Blackhawks Re-Sign Defenseman Nick Leddy


On Wednesday afternoon, the agent for Blackhawks defenseman Nick Leddy tweeted that the organization would be making an announcement about his client’s future soon. Moments later, Josh Rimer tweeted that the Hawks had agreed to a two-year deal with the restricted free agent defenseman.

UPDATE: Just before 6 pm CT, the Blackhawks twitter account confirmed a two-year deal for Leddy.

UPDATE: On the Fourth of July, multiple sources have reported the deal has a $2.7M cap hit. Josh Rimer was the first to report the dollar amount.

30 thoughts on “Blackhawks Re-Sign Defenseman Nick Leddy

  • July 3, 2013 at 8:58 pm

    Good deal. Nick was, at times, the best d-man we had on the ice during regular season. He is far too young and has too much potential to not be given every opportunity to succeed in Chicago.

  • July 3, 2013 at 9:28 pm

    I agree Ryan.. glad the team found some depth and he didn’t have to bite off more than he could chew this year. I didn’t like it when he got thrown into a 2nd pairing last season, that can just ruin a young D ..thankfully, he came out of that season better than worse, and now he can continue to develop. Saw him at his rook camp and knew he was a keeper.. Cam who???

  • July 3, 2013 at 9:48 pm

    Anyone heard the financials on this deal? Hopefully the Hawks aren’t paying more then 2.5 million a season. Two years is a good time table, I believe after 2 years Seabs and Hammers deals will both be off the books so 2 years allows Stan a good amount of time to evaluate Leddy’s long term value to the Hawks.

    I hope the Hawks let Razor walk so they can fully evaluate Rannata as a backup, bc I’d like to see Crow retained after his deal runs out and a Razor deal might not allow that

  • July 3, 2013 at 11:36 pm

    Hjalmarsson’s contract is up after next season, along with Crawford and Shaw.

    Oduya’s contract is up after 2014/15, along with Toews, Kane, Saad and now Leddy.

    Seabrook’s contract is up after 2015/16.

    The two year contract for Leddy might not be the best in terms of coinciding with other important player resignings, but I’m happy he’s resigned and two years should be ample time to evaluate if he is going to bloom into that elite d-man that we all hope he will.

    The fact that the terms haven’t been announced is a little strange, and coupled with the rumor that a deal with Emery was almost done and then silence on that too … strange. Hopefully something hasn’t gone wrong and things have fallen apart.

  • July 4, 2013 at 12:19 am

    — I’m glad they signed Leddy. I think he he’s displayed a lot of skill, and age/experience considered, he has a LOT of upside. He *watched* quite a bit in the final series (compared to the regular season), but that may have been essential to his learning curve? It’s a good move — Kruger is next…

  • July 4, 2013 at 4:20 am

    Ryan, Leddy was very good during the regular season…a +15 doesn’t lie…and at times, he was our best DMan during the season…but IMO the jury is still out on Nick, as he disappeared during the playoffs, and that’s what counts…this is why, IMO, Bowman only gave him 2 years…as ER said, its enough time to determine whether Leddy is going to make it or not…and its more than enough time for Clendening to develop as a star defender…they play a similar game.

    The financials will be interesting to see after his playoff. Nice to see Stan recognize the character Leddy showed in his limited game 6 role.

    Now Kruger…

  • July 4, 2013 at 9:33 am

    SSHM: Why not play Rantaa in Rockford to see how he does in North America? Emery is a proven commodity as a split tandem and/or quality backup and Crawford has 1 more year until he’s a UFA. I doubt Bowman will want to pay CC what the market may dictate, and with 19/88/4 coming up on renewals, keeping Emery and CC together with Rantaa getting more playing time is better for organization. If Rantaa looks good, then you have a trade commodity in CC or Emery. If CC can’t be signed then you have Ray and Rantaa as your tandem in ’14-15. Issue is Rantaa’s contract (1-way)…

  • July 4, 2013 at 9:35 am

    He’s a young kid who has the “potential” to be the second coming of Duncan Keith.

    If he bulks up a little & gets stronger (he was too easily knocked off the puck at times) he could become a monster.

    This kid wants to run & gun but as I’ve mentioned before it appears the coaches are keeping tight reins on him and so he hesitates sometimes & that spells doom for a D-man. But he also has the speed to recover.

    2 years is a fair mount of time to determine if he’s a keeper or if we should trade him back to Minny & steal another diamond in the rough…..

  • July 4, 2013 at 10:47 am

    Negzz I admit that I am at a loss to explain the apparent signing of Emery…Ray did a great job for us last year, but with his hip, his age, and the signing of Rantaa (on a 1 way contract) it doesn’t make sense. Yes, Rantaa has yet to show that he can play in the NHL, but his play in the World Championships and throughout the Finish Elite league and playoffs were incredible…like we’ve never seen before incredible.

