Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Tavares For Karlsson

  1. #31
    Rep Power
    10

    Dobber Sports Initiate

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Personally I think Karlsson is pretty solid for 65-70 most years, and I could see him hitting 80 as a career high no problem. I don't see fluctuation or risk being an issue at all with him.

    That said, with no weighting for D points I'd probably stand pat too.

  2. #32
    Location
    Prairies
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Jedi

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Karlsson for me.
    I think people don't want to invest in a D-man because the fantasy hockey world got scared from the incredible drop they saw from Mike Green.

    Karlsson is no Mike Green. (Green was a good player for two years, but the offensive pieces in Washington that all clicked at the same time was the major cog that put another 15-20pts on a 50pt player like Mike Green).
    Karlsson put up 50 even-strength points in the full 2011-2012 season, including 16 even-strength goals.
    Karlsson put up 43 even-strength points in the full 2012-2013 season, including 15 even-strength goals.
    These are massive, massive numbers.

    (Even in Mike Green's best year, he only put up 13 even-strength goals... and 10 in his second best year.)

    And as consistency goes... Karlsson has four straight seasons at 7% shooting, so there's not much luck in the goal-scoring.
    He's a 75pt player.
    And in a 13-team x 4D pool, that gives him +45pt differential on the 30pt D-man around #52.

    For forwards, in a 13-team x 6F pool, you're looking at the #78 forward that typically churns out 50pts.
    Thus, Tavares would have to score 95pts to have equivalent value to a 75pt Karlsson.

    So - what is more likely:
    *75pt Karlsson, which we've pretty much seen twice.
    or
    *95pt Tavares, which we haven't seen yet.


    Now... I like Tavares, but he paced at 1.12ppg this year with VANEK (best player he's lined up with). That's a 92pt pace.
    Without Vanek, I think he's more in the 85-90pt range.

    Going back to Karlsson - he's a generational talent on defense.
    The league is in an era where there aren't end-to-end skating defensemen that can play top pairing minutes (26-30min).
    But Karlsson IS that guy... in an era where there isn't another (though PK Subban is about 60pts).

    And the passing - my lord... the passing.
    The passing/vision/hockeysense IS - what makes Karlsson a guy that can stay at 70pts.

    Evidence #1
    http://video.senators.nhl.com/videoc...sole?id=577778
    Or... 3:49mark of video below.


    Evidence #2


    With Karlsson, he's fortunate in that Ottawa can (& will) pair him with a stay-at-home defenseman, which they have several.
    He's a 70pt-80pt defenseman... and just because other recent D-men have failed to stay at 70pts... doesn't mean he won't.

    In a lot of points-only positional pools, I think he's the #2 player to own (behind Crosby).

    Karlsson, for me.
    Relative-difference at scarce positions (especially D) is critical in points-only pools.

  3. #33
    Rep Power
    5

    Dobber Sports Blue-Chipper

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Quote Originally Posted by Pengwin7 View Post
    Karlsson for me.
    I think people don't want to invest in a D-man because the fantasy hockey world got scared from the incredible drop they saw from Mike Green.

    Karlsson is no Mike Green. (Green was a good player for two years, but the offensive pieces in Washington that all clicked at the same time was the major cog that put another 15-20pts on a 50pt player like Mike Green).
    Karlsson put up 50 even-strength points in the full 2011-2012 season, including 16 even-strength goals.
    Karlsson put up 43 even-strength points in the full 2012-2013 season, including 15 even-strength goals.
    These are massive, massive numbers.

    (Even in Mike Green's best year, he only put up 13 even-strength goals... and 10 in his second best year.)

    And as consistency goes... Karlsson has four straight seasons at 7% shooting, so there's not much luck in the goal-scoring.
    He's a 75pt player.
    And in a 13-team x 4D pool, that gives him +45pt differential on the 30pt D-man around #52.

    For forwards, in a 13-team x 6F pool, you're looking at the #78 forward that typically churns out 50pts.
    Thus, Tavares would have to score 95pts to have equivalent value to a 75pt Karlsson.

    So - what is more likely:
    *75pt Karlsson, which we've pretty much seen twice.
    or
    *95pt Tavares, which we haven't seen yet.


    Now... I like Tavares, but he paced at 1.12ppg this year with VANEK (best player he's lined up with). That's a 92pt pace.
    Without Vanek, I think he's more in the 85-90pt range.

    Going back to Karlsson - he's a generational talent on defense.
    The league is in an era where there aren't end-to-end skating defensemen that can play top pairing minutes (26-30min).
    But Karlsson IS that guy... in an era where there isn't another (though PK Subban is about 60pts).

    With Karlsson, he's fortunate in that Ottawa can (& will) pair him with a stay-at-home defenseman, which they have several.
    He's a 70pt-80pt defenseman... and just because other recent D-men have failed to stay at 70pts... doesn't mean he won't.

    In a lot of points-only positional pools, I think he's the #2 player to own (behind Crosby).

    Karlsson, for me.
    Relative-difference at scarce positions (especially D) is critical in points-only pools.
    Pengwin, once again, you've thrown out extremely valuable information. Thanks a lot for the help.

    I agree with your above statement totally but perhaps I'll try and move Giroux instead and see if the other GM will bite....
    13 Team Keeper (keep 6), Weekly, Dress 6 forwards, 4 Defense, 2 Goalies.
    Points only: 1G, 1A, 2 GW, 2 SO

    F:Tavares, Giroux, Kucherov, Little, R. O'Reilly, Zuccarello, Galchenyuk
    D: Karlsson, Klingberg, Keith, Doughty, M. Reilly
    Goalies: Rask, Crawford

  4. #34
    Rep Power
    0

    Banned

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Huh, that's a tough one, I guess my short answer would be that they are more or less of equal value so ask yourself if it helps your team? I think it does, slot Karlsson in as your cornerstone defenseman keeper and that leaves you more open to snap up quality forwards in the draft.

