Fill in the blank: “Nikita Zadorov is a number BLANK defenceman”
- Thread starter Love
- Start date
He’s about a borderline #4 and a solid #5.
Somewhere between a Nicolas Hague and an Ian Cole in terms of career progression.
Somewhere between a Nicolas Hague and an Ian Cole in terms of career progression.
Brock Boeser Laser Show
Registered User
- Sep 27, 2017
- 5,978
- 5,410
This. He's a bottom pairing dman. A soilid #5. He's gonna make mistakes that will drive you nuts.
Speaking of nuts, if Z thinks he's getting 5M AAV next year, he's lost the plot.
BigRangy
Get well soon oliver
- Mar 17, 2015
- 3,447
- 1,175
On a contender, a 5 that you’re slightly confident can fill in in the top 4 if one of those guys goes down. A strong defensive team can cover for him somewhat but he is pretty limited in the d-zone.
SelltheTeamFrancesco
Registered User
- Aug 11, 2015
- 4,475
- 4,748
A solid 2nd pairing option if he has the right partner to make up for his deficiencies.
#5 was my initial reaction so went with that.
Playing higher than that is okay if your #1-3 are excellent and 5 and 6 are good too.
I mean how many #5 d men can score 14 goals in a season ?
ManofSteel55
Registered User
dirtydanglez
Registered User
- Oct 30, 2022
- 5,296
- 5,358
MrHeiskanen
Registered User
- Nov 12, 2017
- 12,626
- 10,271
I Hate Blake Coleman
Bandwagon Burner
Uncle Scrooge
Hockey Bettor
SeanMoneyHands
Registered User
- Apr 18, 2019
- 15,219
- 14,530
Did Zadorov struggle in bigger minutes at some point in Calgary?
My impression is that in a highly structured role like in Calgary that he actually could play bigger minutes. They just have a lot of good D and he doesn't get a lot of minutes.
There are a lot of freewheeling clubs where I wouldn't want Zadorov though.
My impression is that in a highly structured role like in Calgary that he actually could play bigger minutes. They just have a lot of good D and he doesn't get a lot of minutes.
There are a lot of freewheeling clubs where I wouldn't want Zadorov though.
Bouboumaster
Registered User
- Jul 4, 2014
- 10,682
- 9,050
Bottom pairing
Sadly, he ain't a RHD, otherwise it would have been hilarious to put this guy besides Xhekaj
Sadly, he ain't a RHD, otherwise it would have been hilarious to put this guy besides Xhekaj
biturbo19
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2010
- 27,201
- 12,343
I'd say he quite impressively skirts that murky ground between a Top-4D and a classic #5D. His minutes and his actual impact can kind of swing either way. With the right partner, i think he's a serviceable Top-4D...but a real contender is probably still looking to push him down the lineup to that #5 slot when healthy. Though at the same time...his physicality and tools overall can make for a much bigger impact than your typical #5D an awful lot of the time. He's a very "premium" guy to have as your 5th D.
He's pretty much the epitome of where i'd draw that line. Thus, pretty much perfectly defines the sort of play who is challenging to definitively categorize on one side or the other of that line. His lack of real consistency certainly also contributes a great deal to that tricky categorization.
But in the way i'd break things down...it's really not unusual for quality, contending bluelines to have more than 4 Top-4D. Where he's probably the guy pushed down a rung...as a real fringe case.
More importantly perhaps...he can be fun as heck to watch.
He's pretty much the epitome of where i'd draw that line. Thus, pretty much perfectly defines the sort of play who is challenging to definitively categorize on one side or the other of that line. His lack of real consistency certainly also contributes a great deal to that tricky categorization.
But in the way i'd break things down...it's really not unusual for quality, contending bluelines to have more than 4 Top-4D. Where he's probably the guy pushed down a rung...as a real fringe case.
More importantly perhaps...he can be fun as heck to watch.