    CC has one more year on his contract, so by giving Emery a $1.5-1.75 million per year contract (for 2 years apparently) and having Rantaa on a 1 way $1.1 million contract, it doesn’t add up and puts us tight against the salary cap.

    I guess the only thing that Stan is thinking is to start the year with CC and Emery with the big club, and Rantaa in Rockford, and at the trade deadline moving Emery (who on an affordable 2 year deal should be very attractive). That has to be it…and it gives Rantaa 40+ games in Rockford to become accustomed to NHL sized rinks and to build up his confidence.

    Actually not a bad plan if we can afford it.

  • July 4, 2013 at 10:52 am

    Hawks 70 games in next season and in good position to fight for another Cup…Craw pulls a hamstring and is out for the playoffs…how much ya want to pay Emory today?

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:02 pm

    Leddy´s year salary is 2,7.

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:11 pm

    Sorry, this question is a little off thread topic, … well, actually it’s a LOT off thread topic.

    What’s the criteria for a player to get his name on the Cup? For example, Ray Emery was on the roster the entire season but did not appear in the post season. Ben Smith did not appear during the regular season but played 1 game in the PS. Brookbank was on the roster the entire season and appeared in 1 game in the PS. Jimmy Hayes played a few games during the regular season but none in the PS; same with J. Mayers. So, whose names get put on the Cup?

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    I believe Emery will be on the Cup because of the number of games played in the regular season and he suited up in the playoffs.

    I am not that happy with the Leddy deal. I agree with the 2 years as he is only 22 and could earn a big payday 2 years from now. I was thinking 2 years at $1.8mm. His signing really cuts down on cap space.

    Cap Geek still shows Emery as a UFA.

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:24 pm

    @DropthePuck: 41 games in the regular season (or, in this shortened season, 24 games) OR 1 game in the finals (the rest of the postseason is irrelevant). so bollig will get his name on the cup, but hayes and brookbank won’t.

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:26 pm

    and yes, the backup goalies are put on the cup.

  • July 4, 2013 at 1:29 pm

    sorry, brookbank got the 24 regular season appearances, sorry. he’ll be on the cup. mayers was just shy with only 19 games. that’s a huge bummer in my book. but at least he lifted it, eh?

  • July 4, 2013 at 2:17 pm

    as far as Cup/names- I think the Team can “place” a few xtra names on the Cup at their discretion- so I think Mayers will make it… Just something I heard on Radio/sports- not concrete…

    Tab- another I told you so… on Leddy’s $2.75M- the GM’s almost always overpay… the only contract I have seen this Summer that seems “underpaid” was the discount that Pascal Dupuis just gave Pens!!!

    Not saying 29, 8 aren’t worth it… Just saying the Market/demand is always there for Nice players…

    Now if the Hawks could just dump 13 and 17- they could have another 2M to spend on some talent (like Rosey or other)

    If Raanta is one way contract… why isn’t Capgeek counting it against the Hawks Cap???

  • July 4, 2013 at 4:52 pm

    Brad: Yea, tehat’s what I was thinking. Give Rantaa NA experience and then trade either CC or Emery at the deadline (depending on market, performance, etc), changing gears for the enxt year with Rantaa in the regular rotation with whoever is still with the club.

    Wall: I believe a 1-way contract does not count against the cap until/unless you bring the player up. You have to pay him the full $$ regardless of where he plays, but the cap hit is triggered by location. A 2-way pays the player his NHL salary only when he’s with the big club… Not clear on prorata, etc, but interested to know if anyone knows the CBA nuances better?

  • July 4, 2013 at 8:42 pm

    2.7 sounds about right for Leddy. Managed to guess pretty close. I’m curious to Hear about Razor sounds like at this point he’ll hit the market which is fine by me. Nothing wrong w banking some money after all the top fa sign. Happy 4th of July

  • July 4, 2013 at 9:04 pm

    No, $2.7 isn’t about right for Leddy…he’s being overpaid based upon his playoff performance. Bowman can afford to do this as the contract isn’t a big one, but no doubt, Leddy will have to improve defensively to earn these dollars. The great thing with contracts is that no matter how much they are based on the past, the only thing that matters is the future…so who knows…a few more pounds of muscle on Leddy, and he may be considered a bargain at this rate. We just don’t know…but at this point, the figure flatters Leddy.

  • July 5, 2013 at 8:01 am

    I thinking a 2.3-2.5 for 2/3 years would be close, so i’ll take 2.7 for 2. Gives us the ability to cut ties if he doesn’t deleveop and Johns/Clenening/Fournier are ready.

