Nick Leddy assigned to Rockford

bobferg

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Oct 16, 2010
Posts:
1,186
Liked Posts:
275
Location:
Indianapolis
I don't really get it.... Hendry has been a scratch for almost every game. I guess they just want him to get the most ice time possible.
 

BzartlerEYF

New member
Joined:
Oct 5, 2010
Posts:
355
Liked Posts:
21
Location:
Tinley Park, IL (basically Chi
I don't really get it.... Hendry has been a scratch for almost every game. I guess they just want him to get the most ice time possible.

Yea thats what it's really about getting him more experience in all situations which he wasn't up in the NHL. His cap hit of 1.3 wasn't the best fit for us either!
 

Matthew

New member
Joined:
Oct 9, 2010
Posts:
328
Liked Posts:
126
This makes absolutely no sense to me. Nick Leddy has been steady after those first two periods he started his career with. John Scott and Jassen Cullimore are awful and Jordan Hendry is not exactly reliable. I wonder why they don't make this move once Brian Campbell returns from injury if it is about getting Leddy maximum ice time.

What are they going to do? Give Duncan Keith and Brent Seabrook even more ice time until Soupy returns? Keith needs to see less ice time as it is if he is going to be in optimum shape at the end of the season.
 
Last edited:

ClydeLee

New member
Joined:
Jun 29, 2010
Posts:
14,829
Liked Posts:
4,113
Location:
The OP
How do you not get it, it's a better move for LEDDY.

Is it better for the Hawks right now, probably not but down the line, maybe even down the line in this season (which matters more) it will be a better move.

Scott is useless, Henry is inconsistent form bad to foolish and Cullimore is a dull nothing but they're all manageable mangled into a 3rd pairing if the team can pick up steam.
 

Matthew

New member
Joined:
Oct 9, 2010
Posts:
328
Liked Posts:
126
How do you not get it, it's a better move for LEDDY.

Is it better for the Hawks right now, probably not but down the line, maybe even down the line in this season (which matters more) it will be a better move.

Under the current circumstances (Campbell being out and Keith and Seabrook playing too many minuets) Leddy has played well enough to see significant minuets. Once Campbell returns I would agree it would make sense for Leddy's development to send him to Rockford but right now we need him.
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
It could also be clearing a little room for a move as well ( a cap hit of 1.3 (if that's right), plus sending back a .5 mil guy to the AHL; since Campbell isn't on ltir I think he is still counting against the cap -so maybe they are looking to upgrade).

I doubt you'll see Scott sent to the AHL unless they are just giving up on the guy entirely (as with his limited skill set you would probably assume if he has to go through waivers he'd be picked up -and therefore just gone). . . he, apparently, only has one skill -and since there are no majors logged in his PIM stats -he hasn't used it - I suppose until that happens - his skill is what his "potential specialty" is.

There aren't very many 19 year old defensemen that play in the NHL - in fact guys like Seabrook and Keith are sort of "freaks" when it comes to that sort of thing.
 

Sarava

New member
Joined:
Jul 18, 2010
Posts:
42
Liked Posts:
9
It could also be clearing a little room for a move as well ( a cap hit of 1.3 (if that's right), plus sending back a .5 mil guy to the AHL; since Campbell isn't on ltir I think he is still counting against the cap -so maybe they are looking to upgrade).

I doubt you'll see Scott sent to the AHL unless they are just giving up on the guy entirely (as with his limited skill set you would probably assume if he has to go through waivers he'd be picked up -and therefore just gone). . . he, apparently, only has one skill -and since there are no majors logged in his PIM stats -he hasn't used it - I suppose until that happens - his skill is what his "potential specialty" is.

There aren't very many 19 year old defensemen that play in the NHL - in fact guys like Seabrook and Keith are sort of "freaks" when it comes to that sort of thing.

I had thought about if this could be setting up a trade. But in looking at our player's salaries, I just don't see what they can do. Sharp and Hossa have been our two best players so far this year, so they aren't going anywhere. Kane and Toews are obviously untouchable. After those 4, our only high paid forward is Bolland with a cap hit of 3.375 mil.

On defense, obviously Keith and Seabs are untouchable. Hammer can't be traded until it's been a year since the offer-sheet match. Campbell can't be traded while injured, having the strict limited NTC and his atrocious contract.

All I can come up with is Troy Brouwer. The Hawks probably wouldn't lose much in trading him. The problem is he only has a cap hit of 1.025 mil, so combining Leddy and Brouwer only gets you to around 2.3 mil, and that's with one less player on the roster.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
There aren't very many 19 year old defensemen that play in the NHL - in fact guys like Seabrook and Keith are sort of "freaks" when it comes to that sort of thing.

Zach Bogosian & John Carlson just turned 20 & are just fine.
 

Everyday I'm Byfuglien

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Oct 8, 2010
Posts:
3,194
Liked Posts:
1,463
Scott is useless, Henry is inconsistent form bad to foolish and Cullimore is a dull nothing but they're all manageable mangled into a 3rd pairing if the team can pick up steam.

