Shad
Registered User
- Mar 5, 2011
- 1,128
- 1,065
I like the dude but he is massively overrated here
I like the dude but he is massively overrated here
Is that all you got man?Just like Danault right?
when players are in slump they are going to look worse then they are though. 3 pts in the last 18, 5 pts in the last 24. Before that had 19 pts in 33 games.
But when it's your annual half season slump...
I don't recall a slump in his rookie year but with him being undersized perhaps he hit a wall physically. Last year he had a few injuries and just didn't get going. It didn't help matters that his center was Pleks but at least he was at RW.
At this point I just see him as a really good fourth liner and PKer.
Hope he's able to take his game to another level. But I don't like seeing him in the top 9 the way he's playing now. Without top guns in the top 6 we need more offense from the 3rd line.
I think he'll put up over 30 pts this year, that's clearly not 4th line production. I think he's a 3rd liner that's in a slump. Why not mix it up, put him at RW on a new line and see what happens, doesn't make sense to me when the guy is slumping to keep rolling him out on the same line and at a position he's not as good at imo.
when players are in slump they are going to look worse then they are though. 3 pts in the last 18, 5 pts in the last 24. Before that had 19 pts in 33 games.
I like the dude but he is massively overrated here
Lehkonen is the Mete version in offense. Both seem doing quite well on ice, have good effort, generate things. But at the end of day, both suck at scoring. They simply couldn't convert although having some chances.
Mete looks like the better offensive player going forward. Looks bad on Lehkonen seeing as the guy he is being compared to offensively has zero goals at the NHL level.Only difference is that Lehkonen has posted 18 goals in 73 games but that was 2 seasons ago while Mete ...
Was that a fluke?