    And if he does develop then he can get a raise to 3.5-3.7 and we can lock him up with the “future core” for the next 5-6 years.

  • July 5, 2013 at 9:43 am

    @ Wall – You don’t think Vincent Lecavalier was underpaid?

    And Wall easy with the “I told you so’s”. If we listened to you all the time Stan Bowman and Coach Quenneville would have been fired during the losing streak last season. And one of if not both Kane and Sharp would have been traded last off season. You were dead wrong on all that and we have a Cup, Conn Smythe and an organization on solid ground because of it.

  • July 5, 2013 at 10:19 am

    Ryan- No Lecavalier – is not underpaid… He is going to get around $5 M from Tampa buyout and then another $4 M from Flyers!!! I believe he is going to make even more money then last year> seems like a RAISE!!! But perhaps I am misinterpreting the “Buyout $$$”-

    Can anyone clarify the “Buyout structure???” Does the buyout player receive 2 Fat check??? or is really subsidized by “Old” team to “equal” old contract?

    Once again- my “FEAR” is that buyout Players could basically sign where ever they want– for almost league Minimums to screw the Old teams- and Make a potential Dynasty (Miami Heat type team)- buy signing w/ a Powerhouse???

  • July 5, 2013 at 10:41 am

    They can do that anyway, wall. Nothing prevents stars from taking a discount to go play with the team they want.

  • July 5, 2013 at 10:56 am

    JS- well if Lecavalier gets $5 M from the “buyout” team – guaranteed!!! then MONEY is a MUCH smaller concern going forward for Vinny- So he is MUCH more likely to go where he wants Based on Cup chance or preferred City/Players- and not MONEY!

    Sure- the NON-Buyout UFA- can sign for $1 M- where he wants- but Vinny would be making $1 M from new team + $5 M from Tampa Buyout= $6 M/yr.!!!
    The UFA who signs for $1M- only makes $1M…
    So There is a HUGE difference… Unless I am misinterpreting how the actual $$$ work on the buyouts!!!

    Please correct me if I am wrong-

  • July 5, 2013 at 11:16 am

    That is indeed how it works… but he still went to Philly for pretty big money.

    And honestly, which buyout candidates do you think will make that much of a difference? Vinny was likely the best available and he still went to a bad team that offered him good money. Briere was also offered good money.

    The reason that most of these players are being bought out is because they were signed to bad contracts that they aren’t living up to. Are you worried Montador is going to sign for the minimum with Boston and push them over the edge to the Cup?

    Also remember, a lot of these deals were made during the last CBA so they are typically front loaded with very little money at the end.

  • July 5, 2013 at 11:26 am

    Wall- I’m not going to claim to be a CBA expert or anything, but as in the case of Vinny, He doesn’t get the 5 million up front or anything. In the buyouts, the player is paid out over time. For example, His contract has 7 years remaining, but the buyout is over double that… with just under 32M due… So he will only get roughly 2.25 mill from the Lightning yearly. (I know…. ONLY… lol)

    So that does lessen the odds of a player just taking a 1.0M contract to “win a title”. If a player has been making 6 million per year and he wants to keep making 6 million he will still need a 4 mil contract… like the one Vinny signed with Philly…

    The bigger “fear” and its not really that big of one… (and this is just HYPOTHETICAL for the examples sake… no one think i want this to happen)… would be the Hawks talking to Seabrook and saying, “hey, we will amnesty you, let you go somewhere for one year… and then sign you back in a year at 2.5 mil on the cap”. They put the provision in that you cant resign a bought out player the year after they were bought out, but I really think it should have been 2 or 3 years…

  • July 5, 2013 at 11:37 am

    JS- Agree these buyouts are for “bad” contracts or under-performing players or both!!! all I was suggesting- This “could” have been a loophole for Buyout Players to band together and Join a cash/cap strapped team- let’s say the Hawks signed 8,16,29, 67- raanta- and have $1.5M left- Lecavalier, Briere, could have called eachother- and said let’s go play for Hawks (for less than that $1.5M) – remember they still are getting a FAT check from old teams…- so it’s not the same as 2 UFA’s planning/playing for nothing on same team.

    No- it doesn’t guarantee – That Hawks would win/better w/ those guys… I am just Saying that the CBA/NHL- should have considered that scenario!

  • July 5, 2013 at 11:49 am

    thx- Tim

  • July 7, 2013 at 8:40 pm

    Good deal , glad to see Leddy is still with the Blackhawks. Love his speed and his puck moving out there on the ice, now is time to sign Kruger as well.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *