Lightning @ Leafs - Oct. 25th, 7:30pm - SN1, TSN 1050

[Highlander]

That's really harsh on Hyman, he is a great bottom six player who is being played too high in the lineup by his coach.

Hunwick isn't an NHL'er at this point.

Okay, that's fair. I was angling for the irrational love that Babcock has for them, but more proper comparison might be Byron Froese.

I agree with the irrational love part.  There has to be somehting that happens behind the scenes that us normies don't see, because I can't figure out what the difference is losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the League with Roman Polak and Hunwick on defence versus losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the league with Rinat Valiev and Victor Loov on defence.

Good point, it time for some Loov

 

[ZBBM]

That's really harsh on Hyman, he is a great bottom six player who is being played too high in the lineup by his coach.

Hunwick isn't an NHL'er at this point.

Okay, that's fair. I was angling for the irrational love that Babcock has for them, but more proper comparison might be Byron Froese.

I agree with the irrational love part.  There has to be somehting that happens behind the scenes that us normies don't see, because I can't figure out what the difference is losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the League with Roman Polak and Hunwick on defence versus losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the league with Rinat Valiev and Victor Loov on defence.

See, this was the whole point of my challenge question to herman.  You all say it's irrational, and I'm certainly not going to say that Babcock is above criticism, but it seems to me to be a real stretch to just denominate lineup decisions of one of the best coaches as just being the product of emotion, or something other than reason.  Maybe there is one, and we just don't know about it.  As you say, something behind the scenes.

 

[rdowdall]

That's really harsh on Hyman, he is a great bottom six player who is being played too high in the lineup by his coach.

Hunwick isn't an NHL'er at this point.

Okay, that's fair. I was angling for the irrational love that Babcock has for them, but more proper comparison might be Byron Froese.

I agree with the irrational love part.  There has to be somehting that happens behind the scenes that us normies don't see, because I can't figure out what the difference is losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the League with Roman Polak and Hunwick on defence versus losing 7-3 to one of the best teams in the league with Rinat Valiev and Victor Loov on defence.

See, this was the whole point of my challenge question to herman.  You all say it's irrational, and I'm certainly not going to say that Babcock is above criticism, but it seems to me to be a real stretch to just denominate lineup decisions of one of the best coaches as just being the product of emotion, or something other than reason.  Maybe there is one, and we just don't know about it.  As you say, something behind the scenes.

Typically though that's because people subscribe to things and give an inordinate amount of weight to things that shouldn't really have any meaning.  Like "veteran presence".  Is it good to have someone who has been there before?  They don't change things because there is a belief that if they don't do it the way they are currently doing it then bad things are going to happen.  So in this case, somehow, by having Hunwick and Polak on the team, they are preventing some future bad things from happening because they bring some intangible that is really really important to this team.

The question that is being put forth is "Would something really bad happen in the future if Polak and Hunwick weren't on this team and Loov and Valiev were?  I mean, I guess you could argue that their development would be impacted.  However they have both been in the minors for at least a year.  Maybe it would be good to try them out at the NHL level and see what they do?

When statements like "you can't run with more than 6 rookies on a team" get made, it seems to be made for reasons that get applied generically to something that isn't generic.

All that is to say that I think that sometimes Babcock makes decisions because he is set in his ways and doesn't want to look outside of what he knows in order to come up with another solution.  It's sort of a paradigm paralysis.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

It's not like this would be the first time Mike Babcock showed irrational love/loyalty towards somebody who arguably wasn't playing close to a NHL level because of leadership/intangibles.

See: Dan Cleary.

 

[McGarnagle]

All that is to say that I think that sometimes Babcock makes decisions because he is set in his ways and doesn't want to look outside of what he knows in order to come up with another solution.  It's sort of a paradigm paralysis.

Well, it didn't take them long to make room for a rookie to move up the lineup by waiving michalek, so I don't think there's a "veteran quota" being applied here.

At the risk of adding a more simple explanation, I think if Marincin was healthy, Polak would be in the press box, and they simply didn't expect Hunwick to be so terrible after being fairly serviceable for most of last season - and they're giving him some more leash to turn it around.

 

[rdowdall]

All that is to say that I think that sometimes Babcock makes decisions because he is set in his ways and doesn't want to look outside of what he knows in order to come up with another solution.  It's sort of a paradigm paralysis.

Well, it didn't take them long to make room for a rookie to move up the lineup by waiving michalek, so I don't think there's a "veteran quota" being applied here.

At the risk of adding a more simple explanation, I think if Marincin was healthy, Polak would be in the press box, and they simply didn't expect Hunwick to be so terrible after being fairly serviceable for most of last season - and they're giving him some more leash to turn it around.

Perhaps, but they replaced Michalek with a veteran in Ben Smith.  He just plays a different position.  Also, they do still have Corrado to try.  After the game in Chicago, where both Polak and Hunwick didn't fare too well, it's hard to not question why Polak and Hunwick were both in the lineup again.

 

[McGarnagle]

All that is to say that I think that sometimes Babcock makes decisions because he is set in his ways and doesn't want to look outside of what he knows in order to come up with another solution.  It's sort of a paradigm paralysis.

Well, it didn't take them long to make room for a rookie to move up the lineup by waiving michalek, so I don't think there's a "veteran quota" being applied here.

At the risk of adding a more simple explanation, I think if Marincin was healthy, Polak would be in the press box, and they simply didn't expect Hunwick to be so terrible after being fairly serviceable for most of last season - and they're giving him some more leash to turn it around.

