HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Nick Leddy

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
05-23-2012, 08:59 PM
  #101
xX Hot Fuss
Registered User
 
xX Hot Fuss's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 10,832
vCash: 500
How did this go from a "Leddy played too many minutes this year" to a detour into revisionist history about Tallon and Bowman?

xX Hot Fuss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 12:49 AM
  #102
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Agreed but the 2nd line center was a major issue and needed a very good player to fill that role. It was left unfilled and it created a lot of problems and heart ache. Furthermore, a lot of us felt we would need to acquire a top 4 D at some point. Needless to say, Oduya wasn't what we were looking for. To use another food analogy, he was making an ice cream sundae, he put some awesome sprinkles in the bowl, some good fudge, but no ice cream.
Bowman did what we all expected and what I (and some others) said all offseason long.
We will go with Krüger/Pirri next year and see what they can do. If they really suck we go and trade for help at the TD. Come PO time, Krüger/Pirri should not be our #2 Center

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 01:30 AM
  #103
Pie Man
A-Pie
 
Pie Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Im the guy next door
Country: Sweden
Posts: 2,460
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by madgoat33 View Post
so leddy will never be as good as campbell? Interesting theory.
From what I read, I thought the theory was that at the same age Leddy is ahead of Campbell in development so he will equal or be better than Campbell eventually. I actually like that theory.

Pie Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 01:32 AM
  #104
Rexy
Registered User
 
Rexy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,119
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pie Man View Post
From what I read, I thought the theory was that at the same age Leddy is ahead of Campbell in development so he will equal or be better than Campbell eventually. I actually like that theory.
yeah, I LIKE the theory too. I just don't think it's true lol

Rexy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 06:18 AM
  #105
clydesdale line
Registered User
 
clydesdale line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xX Hot Fuss View Post
How did this go from a "Leddy played too many minutes this year" to a detour into revisionist history about Tallon and Bowman?
I'me trying to stay away from this thread now because of it. (especially since I despise Bowman)

clydesdale line is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 08:57 AM
  #106
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
Bowman did what we all expected and what I (and some others) said all offseason long.
Well, I expected all of that cap space to get spent. When he didn't make signings/trades in the offseason, the ONLY reason I could come up with for him waiting was if someone like Sharp went down, for example, and he felt he needed to replace him with Iginla. I thought it was just insurance in case one of our core guys went down, and if they didn't, then he would get the 2nd line C and/or top 4 D. Needless to say, I was shocked. I mean, all year I gave Bowman an INC in the grade threads because I was waiting to see what he did with the space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bubba88 View Post
We will go with Krüger/Pirri next year and see what they can do. If they really suck we go and trade for help at the TD. Come PO time, Krüger/Pirri should not be our #2 Center
No we won't. We'll hear the garbage about how the asking price was too much and Bowman didn't want to part with prospects. Then we'll lose early in the playoffs and be having this exact same conversation at this exact time 1 year from now. It's just one big circle of ****.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 10:43 AM
  #107
hawksfan50
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,920
vCash: 500
But get this--that guy with "sources" (John Jaeckel) over at hockeybuzz.com is hinting its almost a virtual lock that the Hawks will get Ryan Suter if he decides not to re-sign with Nashville---all his arguments of why the Hawks should be favoured in the Suter sweepstakes make sense ( proximity to his hometown in madison Wisconsin --easy driving distance for his family;family ties with the Hawks as uncle Gary played here and Ryan grew up with the Hawks as his favourite team,Hawks will have the cap room and won't be outspent unless some team goes way overboard to
proper market value in the $6-7 millionper range, Suter would rather be one of 3 #1D's in Chicago (along with Keith and Seabrook)and so all 3 just entering their prime hockey years,than be the clear and only #1 in Det or Minnesota withall the extra minutes and pressure that entails--less minutes will help him play better not decline and with that 3-some anchoring the Hawks in their best years to come -usually hockey D-men's primes are from 27-34 ---so Suter is 27 this year,Keith is 29,Seabrook is 27 this season--all in their prime years;AND also all those big market endorsement opportunities in Chicago--though no doubt he'd get those in DET too) --so yes i get all these arguments in favour of the Hawks winning the Suitor battle for Suter --if he leaves Nashville---THEN J.J. goes and ruins the argument--because he implies the CLINCHER in convincing Suitor willbe that he willget to partner with NICK LEDDY who the Hawks genius top bras all love and think will emerge into some superstardom (I guess they think he is the next ERIK KARLSSON--or I guess J.J. agrees with that
projection) --but the skeptic in me says WHOA!!!!