    Also Penguin makes some good points on relative values, you'd be getting a lot of bang for your buck with EK

  5. #35
    ds760's Avatar
    ds760 is online now
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    369
    Rep Power
    7

    Dobber Sports Blue-Chipper

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    The biggest risk is ottawa forcing him to be a d-man. He plays like a forward and gets burned regularly and costs ottawa wins. There is no way they are going to let him do what he wants on the ice. He's going to have to be more defensively responsible which means less points.

  6. #36
    Location
    Hamilton, ON
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Sage

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Quote Originally Posted by ds760 View Post
    The biggest risk is ottawa forcing him to be a d-man. He plays like a forward and gets burned regularly and costs ottawa wins. There is no way they are going to let him do what he wants on the ice. He's going to have to be more defensively responsible which means less points.
    He’s never been on a leash since he’s entered the league, so he wouldn’t all of a sudden be put on one. Plus he’s actually a solid D-man, not a complete shutdown player, but I wouldn’t say I’d ever be worried of him playing D. The first half of the yr he was still recovering from his Achilles injury, and he was always a step behind, making him out of position regularly. When healthy, he uses his great speed and quickness to stay in front of players, and has a very good “stick” when it comes to defense. He may not out muscle you, but he doesn’t need with his style of defense

    Plus he’s like 30lbs stronger than 2 yrs ago just on muscle without losing any of his speed. He’s moving in the right direction when it comes to becoming a complete player.
    All about them GIFs, bout them GIFs, no stills.


  7. #37
    Location
    Prairies
    Rep Power
    40

    Dobber Sports Jedi

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    Karlsson won't need to be any more defensive-minded that he has been.

    The goal of any player is to be a PLUS player... on for more goals for than against. This much is true.
    But skaters can't completely control that - because goals for is a function of linemate SH% and goals against is a function of goaltending SV%.
    What skaters can look to achieve is a system where they are on for more shots FOR than shots against.
    Relative shot differential.
    [And this is all a coach can really strive for - because he doesn't bring in the quality SH% of skaters or the quality SV% of goalies.]

    Most undertalented teams (*cough* Ottawa *cough*) are going to end up behind in most games.
    This means they'll be chasing goals.
    For Karlsson (and Tavares), that can be a good thing - as it allows them a shift to their offensive focus.

    If you look at Karlsson's SF (shots for) vs. SA (shots against), he's 958 vs. 902.
    That's a +56 shot differential for the season, which is BY FAR, the best among all Ottawa players... 5 on 5.
    http://www.extraskater.com/players/p...=ott&min_gp=50

    So why would he need to play differently?
    In fact, he was only -4 at even-strength. (72 GF vs. 76 GA).

    -9 from Karlsson's +/-, actually came from 9 Short-Handed Goals.
    http://www.extraskater.com/players/p...gp=50&team=ott

    And the other -2 of Karlsson's -15 is likely from 6-on-5 play where empty-netters are scored against OTT while chasing a tie.

    Like any other "situation", hockey is all about relative difference in goal-scoring.
    Compare these two PP skaters:
    PlayerX playing 200 PP opps, scoring 50 For with 9 Against (+41 PP) vs.
    PlayerY playing 200 PP opps, scoring 30 For with 0 Against (+30 PP)
    Who is more valuable in this situation?

    In the +/- department, this will show up as PlayerX being -9... and PlayerY being +0... but make no mistake, PlayerX is still more valuable there.


    Tavares is in a similar position.
    As long as NYI gets behind in games, Tavares' will be allowed to gun for more points.
    But, with a center, if the team is winning the center's role becomes much more defensive.

    However, unlike Karlsson... at 5-on-5 even-strength, Tavares actually has a NEGATIVE shot differential. (as did Vanek... as did Okposo)
    http://www.extraskater.com/players/p...gp=50&team=nyi

    Anyways - in summary, Ottawa isn't going to ask Karlsson to play any more defensively, because that doesn't necessarily help their team shot differential (which leads to goal differential).
    Karlsson's production at even-strength will only decline if Ottawa is WINNING games.
    And based on their overall team strength, I don't see Ottawa being a "Winning" team any time in the near future.
    Ottawa will be chasing wins & Karlsson will be free to rush & create... especially if it means a POSITIVE shot differential.

  8. #38
    Rep Power
    50

    Dobber Sports Wizard

    Default Re: Tavares For Karlsson

    i think that Karlsson's defensive inability is vastly overblown

    i feel like people read something about the guy a couple of seasons ago and haven't really watched him develop in recent years

    he is never going to be a back end stud but then again neither was Brian Leetch; speed, stick work, and positioning made Leetch more than passable in his own end
     
    6 Team Yahoo H2H Daily Today League
    G, A, +/-, PIM, PPP, GWG
    W, GAA, SV, SV%
    3 C, 3 LW, 3 RW, 3 F, 6 D, 2 G, 5 Bench
    Keep 10 - 6 F, 3 D, 1 G


    14 Team Yahoo H2H Daily Tomorrow League
    G, A, -/+, PIM, PPP, SHP, SOG, FW
    W, GAA, SV, SV%, SHO
    3 C, 3 LW, 3 RW, 5 D, 1 U, 2 G, 5 Bench
    Keep 14 - 2 G Max

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •