Better all around Defenceman

[Axeman33]

If Karlsson wasn't putting up 60+ points every year, I doubt he would be in many top 5 lists because he isn't as good in his own end as he is in the offensive end. And yes, I watch plenty of Sens games. He's not as bad defensively as many may think, but he isn't as good defensively as many wished he was. There's a reason he doesn't kill penalties. To me, that's an important part of anyone who's the best "all around" defenseman. If you are going to ask about all around Dmen, you need to look at who plays excellent in both ends of their rink and in all situations. Not only offensive Dmen but also who goes out and plays on the PK with success as well.

My top five better "all around" defensemen would look like this:

Weber
Doughty
Hedman
Subban
Suter

HM - John Carlson.

In your poll, I voted Hedman.

[Pengwin7]

To give a short answer to the thread...
If I'm picking between Karlsson & Hedman, I'm taking Karlsson.
If I get to pick ONE NHL defenseman for one winner-take-all real hockey game to be played next week, the guy I'm picking is Shea Weber.

[franklin]

Between Hedman and Karlsson, it's close but I'd go with Karlsson.

In the NHL, it's close between Doughty, Weber and Keith for me. It's not easy to compare. But at the Olympics, I think Doughty was the best D on the ice so I'd go with him.

[Dikoi]

If Karlsson wasn't putting up 60+ points every year, I doubt he would be in many top 5 lists because he isn't as good in his own end as he is in the offensive end. And yes, I watch plenty of Sens games. He's not as bad defensively as many may think, but he isn't as good defensively as many wished he was. There's a reason he doesn't kill penalties. To me, that's an important part of anyone who's the best "all around" defenseman. If you are going to ask about all around Dmen, you need to look at who plays excellent in both ends of their rink and in all situations. Not only offensive Dmen but also who goes out and plays on the PK with success as well.

My top five better "all around" defensemen would look like this:

Weber
Doughty
Hedman
Subban
Suter

HM - John Carlson.

In your poll, I voted Hedman.

Wow 3 pages of posts and I finally find one I agree with. The only name I might replace in your list is Suter, I'd probably put Keith in there instead.

[Big Ev]

The Hawks have won their Cups with defense and for two of their three Cups, Keith was the best player for the Hawks. He's been their MVP of this era. If you were to swap DK and Karlsson, the Hawks probably still win their their 2010 Cup but I doubt they win 2013 and 2015. Many people look at Keith's points but they are just a by-product of his game. His strength is his breaking up plays in his own zone and transitioning the puck back the opposite direction which allows the Hawks to drive possession. The Hawks are possession team and the two players most responsible for this are Duncan Keith and Jonathon Toews. Obviously, Karlsson outshines Keith in the offensive zone but when I hear people continually say Karlsson is merely average defensively, that is all I need to hear when comparing the two.

you literally just described Karlsson who does that even better than Keith.

[Big Ev]

If Karlsson wasn't putting up 60+ points every year, I doubt he would be in many top 5 lists because he isn't as good in his own end as he is in the offensive end. And yes, I watch plenty of Sens games. He's not as bad defensively as many may think, but he isn't as good defensively as many wished he was. There's a reason he doesn't kill penalties. To me, that's an important part of anyone who's the best "all around" defenseman. If you are going to ask about all around Dmen, you need to look at who plays excellent in both ends of their rink and in all situations. Not only offensive Dmen but also who goes out and plays on the PK with success as well.

My top five better "all around" defensemen would look like this:

Weber
Doughty
Hedman
Subban
Suter

HM - John Carlson.

In your poll, I voted Hedman.

Poor comment Axeman. If Sidney Crosby wasn't putting up 100+ points then nobody would consider him the best in the NHL. It's irrelevant because they both are doing that. Of course they wouldn't be considered in a Top 5 or whatever if they were not. That's why it's BEST ALL-AROUND including their offense. This reminds me of the people who like to argue that Toews is better than Crosby.

Of course he isn't as good in his own zone than he is offensively (which is actually all three zones by the way - for some reason people think offense is just playing at the other end of the rink).

Earlier I said the reason he doesn't kill a lot of penalties, because he isn't a big guy who can just stand there and block shots. Why would Ottawa bother playing him there if they don't need to? That's what Methot is for.

Putting Subban over Karlsson on any list is a farce. He is not better than Karlsson in any area of the game. Suter is not good enough offensively to be considered best all-around. And John Carlson definitely should not be mentioned over Erik.

Generational offense + average/above average defense = one of the best all-around. Simple as that.

Plus, Karlsson has the worst partner out of anybody mentioned here. Most of these guys play with great partners and even stars. Karlsson won a Norris playing half the year with a revolving cast of scrubs.

[Axeman33]

Poor comment Axeman. If Sidney Crosby wasn't putting up 100+ points then nobody would consider him the best in the NHL. It's irrelevant because they both are doing that. This reminds me of the people who like to argue that Toews is better than Crosby.

Of course he isn't as good in his own zone then he is offensively (which is actually all three zones by the way - for some reason people think offense is just playing at the other end of the rink).

Earlier I said the reason he doesn't kill a lot of penalties, because he isn't a big guy who can just stand there and block shots. Why would Ottawa bother playing him there if they don't need to? That's what Methot is for.

Putting Subban over Karlsson on any list is a farce. He is not better than Karlsson in any area of the game. Suter is not good enough offensively to be considered best all-around. And John Carlson definitely should not be mentioned over Erik.

Generational offense + average/above average defense = one of the best all-around. Simple as that.

I knew you'd come back into the discussion.

You are allowed to have your opinion here, this is mine.

Karlsson is not a high end "all around" defensemen for the exact reasons I said. His "teeter-totter" is tilted heavily on the offensive side while the ones I listed are all pretty level when it comes to overall play. If Karlsson was used in all situations on the ice then sure, I'd have him on my list but until he starts killing penalties he is what he is; he's an offensive defenseman. There's nothing wrong with that but what he isn't is a top five "all around" defenseman.

If you took your blinders off for a minute, you'd see that.

[Big Ev]

I knew you'd come back into the discussion.

You are allowed to have your opinion here, this is mine.

Karlsson is not a high end "all around" defensemen for the exact reasons I said. His "teeter-totter" is tilted heavily on the offensive side while the ones I listed are all pretty level when it comes to overall play. If Karlsson was used in all situations on the ice then sure, I'd have him on my list but until he starts killing penalties he is what he is; he's an offensive defenseman. There's nothing wrong with that but what he isn't is a top five "all around" defenseman.

If you took your blinders off for a minute, you'd see that.

Your first statement didn't make much sense. Of course Karlsson would not be considered a Top 5 all-around defenseman if he wasn't scoring 60+ points. It's completely irrelevant. None of these guys would be considered if they weren't scoring.

You don't win two Norris trophies before the age of 25 if you're not one of the best all-around defensemen in the game. He is not just an offensive defenseman. You don't have to be killing penalties every time for you to be considered a great defenceman. It's a BS argument that has already been debunked twice given his Norris trophies. People need to reevaulte their view of what "defence" is. Isn't defence keeping the puck away from the other team and stealing it away from the other team's forwards? Is the point of hockey not to score more goals than the other team? If the end result is an elite goal differential than you are elite at both ends of the rink.

I don't have blinders on. I'm stating facts and haters just ignore them. He won two Norris trophies, "oh so what, he didn't deserve them and the people voting are stupid". He led the league in steals for defensemen, "so what, he isn't big and blocking shots on a PK".

I know I am right (like I have been for the last five years about EK) so I will leave it at that. For now.

[Pengwin7]

re: Penalty killing. (Some general thoughts)
I've always thought this argument was one of the most exaggerated components of placing value-upon a Defenseman.

Think about killing a PK.
Think about what a defenseman can actually contribute on a PK.

1. There's a face-off, which is basically the PP center vs. the PK center. There's no D involved here.
2. If the PK center wins, it's a piece of cake for ANY NHL defenseman to clear the puck out.
3. If the PP center wins, then the PP team will eventually carry the zone and set-up their PP rotation.
...
4. Once a PP unit enters a zone... what is a PK forward or defenseman doing? (Again, think... visualize what a PK D-man is actually doing on a PK.)
The value in a defenseman (and I say this from experience) on a PK is not nearly as critical as people value it to be.
I'd venture to say that a team's PK forwards are FAR more important to a good PK then it is to have good defensemen.

5. So a PK defenseman is mostly playing the low-lanes and clearing out bodies.
OK... so Erik Karlsson doesn't play a lot of PK. I don't really care. If a D-man is 6'... and the team has other 6'-3" D-men... send those guys out there for the PK.

4-on-5 last year, some stats.
Victor Hedman on for 1 goals for, 12 goals against, 5.24gaa/60min.
Dan Hamhuis on for 2 goals for, 11 goals against, 5.13gaa/60min.
Cody Franson on for 1 goals for, 10 goals against, 4.94gaa/60min.
Jon Merrill on for 2 goals for, 9 goals against, 4.81gaa/60min.
http://www.behindthenet.ca/nhl_stati...6+27+28#snip=f

Point is: We know that Hedman is better than Hamhuis and Franson and Merrill.
But the PK numbers suggest they are all about equal.
The real truth is that Hedman is just one large defenseman of 4 skaters who are playing passing lanes or perhaps clearing an in-front forward out of the net.
[You guys know I like stats... but what I'm trying to point out is that the stat above is damn close to worth nothing... Hedman is not of same value as Hamhuis/Franson/Merrill.]

Some more numbers, 4-on-5:
Drew Doughty on for 5 goals for, 24 goals against, 6.75gaa/60min. (-5.35 per 60min of PK.)
Erik Karlsson on for 2 goals for, 5 goals against, 6.55gaa/60min. (-3.93 per 60min of PK.)
Q: What does this tell us?
A: Nothing.


For me, if you were to "weight" D-man value:

Give a guy an "even-strength" score: Multiply that by 80%
Give a guy a "power-play" score: Multiply that by 15%
Give a guy a "short-handed" score: Multiply that by 5% [*Point of my post: D-men that kill penalties are not valuable just because their coaches choose them to be on the PK unit.]

A QB defenseman can contribute a LOT to a power-play...
But even the greatest defenseman might be powerless to stop a good PP unit... after all... a smart PP unit is gonna strive to keep the puck away from a good defenseman.

Food for thought, in these types of discussions.
(My 2 cents - as a majority-position defenseman throughout my life.)

[Axeman33]

Your first statement didn't make much sense. Of course Karlsson would not be considered a Top 5 all-around defenseman if he wasn't scoring 60+ points. It's completely irrelevant. None of these guys would be considered if they weren't scoring.

You don't win two Norris trophies before the age of 25 if you're not one of the best all-around defensemen in the game. He is not just an offensive defenseman. You don't have to be killing penalties every time for you to be considered a great defenceman. It's a BS argument that has already been debunked twice given his Norris trophies. People need to reevaulte their view of what "defence" is. Isn't defence keeping the puck away from the other team and stealing it away from the other team's forwards? Is the point of hockey not to score more goals than the other team? If the end result is an elite goal differential than you are elite at both ends of the rink.

I know I am right (like I have been for the last five years about EK) so I will leave it at that. For now.

I was waiting for the Norris to be mentioned. This is not a question about the Norris Trophy. The way the Norris Trophy is awarded is a flawed system that focuses too much on how many points a Dman can produce.

The point of this thread was to ask who's the better "all around" Dman. I don't know what your definition of "all around" encompasses but to me, an all around defenseman is one who is used at any and all times of the game, not matter the situation or time on the clock. As I have said, if Karlsson starts killing penalties, then he is certainly one to be considered as a decent all around dman, but he doesn't kill penalties and that's why he is not on my list or above guys like Subban (who personally I am not a fan of but you cannot disregard his importance to that team) and the same goes for Carlson, who actually gets more PK time than PP time but yet still puts up solid offensive numbers.

Karlsson is without a doubt the best offensive Dman in the league, but he is no where near the discussion when we are talking about all around Dmen in the league. There are a few more I could have easily put on my list before I'd hit Karlsson for best all around Dman.

[Big Ev]

I was waiting for the Norris to be mentioned. This is not a question about the Norris Trophy. The way the Norris Trophy is awarded is a flawed system that focuses too much on how many points a Dman can produce.

The point of this thread was to ask who's the better "all around" Dman. I don't know what your definition of "all around" encompasses but to me, an all around defenseman is one who is used at any and all times of the game, not matter the situation or time on the clock. As I have said, if Karlsson starts killing penalties, then he is certainly one to be considered as a decent all around dman, but he doesn't kill penalties and that's why he is not on my list or above guys like Subban (who personally I am not a fan of but you cannot disregard his importance to that team) and the same goes for Carlson, who actually gets more PK time than PP time but yet still puts up solid offensive numbers.

Karlsson is without a doubt the best offensive Dman in the league, but he is no where near the discussion when we are talking about all around Dmen in the league. There are a few more I could have easily put on my list before I'd hit Karlsson for best all around Dman.

Re: Norris comment. This is exactly what I meant above. A guy wins the best d-man award twice and beats out all these other guys, but OH NO IT DOESN'T MATTER, IT'S FLAWED! Wrong. Mike Green didn't win the award when he led the league in points. The Norris is voted by old fogies who love the true "big defenceman" as you suggest, yet they still put aside their biases and voted the right way.

If these "few more" players are added (really would love to see those names...), it would still be wrong. If you seriously don't think Karlsson is even in the discussion, then you should consider hanging up your skates and stop watching the NHL forever. All the facts are there for you to see why your opinion is flawed. Read Pengwin's post. Sidney Crosby doesn't kill penalties. Who cares?

Only two players played more minutes per game than Karlsson. And you're telling me they don't put him out there as much as possible? If he was truly bad they would shelter him hard. He's ALWAYS out there defending a lead late in the game.

[Axeman33]

Re: Norris comment. This is exactly what I meant above. A guy wins the best d-man award twice and beats out all these other guys, but OH NO IT DOESN'T MATTER, IT'S FLAWED! Wrong. Mike Green didn't win the award when he led the league in points.

If these "few more" players are added, it would still be wrong. If you seriously don't think Karlsson is even in the discussion, then you should consider hanging up your skates and stop watching the NHL forever. All the facts are there for you to see why your opinion is flawed.

Only two players played more minutes per game than Karlsson. And you're telling me they don't put him out there as much as possible? If he was truly bad they would shelter him hard. He's ALWAYS out there defending a lead late in the game.

I know better than to think I am going to change your mind with common sense.

As I say, I've never said he wasn't an excellent Dman. On the offensive side of things, he's as good as the league has seen in years. I just don't consider him one of the better all-around Dmen. I am not going to repeat myself why I feel this way. You think Karlsson walks on water and that's just the way you are.

I, on the other hand, have a differing opinion on what constitutes a top, all-around Dman. I could care less about the Norris Trophy. I do think that Trophy is flawed on how it's awarded. Again, my opinion. It doesn't mean I am right, but it sure doesn't mean I am wrong either.

I am simply answering the OP's question with I feel is an honest, unbiased, opinion. Can you say that? I doubt it anytime Karlsson's involved.

[horrorfan]

This conversation would be epic if MT319 and Maaa were around.

(carry on).

[Pengwin7]

This conversation would be epic if MT319 and Maaa were around.

(carry on).

LOL.
MT319 would be talking about skating mechanics of each defenseman in each quadrant of the ice.
Ma would be referencing their likely regression or normalization based on zone starts.

That would be like a customer talking to an engineer.
Engineers are not good at dealing with customers!!!
I have people skills... I am GOOD at dealing with people... what the hell is wrong with you people!!!

[Big Ev]

I know better than to think I am going to change your mind with common sense.

As I say, I've never said he wasn't an excellent Dman. On the offensive side of things, he's as good as the league has seen in years. I just don't consider him one of the better all-around Dmen. I am not going to repeat myself why I feel this way. You think Karlsson walks on water and that's just the way you are.

I, on the other hand, have a differing opinion on what constitutes a top, all-around Dman. I could care less about the Norris Trophy. I do think that Trophy is flawed on how it's awarded. Again, my opinion. It doesn't mean I am right, but it sure doesn't mean I am wrong either.

I am simply answering the OP's question with I feel is an honest, unbiased, opinion. Can you say that? I doubt it anytime Karlsson's involved.

I can say that because I am right. I don't need to argue this further. I didn't say he was truly elite defensively. The proof is in the god damn pudding of why he is without a doubt one of the best all-around d-men in the game. Choose to ignore it if you want.