An Interesting Article Defending Karlsson's Defense

[ScottM]

This article is about a week and a half old, but since I'm just getting back into my full Internet swing after Christmas, I just now stumbled across it. Basically, it gives stats that dispute the conception that Karlsson is inherently weak in his own zone and gives a very reasonable defense of why the Sens use him relatively infrequently on the penalty kill. http://senators.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=793254

 

My favorite fact from the article though? If Karlsson wins the Norris this year, he'd be only the third player in history (the first two being Bobby Orr and Denis Potvin) to win the trophy at least three times before turning 26.

[JR Ewing]

Karlsson has the best Scoring Chances Against/60 for the Sens, so it's not as if he's hurting the team while he's out there. But then, people still largely have an outdated concept of what defense is.

 

“We don’t play in our zone, so there’s not much defending. The game’s changed. They think there’s defending in today’s game. Nah, it’s how much you have the puck. Teams that play around in their own zone think they’re defending but they’re generally getting scored on or taking face-offs and they need a goalie to stand on his head if that’s the way they play."

 

-Darryl Sutter

 

Perhaps it was growing up watching Paul Coffey (and hearing over and over again that he was a shitty defenseman) that was the reason that I became disdainful of the old attitude that that the best blueliners are Canadians with stubble who hit a lot. There is a huge defensive benefit to having a defenseman who can get the puck out of his own end and, even better, create offense at the other end. Karlsson's great.

[ScottM]

Karlsson has the best Scoring Chances Against/60 for the Sens, so it's not as if he's hurting the team while he's out there. But then, people still largely have an outdated concept of what defense is.

 

 

 

Perhaps it was growing up watching Paul Coffey (and hearing over and over again that he was a shitty defenseman) that was the reason that I became disdainful of the old attitude that that the best blueliners are Canadians with stubble who hit a lot. There is a huge defensive benefit to having a defenseman who can get the puck out of his own end and, even better, create offense at the other end. Karlsson's great.

 

There was another article I read earlier that showed that the Sens face a significantly higher number of shot attempts when he's not on the ice as compared to when he is. When you consider that he takes on the top lines of the opposing teams, you're talking about more shot attempts by weaker lines. I don't care how it happens, I'll take that kind of contribution from any guy any day. If it happens simply by token of the fact that he's on the attack, so be it.

 

On a bit of a side note, I think it's a shame that we don't have Corsi data available for guys like Coffey and Langway. It would be interesting to see how they compared.

[aziz]

But then, people still largely have an outdated concept of what defense is.

 

what, pray, is the current concept of defense?

 

i suppose it must be my outdated concept of defense, but if my team has an ace dman that has been repeatedly called the best in the league, i'd want to lean on him for important defensive work.  would want that elite guy to be a stabilizing force when my team is on the ropes and needs to press through a hard push by the other team.  but.... up by one goal, 90 seconds left....karlsson sits.  vital penalty kill late in a period...karlsson sits.  heck, a faceoff deep in the senators' zone...karlsson generally sits.  he might be an extremely skilled player, but to my outdated concept of defense, he is a huge step down from the level of highly effective two-way defensemen.  two-way defensemen that are able to contribute whenever and wherever needed.

 

the senators, like the penguins 25 years ago, deploy 4 forwards and 1 dman as their primary stance, in terms of skillset and risk/reward prioritization of the players on the ice.  that's fine, it worked for the penguins sometimes, and it works for the senators sometimes.  personally, i wouldn't build a team like that, and think defensemen THAT limited are a liability, no matter how good they are in one really specific area, but there it is.  

[ScottM]

what, pray, is the current concept of defense?

 

i suppose it must be my outdated concept of defense, but if my team has an ace dman that has been repeatedly called the best in the league, i'd want to lean on him for important defensive work.  would want that elite guy to be a stabilizing force when my team is on the ropes and needs to press through a hard push by the other team.  but.... up by one goal, 90 seconds left....karlsson sits.  vital penalty kill late in a period...karlsson sits.  heck, a faceoff deep in the senators' zone...karlsson generally sits.  he might be an extremely skilled player, but to my outdated concept of defense, he is a huge step down from the level of highly effective two-way defensemen.  two-way defensemen that are able to contribute whenever and wherever needed.

 

the senators, like the penguins 25 years ago, deploy 4 forwards and 1 dman as their primary stance, in terms of skillset and risk/reward prioritization of the players on the ice.  that's fine, it worked for the penguins sometimes, and it works for the senators sometimes.  personally, i wouldn't build a team like that, and think defensemen THAT limited are a liability, no matter how good they are in one really specific area, but there it is.  

 

The stats say otherwise. They say it emphatically. Maybe in the strictest sense of the word, it's not defense, but it's not debatable that the Senators by far have better play when Karlsson is on the ice. They stay in the attacking zone more, and they stay in the defending zone less. He's a master of the breakout pass, meaning the Senators are able to clear the puck much more easily with him on the ice. When they're in the offensive zone, he's a master at possession. The end result? More chances for the Senators and fewer for the opposition. Call it whatever you want, but that's highly effective. It means more goals for Ottawa and fewer for their opponents. In fact, to make that point, here's the other article I referred to earlier: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fancy-stats/wp/2015/12/16/if-sidney-crosby-isnt-the-nhls-no-1-player-who-is/ The section about Karlsson is at the end of the article. It shows that the Senators get a far better percent of shots when Karlsson is on the ice (against the best players the opponents have) than when he's not (generally against the opponents' weaker players). But this part is particularly telling: "his 38.9 point shares — an estimate of the number of standings points contributed by a player — from 2011-12 to 2014-15 trail only Ovechkin’s (39.6). That gives him a resume that can stand up to any skater in the NHL, not just blueliners."

 

Plus, saying Karlsson just sits there isn't true either. The man is all over the place. He may be the best skater in the game today. Bobby Orr has even praised his skating ability. "The kid has wonderful speed. Great, great hockey sense, You get a kid who can skate like that and you let him go." Or, check this out: http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2015/3/21/8270993/erik-karlsson-skates-length-of-ice-in-three-seconds-and-scores He covered the length of the ice to score in just 3 seconds. That's not a guy that sits.

 

I don't care if you call what Karlsson does defense, attack, or whatever. Karlsson is a highly skilled player, and he knows how to use those skills. I'll take what he offers the Senators any day all day.

[JR Ewing]

what, pray, is the current concept of defense?

 

i suppose it must be my outdated concept of defense, but if my team has an ace dman that has been repeatedly called the best in the league, i'd want to lean on him for important defensive work.  would want that elite guy to be a stabilizing force when my team is on the ropes and needs to press through a hard push by the other team.  but.... up by one goal, 90 seconds left....karlsson sits.  vital penalty kill late in a period...karlsson sits.  heck, a faceoff deep in the senators' zone...karlsson generally sits.  he might be an extremely skilled player, but to my outdated concept of defense, he is a huge step down from the level of highly effective two-way defensemen.  two-way defensemen that are able to contribute whenever and wherever needed.

 

the senators, like the penguins 25 years ago, deploy 4 forwards and 1 dman as their primary stance, in terms of skillset and risk/reward prioritization of the players on the ice.  that's fine, it worked for the penguins sometimes, and it works for the senators sometimes.  personally, i wouldn't build a team like that, and think defensemen THAT limited are a liability, no matter how good they are in one really specific area, but there it is.  

Darryl Sutter has some insight which I find valuable: "The game’s changed. They think there’s defending in today’s game. Nah, it’s how much you have the puck. Teams that play around in their own zone think they’re defending but they’re generally getting scored on or taking face-offs and they need a goalie to stand on his head if that’s the way they play."

 

Dave Tippett weighs in similarly: "We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can’t move the puck. Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn’t defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he’s making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he’s only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."

 

His Scoring Chances Against is lowest on the team.

Late and close? Karlsson has the best defensive numbers on his team.

Penalty killing? Karlsson has by far the best numbers on his team, and it's not remotely close. His Corsi Against is 81.7 compared to an average of 96.5 for his teammates.

Karlsson is great at getting the puck to the other end of the ice, and there is tremendous (and for a very very long time underrated) defensive value there.

 

If he's so terrible defensively, then why don't the Sens give up a lot more chances while he's on the ice?

 

---

 

I love a good two-way defenseman, btw.

[JackStraw]

Darryl Sutter has some insight which I find valuable: "The game’s changed. They think there’s defending in today’s game. Nah, it’s how much you have the puck. Teams that play around in their own zone think they’re defending but they’re generally getting scored on or taking face-offs and they need a goalie to stand on his head if that’s the way they play."

 

Dave Tippett weighs in similarly: "We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can’t move the puck. Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn’t defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he’s making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he’s only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."

 

His Scoring Chances Against is lowest on the team.

Late and close? Karlsson has the best defensive numbers on his team.

Penalty killing? Karlsson has by far the best numbers on his team, and it's not remotely close. His Corsi Against is 81.7 compared to an average of 96.5 for his teammates.

Karlsson is great at getting the puck to the other end of the ice, and there is tremendous (and for a very very long time underrated) defensive value there.

 

If he's so terrible defensively, then why don't the Sens give up a lot more chances while he's on the ice?

 

---

 

I love a good two-way defenseman, btw.

 

 

This is why I started my campaign (hasn't gotten much traction yet, I admit) to change the name of the position. They don't call forwards, "offensemen", they call them forwards because of where they are positioned on the ice. Same with goalies in fact. In soccer, they don't call guys who play back, "defensemen", they call them "backs". They should do the same in hockey. "Defenseman" is an antiquated term.

[aziz]

The stats say otherwise. They say it emphatically. Maybe in the strictest sense of the word, it's not defense, but it's not debatable that the Senators by far have better play when Karlsson is on the ice. They stay in the attacking zone more, and they stay in the defending zone less. He's a master of the breakout pass, meaning the Senators are able to clear the puck much more easily with him on the ice. When they're in the offensive zone, he's a master at possession. The end result? More chances for the Senators and fewer for the opposition. Call it whatever you want, but that's highly effective. It means more goals for Ottawa and fewer for their opponents.

 

yes, no argument, the senators are able to carry play because of karlsson.  they are able to drive the puck forward and set up offensive zone possession, and ultimately get shots and score goals, to large extent because of karlsson's very high skillset and his willingness to take chances offensively.  the problem is that while the sens get their extra offensive zone time each game, karlsson's willingness to take chances offensively don't always work out, and when they don't work out, it's an odd man break the other way.  because he thinks and acts offense first.  the sens get extra zone time and a fair number of extra shots, but the other team gets 2 or 3 extreme opportunities each game.  it balances in the senators' favor (at least so far), overall, but to me it is playing with fire.  it'll work out over the course of a season, but you can't know it is going to work out this game.  you can only know that the bad guys will definitely get their opportunities, because you lean on a player that specifically gives them opportunities.  he is generally worth the trade off, but when the circumstances are not general but very specific, no thanks.  much better to find a way to push the offense without that push being explicitly at the expense of defensive coverage and decision making.  those are the truly awesome defensemen, the ones that can net 60+ points while also being defensively reliable and conscientious.  the chris prongers, the nick lidstroms, the scott niedermayers.  erik karlsson is not on the same list as those guys.  he is on a list with mike green, kris letang, sheldon souray, bryan mccabe.  you can argue he is better than any of them, and i wouldn't disagree, but that is the archetype.

 

the washington capitals could list ovechkin as a defenseman.  he could play the same game he always has, but start in the back on faceoffs, and skate with 3 other forwards.  i bet that 5 man unit would drive a ton of play.  they'd score a ton of goals.  they'd give up a ton of goals.  would probably balance out to their benefit.  would hate to go into game 7 of a playoff series with that plan, though, knowing it involves making risky plays that will backfire spectacularly a few times every game.

 

Plus, saying Karlsson just sits there isn't true either. The man is all over the place. He may be the best skater in the game today. Bobby Orr has even praised his skating ability.

 

no, i meant "sits" as in "...on the bench".  he doesn't kill penalties, he doesn't play in prevent situations.  he flies when he is on the ice, no doubt.

 

I don't care if you call what Karlsson does defense, attack, or whatever. Karlsson is a highly skilled player, and he knows how to use those skills. I'll take what he offers the Senators any day all day.

 

and that is really all that matters, you enjoy the product (frankly, i enjoy the product, too, because i think its a division rival that has a fatal and exploitable flaw ).  and, hey, it *does* work, in its way.

[aziz]

Dave Tippett weighs in similarly: "We had a player that was supposed to be a great, shut-down defenseman. He was supposedly the be-all, end-all of defensemen. But when you did analysis of him, you found out he was defending all the time because he can’t move the puck. Then we had another guy, who supposedly couldn’t defend a lick. Well, he was defending only 20 percent of the time because he’s making good plays out of our end. He may not be the strongest defender, but he’s only doing it 20 percent of the time. So the equation works out better the other way. I ended up trading the other defenseman."

 

i didn't say i preferred one-way defensive defensemen.  it is a position that needs to be both directions.  one-way in either direction is limited and limiting.

 

Late and close? Karlsson has the best defensive numbers on his team.

 

show me.  and include actual TOI.  every time i've seen a sens game where they had to withstand a late push, karlsson's ass is firmly on the end of the bench.  if the sens are down a goal with 30 seconds left, yeah, i bet his numbers are impressive.  if the sens are up a goal with 30 seconds left, he probably isn't playing.

 

Penalty killing? Karlsson has by far the best numbers on his team, and it's not remotely close. His Corsi Against is 81.7 compared to an average of 96.5 for his teammates.

 

huh?  karlsson averages less than a minute per game on the PK.  from there, any numbers he may have are from a tiny and useless sample.  

 

Karlsson is great at getting the puck to the other end of the ice, and there is tremendous (and for a very very long time underrated) defensive value there.

 

If he's so terrible defensively, then why don't the Sens give up a lot more chances while he's on the ice?

 

yes, no argument there.  but it is a balancing act, and i think the oscillations and uncertainty that style of play brings are not worth the tradeoffs.  you have a consistently increased ability to pressure offensively, but you also have spikes of defensive collapse.  those do bite the senators frequently.  middle of the season, ok, no big, shake it off and get the next one.  when you get into a playoff game, though, and it gets tight, when it gets close and hardfought and one mistake could be the difference in the series...well, you have a guy that you KNOW is going to make a mistake eventually, and he is literally playing half of the game.  his game is taking risks...and i just can't say i would want that involved when things start to really count.

 

my opinion, not saying he sucks.  just saying i'm not a fan of the style of play for the position.  it is far too one dimensional for me.  as are defensive pylons that focus exclusively on the other end.

[ScottM]

yes, no argument, the senators are able to carry play because of karlsson.  they are able to drive the puck forward and set up offensive zone possession, and ultimately get shots and score goals, to large extent because of karlsson's very high skillset and his willingness to take chances offensively.  the problem is that while the sens get their extra offensive zone time each game, karlsson's willingness to take chances offensively don't always work out, and when they don't work out, it's an odd man break the other way.  because he thinks and acts offense first.  the sens get extra zone time and a fair number of extra shots, but the other team gets 2 or 3 extreme opportunities each game.  it balances in the senators' favor (at least so far), overall, but to me it is playing with fire.  it'll work out over the course of a season, but you can't know it is going to work out this game.  you can only know that the bad guys will definitely get their opportunities, because you lean on a player that specifically gives them opportunities.  he is generally worth the trade off, but when the circumstances are not general but very specific, no thanks.  much better to find a way to push the offense without that push being explicitly at the expense of defensive coverage and decision making.  those are the truly awesome defensemen, the ones that can net 60+ points while also being defensively reliable and conscientious.  the chris prongers, the nick lidstroms, the scott niedermayers.  erik karlsson is not on the same list as those guys.  he is on a list with mike green, kris letang, sheldon souray, bryan mccabe.  you can argue he is better than any of them, and i wouldn't disagree, but that is the archetype.

 

I don't really have anything to add to that but to refer back to the stats given already and the quotes that JR gave already. I don't think you're going to see quite as many guys like the ones you mentioned as we used to, but on the flip side, we'll see more guys that play like Karlsson. The "defensive defenseman" mode will be what a guy adjusts to in order to extend his career, while the attacking defenseman will be the norm for the younger guys.

 

 

no, i meant "sits" as in "...on the bench".  he doesn't kill penalties, he doesn't play in prevent situations.  he flies when he is on the ice, no doubt.

 

My bad for misunderstaning. I thought you meant that he lingers in the offensive zone or leans in that direction. But again, I have to disagree to an extent. He does take the ice somewhat more often in offensive situations, but as the stats in the original article show, it's not as unbalanced as what many make it out to be. As for the penalty kill, the more I think about it, the more I don't want to see him increase penalty kill minutes, and it's not because I doubt his ability. If he plays the penalty regularly, one of two things will happen: 1) His already workhorse 28 minutes per game turns into a ridiculous 31 or 32 minutes or 2) His time at even strength and on the power play is cut. I don't want to see either of those things happen. I don't want him overworked, and I want him out there when he can have the best opportunity to create chances.

 

 

and that is really all that matters, you enjoy the product

 

Yes, I do enjoy the product, but that's not the most important aspect of this. I want my team to win whether it's in a exciting or boring way. Karlsson's play gives us winning chances and he does it in an exciting way. I like that combination, but the first part is far and away the most important part of it.

[aziz]

This is why I started my campaign (hasn't gotten much traction yet, I admit) to change the name of the position. They don't call forwards, "offensemen", they call them forwards because of where they are positioned on the ice. Same with goalies in fact. In soccer, they don't call guys who play back, "defensemen", they call them "backs". They should do the same in hockey. "Defenseman" is an antiquated term.

 

sure, but try to suggest a sweeper ought to start regularly pressing to the top of the opposing penalty box.

[JackStraw]

sure, but try to suggest a sweeper ought to start regularly pressing to the top of the opposing penalty box.

 

 

Obviously the relative sizes of the playing surfaces and the speed difference between running and skating result in different styles. But backs and midfielders (especially midfielders) still have to move the ball and contribute to offense.

