Offseason Roster Discussion part 3

Hawkaholic

Registered User
Dec 19, 2006
32,299
11,904
London, Ont.
I feel exactly the opposite. So many new faces and Hawks on paper are a playoff team, and it's been a while since I could say that. I may even bite the bullet and subscribe to Center Ice again.
Agreed, Im far more interested this year than the past few. I just hope that interest stays throughout most of the year, and this team is actually exciting to watch. I have my doubts though.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,486
Minneapolis, MN
He had one stretch where he was great and around 55% I think but I want to say it was for like 30 or so games. The rest of his career he’s been bad and more like 45%.

He is 47.1% for his career. He can win draws.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,486
Minneapolis, MN
47% for a player as flawed as he is is not good.



What % do you consider good and bad?

I consider 46% and up fine but you have to get shit done in other areas. Face-offs have value but I don’t give them that much compared to some but we are talking about face-offs alone.
 

Styles

No Light, No Signal
Apr 6, 2017
8,380
13,593
Less than 40% is bad although faceoffs don’t mean anything unless you’re in the defensive zone or on the PP. The puck is willingly given up to the other team so much throughout the game. What’s the difference if you lose a draw in the neutral zone or dump the puck for a change. Nothing.
 

BobbyJet

The accountability era?
Oct 27, 2010
30,556
10,246
Dundas, Ontario. Can
Less than 40% is bad although faceoffs don’t mean anything unless you’re in the defensive zone or on the PP. The puck is willingly given up to the other team so much throughout the game. What’s the difference if you lose a draw in the neutral zone or dump the puck for a change. Nothing.
This is exactly why faceoff percentage is yet another flawed stat. All faceoffs are not equal. Far from it.

It would be nice if Strome's value was increased by winning key faceoffs but that is not the case.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
i wish there was a way to get DeHaan+ for Leddy from Detriot. Like DeHaan and Nylander for Leddy.

McCabe-Jones
Leddy-Murphy
 

RayP

Tf
Jan 12, 2011
94,103
17,878
i wish there was a way to get DeHaan+ for Leddy from Detriot. Like DeHaan and Nylander for Leddy.

McCabe-Jones
Leddy-Murphy


I’d be fine bringing Leddy back but it’s going to cost more than Nylander and a cap dump. Nylander stinks.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
I agree its not enough just dont know what we could give without gutting the prospect pool even more.
 

Muffinalt

Registered User
Mar 1, 2016
3,827
4,003
Hungary
I agree its not enough just dont know what we could give without gutting the prospect pool even more.

We should see by mid season. If we are close to being a legit contender for at least a deep playoffs, I wouldnt mind trading one of the higher d prospects with Nylander/Borgstrom/Strome.

For Leddy or whoever the missing piece is.
 

Hattrick Kane

Registered User
Oct 8, 2018
9,805
14,535
If you want a defenseman, trade for Lindholm at the deadline. Mitchell and a first and something else.

That’s a good ass defense right there.
 

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
Why do we want Leddy on this team, again?
because hes a steady top 4 d man with a good transition game and can provide offense to a d core that lacks that. Hes also on a 1 year deal expiring after this year and plays the left side in which we are lacking top 4 quality defenseman. He could also quarterback a powerplay unit. Also he should be available and on a team that can take back money.

So a bunch of reasons.
 
Last edited:

Pez68

Registered User
Mar 18, 2010
19,301
26,941
Chicago, IL
because hes a steady top 4 d man with a good transition game and can provide offense to a d core that lacks that. Hes also on a 1 year deal expiring after this year and plays the left side in which we are lacking top 4 quality defenseman. He could also quarterback a powerplay unit. Also he should be available and on a team that can take back money.

So a bunch of reasons.

26 points in 82 games
21 points in 60 games
31 points in 56 games.

Those numbers don't exactly scream "offensive catalyst" to me. His advanced stats have also been some of the worst on the team over the last few seasons. To go along with his +- consistently being a minus and near the bottom of the team. When I've watched the Islanders, he's only stuck out to me for the wrong reasons.

Nick Leddy is not very good in this day and age.
 

Ad

Latest posts

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad