Zach Hyman is good at Ice Hockey

[saltming]

So we are as good as we possibly can be with this lineup? Because we are high in the standings there is no possible combination of lines that could make us higher in the standings? The great Babcock has optimized the lines to perfection even though about a month ago things were pretty bad around here? That's it? Moving Marner was the last piece of the puzzle? Pretty big piece to miss.

Instead, wouldn't the fact that the Kadri line wasn't optimal due to a chemistry shift as opposed to Komo losing a step or his mind, indicate to you that maybe Babcock doesn't really know how to optimize things? At least without trying. All some of us are suggesting is to try it for a week or two. Maybe just maybe things will get even better.

Again chemistry is a fickle thing. Mess with it at your own peril.
And I don't believe in perfection so I'm I'll equipped to comment on if something is perfect but what I will say is that being one of the best teams in the best league on the planet shows something is going very right.
How do you judge how well the team is doing? What is the metric that you use?

 

[saltming]

It's like no one here has ever heard the adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Why tinker with the best working part of the lineup?

Because Matthews can score 500 goals in a season if we do

Tbh I think some people don't have realistic expectations on what they expect.
Nobody that is anti hyman addresses the fact that the team is great and that line is great as is. The majority just say but we will never know because Hyman is glued to Matthews because the coach is stubborn and egotistical.
Such is life

 

[Cor]

The Matthews line is a top 3 line in hockey statistically. Zach Hyman is producing comparable numbers to other top line forwards at even strength.

Get over yourselves.

 

[666]

It's like no one here has ever heard the adage "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Why tinker with the best working part of the lineup?

Because maybe it could be a lot better. Maybe. Anyone who thinks 40 points on Matthews wing is a good thing doesn't get it.

Again chemistry is a fickle thing. Mess with it at your own peril.
And I don't believe in perfection so I'm I'll equipped to comment on if something is perfect but what I will say is that being one of the best teams in the best league on the planet shows something is going very right.
How do you judge how well the team is doing? What is the metric that you use?

We're repeating ourselves but you better hope we don't get JT or some other impact player at the deadline if you think chemistry is that fickle.

It's not the metric that you use for success, it's how you use it. There is a constant on this team that doesn't change even when the team is doing poorly. Actually two, Bozak and JVR seem to be attached at the hip as well.

If you only make changes when you suck. How do you know that further changes won't make things better when you have improved?

You people must be pretty crappy in bed

 

[Gary Nylund]

So we are as good as we possibly can be with this lineup? Because we are high in the standings there is no possible combination of lines that could make us higher in the standings? The great Babcock has optimized the lines to perfection even though about a month ago things were pretty bad around here? That's it? Moving Marner was the last piece of the puzzle? Pretty big piece to miss.

Instead, wouldn't the fact that the Kadri line wasn't optimal due to a chemistry shift as opposed to Komo losing a step or his mind, indicate to you that maybe Babcock doesn't really know how to optimize things? At least without trying. All some of us are suggesting is to try it for a week or two. Maybe just maybe things will get even better.

Do you have any idea how many different potential line combos there are? We don't have time to try them all and when things are working as well as they are, complaining about this makes no sense.

 

[Kiwi]

The Matthews line is a top 3 line in hockey statistically. Zach Hyman is producing comparable numbers to other top line forwards at even strength.

Get over yourselves.

Yeah there's lines and pairings on this team that you can justify tinkering with, the Matthews line isn't one of them

 

[saltming]

Because maybe it could be a lot better. Maybe. Anyone who thinks 40 points on Matthews wing is a good thing doesn't get it.



We're repeating ourselves but you better hope we don't get JT or some other impact player at the deadline if you think chemistry is that fickle.

It's not the metric that you use for success, it's how you use it. There is a constant on this team that doesn't change even when the team is doing poorly. Actually two, Bozak and JVR seem to be attached at the hip as well.

If you only make changes when you suck. How do you know that further changes won't make things better when you have improved?

You people must be pretty crappy in bed

We did get an impact player in Marleau and it took some time to find chemistry there too.
Chemistry is a very important part to success in everything not just hockey. Even your comment on sex is 99% chemistry.
Why does every coach in the nhl talk about developing it?

 

[PuckMagi]

Hyman is probably the worst 1st line LW in the league.

 

[666]

We did get an impact player in Marleau and it took some time to find chemistry there too.
Chemistry is a very important part to success in everything not just hockey. Even your comment on sex is 99% chemistry.
Why does every coach in the nhl talk about developing it?

One last time. No one knows if someone else might have better chemistry with Matthews (while improving the entire team) because we have never tried. Although the one time with Martin worked pretty good so that should give us some hope. And maybe, if Hyman is as awesome as people around here say then he might make that line even better too. It's certainly possible. That's all.

I'm just repeating myself so I'm out but think about this. Just because your partner is "satisfied 5 times" in a session. It doesn't mean that you shouldn't change things up a bit and shoot for 6 or 7 or 15 or 20. If it doesn't work you can always go back the the standard 5 timer routine.

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Hyman is probably the worst 1st line LW in the league.

Matthews is good enough to make him passable

 

[ErnieLeafs]

Because maybe it could be a lot better. Maybe. Anyone who thinks 40 points on Matthews wing is a good thing doesn't get it.



We're repeating ourselves but you better hope we don't get JT or some other impact player at the deadline if you think chemistry is that fickle.

It's not the metric that you use for success, it's how you use it. There is a constant on this team that doesn't change even when the team is doing poorly. Actually two, Bozak and JVR seem to be attached at the hip as well.

If you only make changes when you suck. How do you know that further changes won't make things better when you have improved?

You people must be pretty crappy in bed

Yer maaaa didn't think so.

 

[666]

Do you have any idea how many different potential line combos there are? We don't have time to try them all and when things are working as well as they are, complaining about this makes no sense.

I don't know what to say Gary. Either you understand that making small changes to a good thing MIGHT make it better or you don't. What do you suggest we do if we acquire Nash from the Rangers next week?

 

[nsleaf]

Because maybe it could be a lot better. Maybe. Anyone who thinks 40 points on Matthews wing is a good thing doesn't get it.



We're repeating ourselves but you better hope we don't get JT or some other impact player at the deadline if you think chemistry is that fickle.

It's not the metric that you use for success, it's how you use it. There is a constant on this team that doesn't change even when the team is doing poorly. Actually two, Bozak and JVR seem to be attached at the hip as well.

If you only make changes when you suck. How do you know that further changes won't make things better when you have improved?

You people must be pretty crappy in bed

Just how do you use that metric that you don't use?

 

[saltming]

One last time. No one knows if someone else might have better chemistry with Matthews (while improving the entire team) because we have never tried. Although the one time with Martin worked pretty good so that should give us some hope. And maybe, if Hyman is as awesome as people around here say then he might make that line even better too. It's certainly possible. That's all.

I'm just repeating myself so I'm out but think about this. Just because your partner is "satisfied 5 times" in a session. It doesn't mean that you shouldn't change things up a bit and shoot for 6 or 7 or 15 or 20. If it doesn't work you can always go back the the standard 5 timer routine.

The reason we keep repeating is because we keep talking about 2 different things. Could the team and line be better? Of course there is a chance but my line is that it's not wise to mess with existing chemistry because it can backfire on you.

So your partner says let's mix it up. I want a new partner and they enjoy the new partner more. Suddenly your chemistry is lost forever.

Again why try to fix what isn't broken? The chance for a few more points on a players stats? Imo it COULD be better is not a logical reason to tamper with something that IS working so until you can convince me that the risk is worth it we can continue in circles but your arguments have not been on that. You've continued with the "it could be but we will never know" train of though.

 

[nsleaf]

I don't know what to say Gary. Either you understand that making small changes to a good thing MIGHT make it better or you don't. What do you suggest we do if we acquire Nash from the Rangers next week?

Hopefully flip him for picks and keep Hyman right where he is.

 

[666]

The reason we keep repeating is because we keep talking about 2 different things. Could the team and line be better? Of course there is a chance but my line is that it's not wise to mess with existing chemistry because it can backfire on you.

So your partner says let's mix it up. I want a new partner and they enjoy the new partner more. Suddenly your chemistry is lost forever.

Again why try to fix what isn't broken? The chance for a few more points on a players stats? Imo it COULD be better is not a logical reason to tamper with something that IS working so until you can convince me that the risk is worth it we can continue in circles but your arguments have not been on that. You've continued with the "it could be but we will never know" train of though.

