Is Keith going the way of... Hammer?

Panzerspitze

Registered User
Mar 4, 2010
4,955
994
As in rapidly falling off a cliff? According to my vaunted "eye test", the awkwardness in Keith's skating has been getting more and more pronounced in the past two seasons. He's not skating smoothly anywhere close to how he used to. It's especially painfully obvious when he's attempting to go back to retrieve the cleared puck on the power[less]play. This awkwardness eeriely reminds me of Hjarmalsson in his last season in Chicago.
 

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,731
21,148
No.


Hammer played a game that was more likely to show wear and tear. He was a shot-blocking machine. Keith plays an entirely different game and I'd imagine if he had more help on defense this year and if the Hawks didn't lose faith in making the playoffs two months ago already, that Keith would've been nearly as good as he was last season.
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
It looks like it to me. How he hesitates turning on a dump in, or taking a shot from the point. His hands have turned to stone. He never covers anyone in his own zone. Why are you a dman then?
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
No.


Hammer played a game that was more likely to show wear and tear. He was a shot-blocking machine. Keith plays an entirely different game and I'd imagine if he had more help on defense this year and if the Hawks didn't lose faith in making the playoffs two months ago already, that Keith would've been nearly as good as he was last season.

Hammer had better numbers than Keith this year in Phoenix
 
  • Like
Reactions: Blackhawks

CallMeShaft

Calder Bedard Fan
Apr 14, 2014
15,731
21,148
9 pts and a -3. But only played 48 games. What was Keith this year?
32pts in 82 games. And like I said, plus/minus has a whole host of issues. If that's all you're going on, then you should bow out of this conversation before you get owned.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
Are you really using +/-?

Keith 51.88% & Hammer 47.95%

Keith .39 PPG and Hammer .19 PPG.

AZ had better goaltending.

Hammer was bad this season in AZ.
 

RememberTheRoar

“I’m not as worried about the 5-on-5 scoring.”
Oct 21, 2015
23,119
21,154
That's me in the corner
9 pts and a -3. But only played 48 games. What was Keith this year?

“Hammer had better numbers than Keith this year in Phoenix”

“What was Keith this year?”

Can you quickly google things before ignorantly making false statements?

You’re already in front of a computer/phone, just open a new tab and do 10 seconds of research before posting about something you know nothing about.
 

Marotte Marauder

Registered User
Aug 10, 2008
8,587
2,442
Are you really using +/-?

Keith 51.88% & Hammer 47.95%

Keith .39 PPG and Hammer .19 PPG.

AZ had better goaltending.

Hammer was bad this season in AZ.

Even strength it's .27 to .17 ppg and one was noted as a more offensive dman. Just sayin'
 

zac

Registered User
Apr 29, 2009
8,484
42
Even strength it's .27 to .17 ppg and one was noted as a more offensive dman. Just sayin'

Keith's offensive numbers should be largely disregarded as they were mostly a product of A) PP time (which he shouldn't have had), B) being on a superior offensive team (for most of his career), and C) an insane number of minutes. If someone would do the work to account for these variables and....moreover...use their f***ing eyes Keith was a very average offensive player. I mean, the only real offensive attribute he had was his ability to skate (and make a stretch pass). He has no hands. He can't f***ing shoot. He can't receive a pass cleanly to save his life.

I'm not mad at Duncan for those things because he was what he was: a great defensive that could cover INSANE ground. But an offensive defenseman? Not in several years (early in his career he could kind of shoot the puck).
 

Putt Pirate

Registered User
Dec 15, 2015
5,226
2,976
The only reason people bitch about Keith’s O numbers is is prominence on the PP. if he were not on that then I think people would not care as much. But getting 1st PP mn most of the season and have those O numbers is a bit alarming.

In reference to his D....shouldn’t he be raising the play of lesser players rather than the other way around? To me that is an absolutely hollow argument in his defense and is actually supporting his decline.
 

Spectra

Registered boozer
Aug 3, 2005
2,519
458
Keith has always had somewhat limited hockey IQ, especially on the offensive side and that is showing. If he slows down any more on the physical side, he's a liability. He will not age like a Lidstrom or a Niedermayer, because those guys could overcome their aging bodies thanks to their superior understanding of the game and smartness. Keith became all world mostly thanks to great genetics and work ethic, as a pure hockey player, he is only above average.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Marotte Marauder

ChiHawk21

Registered User
Jan 15, 2011
7,310
1,552
Keith has always had somewhat limited hockey IQ, especially on the offensive side and that is showing. If he slows down any more on the physical side, he's a liability. He will not age like a Lidstrom or a Niedermayer, because those guys could overcome their aging bodies thanks to their superior understanding of the game and smartness. Keith became all world mostly thanks to great genetics and work ethic, as a pure hockey player, he is only above average.
would disagree with this. His great work ethics and genetics are obvious but his gap control was other worldly and i feel like that has to do with the understanding of the game and hockey smarts. I would also attribute his ability to make that first pass or break out of the zone on his own pretty heady.
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
32pts in 82 games. And like I said, plus/minus has a whole host of issues. If that's all you're going on, then you should bow out of this conversation before you get owned.

He had 2 goals in 80 games, and a lot of PP time. Watch him collect a pass, he has hands of stone. His points came off assists. Keith is a liability out there, his defense is horrible and his passing decisions in his own zone are even worse. You guys need to face the fact that he's not the same guy from 5 years ago.
 

Callidusblackhawk

Registered User
Feb 15, 2012
3,915
3,715
Downers Grove, Illinois
He had 2 goals in 80 games, and a lot of PP time. Watch him collect a pass, he has hands of stone. His points came off assists. Keith is a liability out there, his defense is horrible and his passing decisions in his own zone are even worse. You guys need to face the fact that he's not the same guy from 5 years ago.
Nobody disputes this. He has clearly declined. He's not some plug like you seem to think though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RememberTheRoar

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
Nobody disputes this. He has clearly declined. He's not some plug like you seem to think though.

Don't get me wrong. I loved the guy. Especially in that San Jose game where he lost his teeth and only missed 1 shift. But watching him now makes me cringe. I just don't see the same player on the ice. I get he has lost some speed, but his play is just horrible in my opinion based on his experience.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
would disagree with this. His great work ethics and genetics are obvious but his gap control was other worldly and i feel like that has to do with the understanding of the game and hockey smarts. I would also attribute his ability to make that first pass or break out of the zone on his own pretty heady.

His gap control was actually subpar for him this season. He was caught in no mans land a lot but he was able to recover more often than not. This was possibly his worst season as a pro other than 2011 but that leads me to believe that he can bounce back.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
Don't get me wrong. I loved the guy. Especially in that San Jose game where he lost his teeth and only missed 1 shift. But watching him now makes me cringe. I just don't see the same player on the ice. I get he has lost some speed, but his play is just horrible in my opinion based on his experience.

He had games where he looked like he was back so that is a positive.
 

BK

"Goalie Apologist"
Feb 8, 2011
33,636
16,483
Minneapolis, MN
Well, I'm not so sure. I saw too many games where he does not cover anyone in the Hawks' zone, and cutesy pie passes that lead to scoring chances and goals.

I am not saying they were numerous but they were there. Bad coverage and cutesy passes don't mean he lost his game.
 

Blackhawks

Registered User
Jul 25, 2007
5,678
1,134
Hammer right now would be the second best D on the team easily with the garbage on this team, he was the second best last year. People keep saying he is bad when he played for the worst team in the league, those same people watched maybe just maybe a hand full of games of his but I even doubt that lol, what a joke. I just love the experts, they always try to make themselves feel better about Stanners trades, they did the same to Panarin trade till mid season when I was laughing, well point made now but but but Saad can perform in the playoffs LOOOOL!
 

coolhand

Registered User
Jan 20, 2016
2,624
1,937
Streamwood, IL
Hammer right now would be the second best D on the team easily with the garbage on this team, he was the second best last year. People keep saying he is bad when he played for the worst team in the league, those same people watched maybe just maybe a hand full of games of his but I even doubt that lol, what a joke. I just love the experts, they always try to make themselves feel better about Stanners trades, they did the same to Panarin trade till mid season when I was laughing, well point made now but but but Saad can perform in the playoffs LOOOOL!

The problem with Hammer is his speed. He's as slow or even slower than Seabrook. I liked his ability to block shots. The Hawks miss that with the ballerinas they have on defense now.
 

Pez68

Registered User
Mar 18, 2010
18,267
25,064
Chicago, IL
The problem with Hammer is his speed. He's as slow or even slower than Seabrook. I liked his ability to block shots. The Hawks miss that with the ballerinas they have on defense now.

The coaching staff are the ones making them ballerinas, with their whole "only block wrist shots" approach to defense.
 

Salvaged Ship

Registered User
Oct 9, 2013
8,609
2,316
Keith is 35 years old and has played a ridiculous anount of minutes in the NHL and in international competitions. The mileage on his legs is ridiculous. Whenever I hear that “cyborg” crap or “he isn’t human” nonsense its almost like an excuse to point a finger at him for bad play and using his age cannot possibly be a factor. Its dumb and its not fair to Keith.

Newsflash, Keith is in fact human. He is an older player, has likely played the minutes in his career of someone in his 40’s. If anyone on this team deserves a pass and more understanding for a decline in play it’s Keith, a warrior who has given his absolute all to this organization.
 
  • Like
Reactions: COHawk and RayP

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->