

 

[93LEAFS]

It seems that a number of people feel this way. There is something to be said for a balanced attack though and when players like Hyman can step up and do a credible job on the top line it enables us to have more scoring on other lines.

I'm not sure it matters that much one way or the other but I am quite sure that there will be people complaining no matter what line combos we use.

I think people are overly concerned with counting stats while ignoring that a lot of Babcock's approach is built around having 3-pairs of skilled guys, and mix grit on each line. Instead of stacking a top 6 and having a lacking bottom 6.

A lot of what makes an otherwise very good player great is that they can turn two third liners, into a legitimate first line, which allows you to "spread the wealth" throughout the line-up. Look at what Sidney Crosby has played with throughout his career. He plays with Kunitz, Dupuis, Hornqvist, Sheary, and Guentzel.

I get the knocks on Hyman from year 1, but he was much improved or at least converted at a better rate this year. Is he one of Bab's favorites? Absolutely. But, it is not like that is the case for no reason.

 

[Gary Nylund]

I dont think its so much as people complaining, its more stating their opinion. When there is a number of people like you say that feel that way, there is reasoning for it. Some like a balanced attack as you say, others like myself think there is enough fire power on this team that they do not have to go that route. Its just opinions, not everyone is going to agree with each other. For one thing we are ALL Leafs fans. what some of you cant grasp for some reason is that there are always going to be different opinions on things, Hyman with Matthews is one of them. Nobody is going to change anyones minds in here, its a vicious circle repeated over and over. You got your opinion, I respect it since its yours. Maybe people in here should do the same.

It's fine for people to have their opinions. However, when people don't like line combos and vent their anger in a player appreciation thread with comments like "stone hands" and "no skill" etc. that's what I find annoying. They are wrong and even if they were right, why not express their opinions in the proper place? Hyman was quite good last season, improved a fair bit from the year previous and he deserves zero flack for coaching decisions.

I think people are overly concerned with counting stats while ignoring that a lot of Babcock's approach is built around having 3-pairs of skilled guys, and mix grit on each line. Instead of stacking a top 6 and having a lacking bottom 6.

A lot of what makes an otherwise very good player great is that they can turn two third liners, into a legitimate first line, which allows you to "spread the wealth" throughout the line-up. Look at what Sidney Crosby has played with throughout his career. He plays with Kunitz, Dupuis, Hornqvist, Sheary, and Guentzel.

I get the knocks on Hyman from year 1, but he was much improved or at least converted at a better rate this year. Is he one of Bab's favorites? Absolutely. But, it is not like that is the case for no reason.

Nice post, agree 100%. Especially the part about his improvement last season. When he was signed long term I was somewhat perplexed but now that contract looks like a bargain for us and IMHO, people crapping on Hyman haven't got a clue.

 

[hotpaws]

I think people are overly concerned with counting stats while ignoring that a lot of Babcock's approach is built around having 3-pairs of skilled guys, and mix grit on each line. Instead of stacking a top 6 and having a lacking bottom 6.

A lot of what makes an otherwise very good player great is that they can turn two third liners, into a legitimate first line, which allows you to "spread the wealth" throughout the line-up. Look at what Sidney Crosby has played with throughout his career. He plays with Kunitz, Dupuis, Hornqvist, Sheary, and Guentzel.

I get the knocks on Hyman from year 1, but he was much improved or at least converted at a better rate this year. Is he one of Bab's favorites? Absolutely. But, it is not like that is the case for no reason.

Marner-Nylander-Marleau-Brown-Jonsson-Kappanen-Grundstrom--Levio

we have more than enough wingers to choose from without having to use Hyman on one of our top 2 lines this year , never mind playing him as much as Babs did/will

 

[93LEAFS]

Marner-Nylander-Marleau-Brown-Jonsson-Kappanen-Grundstrom--Levio

we have more than enough wingers to choose from without having to use Hyman on one of our top 2 lines this year , never mind playing him as much as Babs did/will

Babcock pretty much views his set up as a top 9, and he wants grit on each line. If he starts getting PP1 time, I'll worry. But, as of now, I think the set-up is fine.

 

[Daisy Jane]

Babcock pretty much views his set up as a top 9, and he wants grit on each line. If he starts getting PP1 time, I'll worry. But, as of now, I think the set-up is fine.

why?
what if he gets PP1 time and he's good at it?

 

[hotpaws]

Babcock pretty much views his set up as a top 9, and he wants grit on each line. If he starts getting PP1 time, I'll worry. But, as of now, I think the set-up is fine.

who's the grit on the projected Mathews-Nylander-Marleau line ?

Babs loves low skilled energy players , he loved Abdelker/Glendening and a washed up Cleary in Det so if he didn't have Hyman he'd find another similar player to overplay here.

Hyman playing 12/13 mins a night on a checking line or 4th line including pk mins is fine , Hyman avg the 2nd most mins of any forward is nuts .

 

[hotpaws]

why?
what if he gets PP1 time and he's good at it?

maybe we should give him 2-3 mins a game for a couple of seasons to find out , what could be possibly wrong with Hyman avg over 20 mins a game

 

[93LEAFS]

who's the grit on the projected Mathews-Nylander-Marleau line ?

Babs loves low skilled energy players , he loved Abdelker/Glendening and a washed up Cleary in Det so if he didn't have Hyman he'd find another similar player to overplay here.

Hyman playing 12/13 mins a night on a checking line or 4th line including pk mins is fine , Hyman avg the 2nd most mins of any forward is nuts .

Marleau is the speedy forecheck. The one line he ran that was pure skill was JVR-Bozak-Marner, which he sheltered as much as possible.

Hyman's ice-time ended up that way because we took significantly more penalties than we drew. If the opposite happens he's near the middle of the pack ice-time wise.

That line was extremely effective with him last year, and he was converting at a solid rate. I get the knocks for year 1, but if he plays like he did last year he's fine in that role.

 

[Gary Nylund]

Marleau is the speedy forecheck. The one line he ran that was pure skill was JVR-Bozak-Marner, which he sheltered as much as possible.

Hyman's ice-time ended up that way because we took significantly more penalties than we drew. If the opposite happens he's near the middle of the pack ice-time wise.

That line was extremely effective with him last year, and he was converting at a solid rate. I get the knocks for year 1, but if he plays like he did last year he's fine in that role.

I agree with this and I believe this is the issue - some people are paying attention and have noticed Hyman's improvement whereas others aren't paying attention and are stuck on the same narrative.