If you really think that switching Hyman for Kapanen for a couple of weeks is going to irreversibly destroy Matthews and Nylander's chemistry or somehow plunge the Leafs out of the playoffs then I have no response.

If you even think that there is the slightest possibility that taking Hymen off of Matthews wing will do long term damage then I have no response.

If you think that this is such an incredibly risky thing to do that the risk so far out weighs the possible benefits then I have no response.

I sure am glad that moving Marner around all year didn't cause us to tank.

 

[nsleaf]

If you really think that switching Hyman for Kapanen for a couple of weeks is going to irreversibly destroy Matthews and Nylander's chemistry or somehow plunge the Leafs out of the playoffs then I have no response.

If you even think that there is the slightest possibility that taking Hymen off of Matthews wing will do long term damage then I have no response.

If you think that this is such an incredibly risky thing to do that the risk so far out weighs the possible benefits then I have no response.

I sure am glad that moving Marner around all year didn't cause us to tank.

You are too much, no one has said this at all. Also your sex analogy is ridiculous.

 

[frizzer1]

It's all been said before...and over and over, but I will repeat a few thoughts.

First....I think it's absurd to try to use Hyman's statistics as proof of how good he is when he's playing with 2 offensive stars..
Any winger on that line will automatically get points..goals and assists..because there are so many opportunities.
Stop with the numbers and just watch the guy play.

Babcock's talk about how good the 4th line is.....and that is why he keeps them together, makes no sense to me.......no matter how well Kapanen is playing, the 4th line won't accomplish much offensively because his wingers lack the skill to do much...and defensively, does anyone think Hyman on that line would make them worse?
Of course not.
So the world would not likely end if Hyman replaced Kapanen on that line would it?
And what if....what if...the Matthews line with Kapanen really did well....
What have they got to lose?

And what's this stuff about if "it aint broke"? We don't know and will never know if it's "broke" because no one else has ever been tried there....it could very well be "broke" right now, but we can't know.

Now, if other players had been tried and Hyman turned out to b the best option, then fine..go with it..no one would complain..
But the fact that Hyman has been there from the first scrimmage...before any exhibition games for heaven's sake.....is the most unusual thing I think I've ever seen in hockey..

At least JVR and Bozak were split for a few games earlier when Bozak went to the 4th line....

To sum up....please ,please,pretty please, babcock.....change that line...prove us all wrong......
Go ahead..show us how smart you are,..show us that that line has always been the best option....
Show US..

End of rant..

 

[saltming]

If you really think that switching Hyman for Kapanen for a couple of weeks is going to irreversibly destroy Matthews and Nylander's chemistry or somehow plunge the Leafs out of the playoffs then I have no response.

If you even think that there is the slightest possibility that taking Hymen off of Matthews wing will do long term damage then I have no response.

If you think that this is such an incredibly risky thing to do that the risk so far out weighs the possible benefits then I have no response.

I sure am glad that moving Marner around all year didn't cause us to tank.

Hyperbole is a good retort but you've still avoided my question. Give me proof.
The best part is I've already said all those things could be true though I have reasons each one of those moves don't replace Hyman and thus change the function of the line bit I'm still waiting on you to give me your proof they would be better.
And chemistry is fickle like I said. It could come back or not just like an ex. Just because you were good together before they may never want to see your face again or you try again but it's just not the same or sometimes it works out.
Fickle: likely to change, especially due to caprice, irresolution, or instability; casually changeable

 

[Shanty]

If you really think that switching Hyman for Kapanen for a couple of weeks is going to irreversibly destroy Matthews and Nylander's chemistry or somehow plunge the Leafs out of the playoffs then I have no response.

If you even think that there is the slightest possibility that taking Hymen off of Matthews wing will do long term damage then I have no response.

If you think that this is such an incredibly risky thing to do that the risk so far out weighs the possible benefits then I have no response.

I sure am glad that moving Marner around all year didn't cause us to tank.

But even us in the "don't fix it" crowd were screaming for Marner to be moved off the Bozak line. We were screaming about that because it wasn't working. Apples and oranges.

Yes, it makes sense to always do everything you can possibly do to improve your team. But this isn't NHL18. You can't just change the lines every single night and assume it will still work. Stacking lines isn't necessary for us like it is for a team like Florida, because we have more top-6 talent (or top-9 talent if you want to nitpick) than most other teams.

Again, would Matthews score more points with a different linemate than Hyman? Probably. Does this improve the team as a whole? Probably not, because you're taking away a strength to address a weakness which you are making up.

Let's say based on your suppositions, switching Marleau with Hyman has this effect (making up number obviously):

Matthews line: +30 goals scored per season (this would put Marleau at a ~30 goal pace)

New Hyman line: -20 goals scored per season (maybe less, according to your suppositions about Hyman's offensive acumen)

How many more goals are scored against the top line? Marleau and Hyman are both defensively sound, so it would probably even out.

But what if making that change means the Matthews line draws even tougher line-matching? What if they only score an extra 15 goals, and Hyman's new line scores 25 less?

It's all a numbers game, and your guess as to what will occur if we make this change is no better than mine.

If it's not broken...

 

[Gary Nylund]

I don't know what to say Gary. Either you understand that making small changes to a good thing MIGHT make it better or you don't. What do you suggest we do if we acquire Nash from the Rangers next week?

I seems you didn't understand my post and now you've changed the subject to Nash. I guess we're done here.

 

[666]

Hyperbole is a good retort but you've still avoided my question. Give me proof.
The best part is I've already said all those things could be true though I have reasons each one of those moves don't replace Hyman and thus change the function of the line bit I'm still waiting on you to give me your proof they would be better.
And chemistry is fickle like I said. It could come back or not just like an ex. Just because you were good together before they may never want to see your face again or you try again but it's just not the same or sometimes it works out.
Fickle: likely to change, especially due to caprice, irresolution, or instability; casually changeable

I'm trying man. I really am. I can't give you proof that things will get better if Hyman is replaced in exactly the same way that you can't prove things won't get better.

Your opinion is that chemistry is fickle. Matthews was hurt for 10 games. Did they lose their chemistry?

What if I said that I'm waiting for you to prove to me that they will lose their chemistry or that things won't improve overall for the team. See. You can't but more importantly no one can prove that things will get better or worse even Babcock without trying it. Note it was tried for a game and Martin did great.

So we are down to some of us thinking that a couple of weeks of experimenting is worth the risk and some others thinking that even though they didn't lose their chemistry when Matthews went down that this time they might and it's too risky.

Hopefully you're a golfer or play a similar sport. When you have a good round of golf do you stop changing your swing and not try to get better? That's all I have. You either believe that it's too risky to try and improve or you don't.

 

[Liminality]

Again, why does Babcock make this change now? He's not going to cater to the fans curiosity and entitlement just to see if something else works or not when they're trying to win the division.
People keep trying to bring Hyman down but in reality he's doing a good job on that line.

 

[Legion34]

Ultimately i don’t want Hyman in the first line. And if I had my way this year I would have went

Marleau. Matthews. Marner
Jvr. Bozak. Nylander
Hyman. Kadri. Brown
Martin. Moore. Kapanen

I don’t think we need a board presence on the 1st line. And it has been proven. Who is the board presence on the current MKM line.

That being said. Watching the same whiners who have done nothing but cry for a decade still do nothing but cry while watching a top 5 team with under 21 stars is entertaining to say the least.

 

[KDOTO]

You must have missed that above post. I suggest you read it very carefully because the facts strongly contradict your thoughts, especially your statement that "He is an nhler, I Just wished it was in the correct slot".

Hyman's a doin' fine, that's the bottom line.

I know the numbers, all the number tells me is what I already knew. Anyone playing with Mathews and Nylander will produce at that rate. I want more, he is put in prime position 5 on 5, so he will collect points. Will go through this season games again to see what he contribute to each goal.

140 games of hyman on that line, no number gonna change the player I see in front of me. How many other first liner gets zero pp time. Why is that, because he not good enough. How many with his skill set gets put on a line with a teams two best players.

What about that post contradicts my post. I never said he's not getting points. Im saying anyone will get them points. Matt Martin and uncle Leo would prolly get 25 to 30 points playing on that line. They both have 15 and 11 respectively playing 3rd and 4th line minutes.

My post was talking about his skills, his play in the offensive zone, his inability to shoot or pass. To make plays for the other two guys on that line. Nothing in the post you qouted says other wise. If you have info or evidence to refute my opinion on him Im all ears. You have over 140 game tape to find them.