That's the thing... those bunch of guys are NOT capable of being mangled into a 3rd pairing and while we're at it- Boynton has been a massive failure so far.

The D has been awful so far, yet Leddy has been looking capable of staying up. Like others have said, I like the idea of keeping him up til Campbell gets back.
 

Captain Iago

Giver of Occular Proof
Donator
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
5,905
Liked Posts:
1,974
How do you not get it, it's a better move for LEDDY.

Is it better for the Hawks right now, probably not but down the line, maybe even down the line in this season (which matters more) it will be a better move.

Scott is useless, Henry is inconsistent form bad to foolish and Cullimore is a dull nothing but they're all manageable mangled into a 3rd pairing if the team can pick up steam.

This is where I agree.

That's the thing... those bunch of guys are NOT capable of being mangled into a 3rd pairing and while we're at it- Boynton has been a massive failure so far.

When the puck possession game finally gets on track and consistent, the Cullimore, Hendry, Scott mangling will seem less severe.
 

Jntg4

Fire Forum Moderator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
26,017
Liked Posts:
3,297
Location:
Minnesota
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago White Sox
  2. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Chicago State Cougars
  2. DePaul Blue Demons
  3. Illinois-Chicago Flames
  4. Loyola Ramblers
  5. Northern Illinois Huskies
  6. Northwestern Wildcats
WTF? We need Leddy, he's a beast.
 

Capt. Serious

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 17, 2010
Posts:
19,670
Liked Posts:
6,438
Location:
Chicago
How do you not get it, it's a better move for LEDDY.

Is it better for the Hawks right now, probably not but down the line, maybe even down the line in this season (which matters more) it will be a better move.

Scott is useless, Henry is inconsistent form bad to foolish and Cullimore is a dull nothing but they're all manageable mangled into a 3rd pairing if the team can pick up steam.

Problem is they all fucking suck. (bottom pairing that is)
 

tbo41fan

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 26, 2010
Posts:
15,922
Liked Posts:
2,701
Location:
Chicago, IL
My favorite teams
  1. Chicago Cubs
  1. Chicago Fire
  1. Chicago Bulls
  1. Chicago Bears
  1. Chicago Blackhawks
  1. Arizona Wildcats
More ice time for Leddy, plus saving his 1.3 mil cap hit


Im surprised, but OK with this move
 

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
30 teams x 6 or 7 defensemen on their roster ... = 180 - 210 guys and you seriously chuck out there 2 names? I think that mathematically it proves my point - plus if you want to go back through other seasons. . . again, it will be proving my point.

The D has *not* been awful - the team was 2 away from being undefeated in regulation this season -- one of which came when Scott tripped over -well who knows what ... and the other came with under a minute left in the game.

Hold the lead in Colorado (again - 1 goal difference) - you are looking at a 4-0-2 team ... at the very worst. Basically I am saying is that shit happens in hockey ... and it isn't that far away from having been a 10 point start at the very worst - considering coach had to pull his head out and figure out that Scott is a hockey liability... and having to juggle all sorts of things - including a non-standard 4th line -you can't really argue much with it -- it is probably as bad a start as they could have had - and they are still 3-2-1 ...

what exactly do you *want*? 10-0 shut outs every game? Was never going to happen. (Although it would have been nice)


Edited: Ok Boynton - let's go on this one ... the guy has logged 20 minutes plus a bit in each of the first 5 games (was suspended for the opener). Has 2 assists (same as Keith, right?)... and is a plus 2 ... the stats don't indicate anything near to a failure - let alone a "massive" one at this point.

Trades: - It may not be for a rostered player -if that is what they are looking at doing ... but there also seems to be a spare forward floating around. I don't know that Skille did anything to deserve being sat -aside from being caught in a numbers game (poor guy - that seems the story of his life - and I hope he gets a shot).

Well time will tell on that one - Leddy, I'm sure it was also a consideration that he would not have to be put on waivers to move him around either - so... hrm -would say if you traded a spare forward to Edmonton for Souray ... could you make that work under the current cap hit?
 
Last edited:

southern_cross_116

New member
Joined:
May 24, 2010
Posts:
1,748
Liked Posts:
1,012
Location:
Australia
All I can come up with is Troy Brouwer. The Hawks probably wouldn't lose much in trading him. The problem is he only has a cap hit of 1.025 mil, so combining Leddy and Brouwer only gets you to around 2.3 mil, and that's with one less player on the roster.

They would also be sending down another defenseman (if the move was for a defenseman) -so that would be presumably Hendry I guess -or Cullimore - which would add in another half million (maybe some "change") so I figured about 2.8+ mil -if the move was for a defenseman you wouldn't keep more than 7 guys that are available to dress in any given situation, right now they have 6 that dress plus Scott at whatever he is and are sitting a forward to accommodate #32's function.
 

icehogfan08

CCS Donator
Donator
Joined:
Apr 23, 2010
Posts:
5,227
Liked Posts:
1,551
Location:
Rockford, IL
I dont think Boynton has been awful. Hes stepped on and has been blocking shots and logging minutes, the only reason he is getting this criticism is because of that delay of game penalty he got.
 

Top