BK
"Goalie Apologist"
Would he? He took Johns in the second round. He values skill over physical play but that is the same for most GMs in the draft.
Prospect Info: All-Purpose Prospect Thread v9.0: IceHogs/Fuel/NCAA/Jr./Int'l - Too Many Cooks in Net
- Thread starter Any Colour You Like
- Start date
- Status
Would he? He took Johns in the second round. He values skill over physical play but that is the same for most GMs in the draft.
BobbyJet
I am Canadian
Putt Pirate
Registered User
- Dec 15, 2015
- 5,260
- 3,004
I agree with Bobby here. There is only one instance of taking a big d and that was Johns. Svedberg too I guess but he is softer than Charmin. Stan’s track record is smaller to average sized D men who often are more O minded than D. Just his track record. It is nice to have a D that can clear out in front of the G every once in a while.
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
You act like I don’t awknowledge Bowman’s mistakes. We both know that I do that but I don’t melt like toddler about it.
Are you really trying to call me out for my takes on Q? Nice. I openly state Q has failed to evolve with the game and that seems like it goes for some posters on here who jerk off to size and consider a finesse game shinny. The game is changing and that is just how it is.
Throwing stones in a glass house on this one. All of us here have takes that are wrong.
AmericanDream
Thank you Elon!
clydesdale line
Connor BeJesus
- Jan 10, 2012
- 24,640
- 22,719
BobbyJet
I am Canadian
ClydeLee
Registered User
- Mar 23, 2012
- 11,787
- 5,325
Well Matt Tompkins was in net, played Delia last night. Now that'll end and they can have Berube back
CallMeShaft
Calder Bedard Fan
- Apr 14, 2014
- 15,873
- 21,493
Who's all eligible from the Hawks to go to Rockford? I've heard Glass, Berube, and Hayden. Ejdsell is elegible, right? What about lil Sikura?
Some of these guys need the experience, and Rockford could use some more talent.
Some of these guys need the experience, and Rockford could use some more talent.
Teemu
Caffeine Free Since 1919
- Dec 3, 2002
- 28,770
- 5,266
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
LOL? Everything I said was true.
Again where did I say that? We both know I didn’t and you are deflecting by implying it. I am a fan of the Murphy acquisition and his drafting of D the past 2-3 years before that he was not good at all. He has excelled at drafting forwards and finding talent in Europe. Forwards have seemed to be his focus prior to the past two drafts and that is what the team needed most but I doubt that is the case.
HJ and Mitchell both look like top flight prospects so his track record with D could/should change quickly. Krys and others have NHL as well.
Last edited:
BobbyJet
I am Canadian
ChiHawks10
Registered User
So there is an article in The Athletic breaking down the Hawks issues defending...I do not subscribe to their pay wall but I have gleaned from the pedal via Twitter that the Hawks are the worst in the league at giving up high danger area goals and also among the worst in giving up assisted goals ...this implies to me positioning issues (failing to get in the block h lanes to prevent passes to open guys for shots and failing to stick on their assigned checks (logical assimption)...as to the high danger chances and goals gone up being worst in the league. ..we assume logically thus is a result of weak efforts at checking to physically block paths to the danger slot areas between the dots ...I'm other words too easy for the oops to get to those areas because we cannot shove them out of the path to those areas or because in the case of Seabs and Murphy ,too slow and not very agile to stay on their checks and so cannot use their strength to shove them off if the oops a lately past them and get to the danger slots.. Bottom line is...it is both systems and personnel ability issues that cause this. .From a systems view...the forwards must be better in support and in covering both passing lanes and staying on their checks and actually do g something ifvtheyvarecthere on position to check rather than just feeble stick checks that are useless. ..There is no solution to lack of foitvspeed or poor agility by certain den. ..or to lack of strength by certain den. .Bottom line as to personnel....gotta be faster ...more agile and more positional smart and have more physicality to shove guys with the puck off and away and get the puck back...gotta Ottawa be smarter to be in position to cover checks better (that can be improved and "coached up"...or at least Should Be ...else coaches should be fired if system and results not improved ..but as for ability issues of speed and agility by the likes of Seabs and Murphy...nothing can improve what cannot be improved ...as to strength issues /feeble stick checks (Keith ,Oesterle Gus) ...send them to the gym to put on some muscles to improve strength for better block outs ...or concede they have to be replaced ...as to lack of focus (Keith) ,he needs to re-find his competitive drive and get off whatever mind numbing substance he seems to be taking cause his defending was lousy all season ..hisboffense gonebusca lost cause..if his defending has gone too and cannot be fixed then he bought to retire or go on LITR for mental problems cause his mind and body are not in the game anymore ...Minus 29 is a disgrace .and Q should have benched him long ago instead of coddling g and tolerating lousy play from his old reliable #1 D ..Keith fell off the cliff of high standards to the put of cash the paycheck punch the clock no care ..It was put full to watch .His attitude has to change next season at least for getting the passion back to back to defend hard ...but at his age maybe that is a futile hope as he looks to Benin retirement mode already ..And this moped pkay rubs off on the rest of the D-corps who ought to follow his example as a leader on defending with passion ..but alas he just might be indicating he has not got anything left in him to compete the way we think he ought to..so either the fog in his play lifts or we are going to be tortured the rest of his contract with such dreadful defending ...I do not think Crawford would bail out Keith to the extent he saves 29 goals and turns the -29 back to even let alone positive numbers..maybe at best saves 10 goals against Keith ...And so -19 for Leith would still be a horrible display of defending.
Thus Hawks have speed issues. . agility issues...Strength issues. ..focus issues. ..competitive drive issues ..systems issues. .support by forwards for the den issues. ..a ton of defending issues ...If we could fix half of this list as a realist ic goal, that ought to get us back to middle-of-the-road the pack at least ..but still that is not going to win us a Cup ..To do that either we fix all thus list of defending issues or we come sate by better offense including pp to hide the defensive flaws under a camouflage of higher scoring ...
Thus Hawks have speed issues. . agility issues...Strength issues. ..focus issues. ..competitive drive issues ..systems issues. .support by forwards for the den issues. ..a ton of defending issues ...If we could fix half of this list as a realist ic goal, that ought to get us back to middle-of-the-road the pack at least ..but still that is not going to win us a Cup ..To do that either we fix all thus list of defending issues or we come sate by better offense including pp to hide the defensive flaws under a camouflage of higher scoring ...
bwana63
carter blanche
Spectra
Registered boozer
- Aug 3, 2005
- 2,520
- 459
Size is everything on D, amiright? Just ask Duncan Keith...
Wut? Keith is 6'1" 190 +, that is not small.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
I'd put money on Duncs not being the 6'1 or 198lbs he's listed at. Not even close. Go find pictures of him and Kane standing together on the ice. Easy to do in a google image search. Duncs may have 1/4" on him. If he's 6'1, Kane would have to be at least 6'... and Kane is probably 5'10ish at the most. Keith might crack 6', just barely. But I'm thinking more around 5'11 and a a fraction. To summarize, he's not that big for a D.
Edit: Here, I'll do the search for ya. Toews is listed at 6'2. And he's got at least two inches on both of them.
Last edited:
CallMeShaft
Calder Bedard Fan
- Apr 14, 2014
- 15,873
- 21,493
Yeah, Keith is about 6ft, which is fine. He was an inch or two shorter than that when he was drafted too.
Spectra
Registered boozer
- Aug 3, 2005
- 2,520
- 459
I'd put money on Duncs not being the 6'1 or 198lbs he's listed at. Not even close. Go find pictures of him and Kane standing together on the ice. Easy to do in a google image search. Duncs may have 1/4" on him. If he's 6'1, Kane would have to be at least 6'... and Kane is probably 5'10ish at the most. Keith might crack 6', just barely. But I'm thinking more around 5'11 and a a fraction. To summarize, he's not that big for a D.
Edit: Here, I'll do the search for ya. Toews is listed at 6'2. And he's got at least two inches on both of them.
He's listed as 185 cm, not quite 6'1. I'm 184,5 cm, have met him and we are the same height as far as I could tell. Either way, he is not small.
ChiHawks10
Registered User
Panzerspitze
Registered User
- Mar 4, 2010
- 4,957
- 998
pvr
Leather Skates
- Jan 22, 2008
- 4,705
- 2,104
I’m completely laughing at you guys trying to figure out heights based on photos of guys in gear, legs apart, and slightly hunched over as one’s posture has to be on skates, arguing over a half an inch like it has any meaning whatsoever in a game.
Barring Keith lined up next to a tape, I’ll take the first hand account of Spectra until someone provides better proof.
It’s easy to see the outliers on either side of the height thing. However, anyone between about 5’10” and 6’2” height wise are for all intents and purposes about equal on ice. I’ve never noticed +/- a few inches while skating.
The real difference is in the build...bulky, skinny, muscular, flabby, etc... Keith has always looked very lean...wiry even.
Barring Keith lined up next to a tape, I’ll take the first hand account of Spectra until someone provides better proof.
It’s easy to see the outliers on either side of the height thing. However, anyone between about 5’10” and 6’2” height wise are for all intents and purposes about equal on ice. I’ve never noticed +/- a few inches while skating.
The real difference is in the build...bulky, skinny, muscular, flabby, etc... Keith has always looked very lean...wiry even.
BK
"Goalie Apologist"
Most hockey players today are leaner that you would expect except they have tree trunks for quads/butt (and core to a lesser extent)in comparison to the rest of their body. Crosby is built like a house.
No neet to link a picture of Bobby Hull or Gordie Howe because we all know they would built like greek gods.
- Status