THis is putting the cart before the horse...

Currently LEDDY is a defensive liability --too easily pushed around---you put him with Suter who though he plays physically is no "BIG" specimen either--AND without
BIG STRONG SHEA WEBER as partner--who is to say teams won't push Suter around unless he gets help -WHICH LEDDY of all guys- CANNOT at this stage provide and even if he gets stronger as he matures that may STILL be 2-3 years from now and EVEN THEN -he willnever be confused with Weber..


SO methinks J.J.--AND STANBO the "genius" -may be making a colossol mistake if they think Suter-Leddy is the next cat;'s meow of the league...
Even if LEDDY is Housley or Karlsson --- who is to say SUTER can bail the guy out in the push and grind part of the game when the "skill/finess " guy gets overpowered ? Who is to say LEDDY's size strength flaws won't "tax" Suter physically over compensating to bang more than he should to bail out the "weak" but so talented (projected) Leddy?
What makes Stan think 2 averaged sized D-men will "dominate" anything as a pairing?
WELL STAN could say --not this season but 2 seasons ahead then Leddy will reach full mature strength and be fine--MAYBE -but I'm skeptical..

OR STAN could be imagining that Suter will "stay back" to mentor Leddy and "get his back" as the kid willbe given the green light to ATTACK MORE --so that the puck just willnot be inour d-zone much and it willget to our back boards so few times because the experienced and very good Suter willget to pucks backing up Leddy's rushes and so bust up transitions back to our zone before they get the puck deep -in other words opponents willnot be able to pin us back in our zone much because Suter the saviour willnot let it happen...IS SUTER really THAT GOOD he can SAVE
a less cautious LEDDY? OR LEDDY that good that if given the green light to risk attacking more he can"EXPLODE" into HOUSLEYNESS or KARLSSONESS?

IS STAN on some kind of crack with tese imaginings of something special and so dangerous other teams willcower and just give up?

OR--is STAN a fool --wlling to cap spend $6-7 million more AGAIN for a top 3 d-man
who himself must attaclk less if LEDDY is "unleashed" to attack more? BECAUSE it simply makes no sense to USE them the other way---SUTER will attack even more than he did in Nashville givenour vaunted posse of top end forwards -meaning LEDDY has to be the defensive back-up? THAT makes ZERO sense! IT has to be the other way around to have any hope of success as a pairing...

FURTHER-- who is to say ANY PROJECTION for LEDDY as improving EITHER offensively or defensively or both --is CORRECT?

REMEMBER--there willbe no WEBER and RINNE to back up SUTER -but LEDDY and CRAWFORD could DRAG HIM DOWN INTO big MINUS territory..


SO if this is STAN"S MASTER PLAN ---do you go silly saying we have the Cup if we land SUTER --or do you say as Robbie Burns did-- that the best laid schemes of mice and men oft gang a-gley? If I was Stan with this Master Plan-I would not count on those Cups --let alone chickens before they hatch....Tempting the hockey gods to stick it to us --for STANBO never seems to get it ---a skill finess "small" D --has to have a big physical nasty banger and crease clearer to bail him out in the strength game in front of the net and on the boards...While Suter plays with an edge he himself is not that big and asking to overcompensate physically to help Leddy MAY BE DETRIMENTAL to SUTER's perceived defensive "prowess"--we may see "REGRESSION" and that $6-7 million flushed down the drain.

I could be wrong in my skepticism--but untill success is PROVEN (in which case we can put the genius moniker back on Stan) callme a prophet of DOOM (of course the
SUTER-LEDDY experiment might get a short leash and shelf-life if Q sees it will fail
and instead they try inserting a big physical SAH d-man and let SUTER do the attacking instead--but that assumes STAN can find one of those who is good enough NOW (and not 2 years from now with Johns or some other physical specimen finally ready to assume the mantle of perfect partner for Suter).

ALL this is moot if SUTER decides to stay in NASHVILLE or he bites at some team way overpaying in the $8million + range...

hawksfan50 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 12:16 PM
  #108
pvr
Kruger Line=2.5 Men
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawksfan50 View Post
But get this--that guy .... overpaying in the $8million + range...
^ Stream of consciousness writing.

pvr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 02:17 PM
  #109
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,991
vCash: 500
Just because JJ says Leddy and Suter will pair together, doesn't mean they will.

Why not have

Keith - Hammer
Seabrook - Suter
Leddy - Monty

or

Keith - Suter
Seabrook - Hammer
Leddy - Monty

Even Suter - Hammer

And, having Suter instead of Hammer with Leddy is an improvement so no matter what you are improving your D even if Suter doesn't play well with Leddy. Not everything revolves around Leddy, maybe they even trade Leddy for a #2 C or top 6 W?

Lots of options are available if we sign Suter.

Hawkaholic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 02:17 PM
  #110
DisgruntledHawkFan
Moderator
 
DisgruntledHawkFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 22,596
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DisgruntledHawkFan
Throw it at the wall and see what sticks is what all true bottom feeders are forced to do. Karl Stewart, Nikita Alexeev, Andrew Ebbett, Tony Salmeilainen, Mark Cullen, Mikael Holmqvist, Denis Arkhipov, Jeff Hamilton, Jason Williams, Carl Corazinni, Milan Bartovic, Andy Hilbert, Peter Bondra, and Matt Ellison were all cheap pick ups given looks in our top six trying to catch lightning in a bottle during Tallon's tenure - off the top of my head. Don't hold me to the list. - that didn't work out.

The key is to find a few diamonds in the rough, which many bottom feeders never do. Columbus, Atlanta, and Minnesota never struck on any of there longshot projects. It's why they languish in mediocrity and we have a Stanley Cup.

DisgruntledHawkFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 02:17 PM
  #111
coldsteelonice84
Registered User
 
coldsteelonice84's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 26,150
vCash: 50
Agreed, I like Suter and Keith together as the best option.

coldsteelonice84 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 02:43 PM
  #112
needle
Registered User
 
needle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 200
vCash: 500
If we land a miracle with Suter, it has to be Keith-Seabrook, Suter-Leddy, Montador-Olsen. Lepisto. Niiiiice.

Back to reality... forget Suter.

needle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 02:51 PM
  #113
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,327
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by coldsteelonice84 View Post
Well, I expected all of that cap space to get spent. When he didn't make signings/trades in the offseason, the ONLY reason I could come up with for him waiting was if someone like Sharp went down, for example, and he felt he needed to replace him with Iginla. I thought it was just insurance in case one of our core guys went down, and if they didn't, then he would get the 2nd line C and/or top 4 D. Needless to say, I was shocked. I mean, all year I gave Bowman an INC in the grade threads because I was waiting to see what he did with the space.



No we won't. We'll hear the garbage about how the asking price was too much and Bowman didn't want to part with prospects. Then we'll lose early in the playoffs and be having this exact same conversation at this exact time 1 year from now. It's just one big circle of ****.
I talked about this past season, not next.


__________________________________________________ _

Keith - Seabrook
Suter - Leddy
Olsen - Montador
Lepisto

that looks like a hell of a defense now and in the future

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 05:42 PM
  #114
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Just because JJ says Leddy and Suter will pair together, doesn't mean they will.

Why not have

Keith - Hammer
Seabrook - Suter
Leddy - Monty

or

Keith - Suter
Seabrook - Hammer
Leddy - Monty

Even Suter - Hammer

And, having Suter instead of Hammer with Leddy is an improvement so no matter what you are improving your D even if Suter doesn't play well with Leddy. Not everything revolves around Leddy, maybe they even trade Leddy for a #2 C or top 6 W?

Lots of options are available if we sign Suter.
if you bring in Suter per a baby Jesus miracle, then you should pair him and Leddy up. its just logical as it helps balance all our pairs out.

people keep looking past the fact that Leddy put up over 30 points this year, not a shabby chunk of change as pretty much a #4 dman....he has the skill, he just needs to learn the other end of it which is natural for all players of his age and skillset.

look at Paul Coffey and Phil Housley, they never learned the other aspect of playing defense I bet people wanted them as a #5-6 dman after their first few seasons

Leddy is an offensive dman that put up almost 40 points..in his second season. he is barely 21 years old and a bit on the smaller side. he needs to fill out some this year, but the kid is a huge part of our success now and into the future, and a guy like Suter is the perfect player to help transform him into that...Leddy is the least of this teams issues or concerns moving forward

AmericanDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 07:42 PM
  #115
pvr
Kruger Line=2.5 Men
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanDream View Post
if you bring in Suter per a baby Jesus miracle, then you should pair him and Leddy up. its just logical as it helps balance all our pairs out.

people keep looking past the fact that Leddy put up over 30 points this year, not a shabby chunk of change as pretty much a #4 dman....he has the skill, he just needs to learn the other end of it which is natural for all players of his age and skillset.

look at Paul Coffey and Phil Housley, they never learned the other aspect of playing defense I bet people wanted them as a #5-6 dman after their first few seasons

Leddy is an offensive dman that put up almost 40 points..in his second season. he is barely 21 years old and a bit on the smaller side. he needs to fill out some this year, but the kid is a huge part of our success now and into the future, and a guy like Suter is the perfect player to help transform him into that...Leddy is the least of this teams issues or concerns moving forward
Quite true.

I'm salivating at the thought of it...

pvr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-24-2012, 11:23 PM
  #116
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanDream View Post
if you bring in Suter per a baby Jesus miracle, then you should pair him and Leddy up. its just logical as it helps balance all our pairs out.

people keep looking past the fact that Leddy put up over 30 points this year, not a shabby chunk of change as pretty much a #4 dman....he has the skill, he just needs to learn the other end of it which is natural for all players of his age and skillset.

look at Paul Coffey and Phil Housley, they never learned the other aspect of playing defense I bet people wanted them as a #5-6 dman after their first few seasons

Leddy is an offensive dman that put up almost 40 points..in his second season. he is barely 21 years old and a bit on the smaller side. he needs to fill out some this year, but the kid is a huge part of our success now and into the future, and a guy like Suter is the perfect player to help transform him into that...Leddy is the least of this teams issues or concerns moving forward
This. I'd also say the same about Kruger (although I don't see Kruger as being as potentially helpful as Leddy...but will be happy to be wrong on that one).

I'm not a fan of Leddy-whining. First of all, I really don't think he did all that bad a job this year. Secondly, to the extent he had problems it was more to do with being put in a position he wasn't ready to handle - which isn't a mark of failure re Leddy, but more the fault of the coaches.

I like Leddy a lot and I think we benefit from having him...in a "fantasy camp" sense, I think having him paired up with Suter would be p-e-r-f-e-c-t.

UsernameWasTaken is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 12:38 AM
  #117
WarriorofTime
Registered User
 
WarriorofTime's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by salty justice View Post
I'm not sure if you were a Hawk fan at the time, but when that deal went down it was monumental. It was the biggest acquisition made by the Blackhawks in over a decade. It showed Tallon had the balls to give up a good young player and top prospect to bring in a 1st line player, something the Hawks hadn't had since Daze went down.

It also showed the Blackhawks organization was willing to ice a competitive squad in a way not seen in a long time by giving big money to guys like Havlat and Khabibulin at a time when no one wanted to come to Chicago.





He acquired Campbell and Versteeg for nothing.

It's amazes me that 90% of Hawk fans posting on HF do no even appreciate how long it took for the Hawks to be a competitive team. Tallon played a large role in restructuring the organization and there is no tangible evidence of improvement since his departure.

Bowman has made 1 good trade for a guy who will never be as good as Brian Campbell. Whoop-dee-friggin-doo.
Stan hasn't been in position to spend big cap dollars because of the situation Dale left the team in. This year if he moves some players around he could spend big money on free agents if he's aggressive.

WarriorofTime is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 05:43 AM
  #118
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,327
vCash: 500
Leddy was misused by Q... keep that in mind. Leddy is not a defensiv D, he is a PMD

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 08:09 AM
  #119
MagicSlap*
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Nobody is really whining about Leddy, only the way Leddy was used this past year. I still wouldn't want him on the second pairing UNLESS you bring a guy like Suter in as his partner. Even then, I think I might role Suter/Seabrook, Keith/Leddy. Hard to say how it'll all shake out if it does happen but having three guys like that is a great problem to have.

MagicSlap* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 09:16 AM
  #120
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,991
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AmericanDream View Post
if you bring in Suter per a baby Jesus miracle, then you should pair him and Leddy up. its just logical as it helps balance all our pairs out.

people keep looking past the fact that Leddy put up over 30 points this year, not a shabby chunk of change as pretty much a #4 dman....he has the skill, he just needs to learn the other end of it which is natural for all players of his age and skillset.

look at Paul Coffey and Phil Housley, they never learned the other aspect of playing defense I bet people wanted them as a #5-6 dman after their first few seasons

Leddy is an offensive dman that put up almost 40 points..in his second season. he is barely 21 years old and a bit on the smaller side. he needs to fill out some this year, but the kid is a huge part of our success now and into the future, and a guy like Suter is the perfect player to help transform him into that...Leddy is the least of this teams issues or concerns moving forward
This is Q we are talking about, nothing is set in stone when it comes to line-ups.


My post wasn't a dig on Leddy at all, I like Leddy. I just don't think our D pairings will revolve around who plays best with Leddy.

Hawkaholic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 03:12 PM
  #121
AmericanDream
Puck You
 
AmericanDream's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: I Return to Serenity
Country: United States
Posts: 9,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
This is Q we are talking about, nothing is set in stone when it comes to line-ups.


My post wasn't a dig on Leddy at all, I like Leddy. I just don't think our D pairings will revolve around who plays best with Leddy.
I will agree on Q being an idiot and just flipping people around for the sake of it...

but it would make sense to have a Suter-Leddy...but like you said with Q things that make sense are usually the things we dont see

AmericanDream is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-25-2012, 03:16 PM
  #122
HockeySensible
Smug Teuvo
 
HockeySensible's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,920
vCash: 500
If Suter and Leddy work, Q won't break them up.. much.

Our D pairings were almost exclusively Keith/Seabrook and Hammer/Campbell from 2008-11, because they worked.

It's the forward lines you have to worry about.

HockeySensible is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2012, 09:47 AM
  #123
Bubba88
Toews = Savior
 
Bubba88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bavaria
Country: Germany
Posts: 24,327
vCash: 500
this is correct Hoss. He only changed it when it wasn't working. 2-7 & 4-51 worked

Bubba88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2012, 10:26 AM
  #124
Rexy
Registered User
 
Rexy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,119
vCash: 500
so why did I see so much 2-8 this year when it obviously wasn't working?

Rexy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-26-2012, 10:43 AM
  #125
MurrayBannerman
Fishbulb
 
MurrayBannerman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: 219
Country: United States
Posts: 22,462
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rexy View Post
so why did I see so much 2-8 this year when it obviously wasn't working?
Nothing else worked either when 2-7 had to play 35+ minutes.

MurrayBannerman is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.