Perhaps, but they replaced Michalek with a veteran in Ben Smith.  He just plays a different position.  Also, they do still have Corrado to try.  After the game in Chicago, where both Polak and Hunwick didn't fare too well, it's hard to not question why Polak and Hunwick were both in the lineup again.

They put Ben Smith on the first line? I must have missed that.

Regarding coaching, based on some of the comments, I sometimes think that folks see inserting/seating players like setting a fantasy roster or a video game - simply add the parts that make statistical sense. It's a far more involved process that includes information that we're just not privy to. Sure, if I see Polak and Hunwick stinking it up on the first two pairings 30 games from now, I'm going to think the coaching staff is losing the plot, but there's plenty of reasons to let established players players play themselves off the roster over a longer period than a game or two of substandard play.

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

All that is to say that I think that sometimes Babcock makes decisions because he is set in his ways and doesn't want to look outside of what he knows in order to come up with another solution.  It's sort of a paradigm paralysis.

Well, it didn't take them long to make room for a rookie to move up the lineup by waiving michalek, so I don't think there's a "veteran quota" being applied here.

At the risk of adding a more simple explanation, I think if Marincin was healthy, Polak would be in the press box, and they simply didn't expect Hunwick to be so terrible after being fairly serviceable for most of last season - and they're giving him some more leash to turn it around.

Perhaps, but they replaced Michalek with a veteran in Ben Smith.  He just plays a different position.  Also, they do still have Corrado to try.  After the game in Chicago, where both Polak and Hunwick didn't fare too well, it's hard to not question why Polak and Hunwick were both in the lineup again.

As a coach, you have to set up a system where players are not paralysed by the fear of making a mistake. When you have a team that's been poor you have to rebuild their psyche as you teach them to "do it right"/win. Part of that is letting them know that as long as they are giving 100% you are not going to be punitive every time they make a mistake.

It's part of building a team up, turning them into winners. When you get to the point where you are turning into a winner, the players themselves will be demanding so much of themselves that a few things will happen:

1- They will make fewer mistakes because they know what's needed to win.

2 - They will completely understand if you punish them for a mistake because they know what they did was such an unacceptable error.

It's a fine line and there are differing approaches, but knowing Babcock as a teacher, he will be more interested in teaching them to do it right than he will be in punishing them.

Knowing that a significant chunk of this roster is going to be the core of their team for the next 5/6 years at least, they will be doing a delicate balancing act with the group psyche, even with the vets.

 

[rdowdall]

They put Ben Smith on the first line? I must have missed that.

No of course not.  But my original point wasn't about moving rookies up the lineup.  It was about the fact that the coaching staff value having veterans in the lineup even when they don't seem to be contributing as much as some of the younger players could be.  They removed Michalek from the equation and replaced his presence with Ben Smith.  Who would you rather have in the lineup right now, Komarov or one of Kapanen, Leipsic or Soshnikov? 

Regarding coaching, based on some of the comments, I sometimes think that folks see inserting/seating players like setting a fantasy roster or a video game - simply add the parts that make statistical sense. It's a far more involved process that includes information that we're just not privy to. Sure, if I see Polak and Hunwick stinking it up on the first two pairings 30 games from now, I'm going to think the coaching staff is losing the plot, but there's plenty of reasons to let established players players play themselves off the roster over a longer period than a game or two of substandard play.

I don't think people are oversimplifying it at all.  I think they see the problems that some of the veterans have and wonder the reasoning behind them being the lineup.  The quotes that are given are "veteran presence" and "intagibles".  I think it's valid to question the continued plan of trotting them out there, versus a more forward thinking approach of possibly utilizing other pieces that the team has available to them.  It's like what happened with Arizona this year, and some of the progressive moves they made at the draft to acquire assets through some interesting deals. 

Hunwick's and Polak's trouble extend past the last two games.  They weren't overly effective last year either.  If they are the two that are making costly mistakes in games, what exactly is that teaching the younger players if they get to continue making those mistakes?  There is something to be said for also holding people accountable as well.  If you want to roll with letting people make mistakes, why not roll with those that actually could learn and progress from making those mistakes? 

 

[Coco-puffs]

No of course not.  But my original point wasn't about moving rookies up the lineup.  It was about the fact that the coaching staff value having veterans in the lineup even when they don't seem to be contributing as much as some of the younger players could.... Who would you rather have in the lineup right now, Komarov or one of Kapanen, Leipsic or Soshnikov? 

....

Hunwick's and Polak's trouble extend past the last two games.  They weren't overly effective last year either. 

Don't have time to dress your entire post but I will say this....

1.  Komarov 100%.  Sosh may very well become Komarov down the line but he's not being held back by developing further in the A.  Plus Komarov is one of our two most effective penalty killing forwards, something that I don't see Leipsic or Kapanen bringing to the table.  That said, he's likely not part of our team in a few years, so I won't mind if he's traded for more futures and his spot goes to Leipsic or Sosh down the road.  But there is no way I drop him from the lineup for any of those three.

2.  I won't argue that Hunwick wasn't bad last year and doesn't look great this year.  I want our left side to be Reilly-Gardiner-Marincin and if MM is healthy he should be on the left side bottom pair.

3.  Polak on the other hand hasn't been nearly that bad.  His possession metrics last year were just shy of 50% (-2.4% Rel) and this year he's near 55% (1% Rel).  Oh, and he's also a pretty good penalty killer historically- this year the sample size is too small to draw conclusions- no matter how glaring his mistake on the 6th goal was against Tampa.  Is Babcock Going to leave our right side defence penalty killing to Zaitsev, Carrick, and/or Corrado?  I doubt it, no matter how much I want those three as our regulars on the right side.