 

If you're so down on Karlsson, what's your feeling about Ghost? At best he's likely to be a lesser version of Karlsson. But I think it's pretty obvious that he makes the Flyers a better team.

[JackStraw]

@aziz - Franz Beckenbauer isn't regarded as one of the greatest players of all time because he sat back and defended. He got involved in the offense, he controlled the game in much the same way that players like Karlsson do. That's what made him special.

[aziz]

If you're so down on Karlsson, what's your feeling about Ghost? At best he's likely to be a lesser version of Karlsson. But I think it's pretty obvious that he makes the Flyers a better team.

 

see, that's the thing:  ghost has been hugely responsible defensively.  for all of the offense he's been able to create, he's been able to do it without a ton of dangerous pinches, risky outlet passes, stick-handling as the last guy back.  really, that's what has impressed me the most, what i've seen of him has him thinking "safe" first, and then "go" second.  that is the exactly ideal mindset to have for a blueliner, imo, and it's something karlsson specifically doesn't have.  as a result, ghost may never hit karlsson's numbers, but he also isn't a game of swedish roulette every time he steps on the ice.  

 

as a side note, i used to be every bit as down on subban, for exactly the same reasons.  he has expanded his game in a way i didn't think possible, though.  he is still dangerous to both teams, but far far from how he used to be.  and far far from how karlsson is now.

[JackStraw]

see, that's the thing:  ghost has been hugely responsible defensively.  for all of the offense he's been able to create, he's been able to do it without a ton of dangerous pinches, risky outlet passes, stick-handling as the last guy back.  really, that's what has impressed me the most, what i've seen of him has him thinking "safe" first, and then "go" second.  that is the exactly ideal mindset to have for a blueliner, imo, and it's something karlsson specifically doesn't have.  as a result, ghost may never hit karlsson's numbers, but he also isn't a game of swedish roulette every time he steps on the ice.  

 

as a side note, i used to be every bit as down on subban, for exactly the same reasons.  he has expanded his game in a way i didn't think possible, though.  he is still dangerous to both teams, but far far from how he used to be.  and far far from how karlsson is now.

 

 

Well, we obviously have different impressions of these players. Karlsson's defense is much better than Ghost's right now. Of course Ghost is young and should improve. Then again, Karlsson is only 25, so...

[aziz]

@aziz - Franz Beckenbauer isn't regarded as one of the greatest players of all time because he sat back and defended. He got involved in the offense, he controlled the game in much the same way that players like Karlsson do. That's what made him special.

 

i don't follow the game, i have no idea who that guy is.  played in highschool, but really stopped caring after that.  is it a thing for sweepers to jump into the middle of the offense these days?  seems like a bad idea to have him requently forward of your midfielders.

[aziz]

Karlsson's defense is much better than Ghost's right now.

 

i.....ok.  gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

[ScottM]

Well, we obviously have different impressions of these players. Karlsson's defense is much better than Ghost's right now. Of course Ghost is young and should improve. Then again, Karlsson is only 25, so...

 

I'll refer back to something I said in my original post. If Karlsson wins the Norris this season (which seems certain barring disaster), he'll be only the third player to win it three times before turning 26. Bobby Orr and Denis Potvin are as good of company as any defenseman could dream of having.

[ScottM]

i.....ok.  gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

 

Interestingly enough, while 46.3% of Karlsson's zone starts are defensive, only 39.2% of Ghost's are. Hockey Reference credits Karlsson with 2.0 defensive point shares, and Ghost with just 1.1. Karlsson's takeaway/giveaway ratio is significantly better too.

[JackStraw]

i don't follow the game, i have no idea who that guy is.  played in highschool, but really stopped caring after that.  is it a thing for sweepers to jump into the middle of the offense these days?  seems like a bad idea to have him requently forward of your midfielders.

 

 

Well, just google Franz Beckenbauer. One of the greatest players ever. You mentioned the role of sweepers, Beckenbauer basically defined the modern role of that position.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Beckenbauer

[JackStraw]

i.....ok.  gonna have to agree to disagree on that.

 

Fair enough.

[JackStraw]

Interestingly enough, while 46.3% of Karlsson's zone starts are defensive, only 39.2% of Ghost's are. Hockey Reference credits Karlsson with 2.0 defensive point shares, and Ghost with just 1.1. Karlsson's takeaway/giveaway ratio is significantly better too.

 

Ghost is getting pretty sheltered minutes right now. He'll get better as he gains experience. Honestly, he's been better than I expected him to be in his own end.

[ScottM]

Ghost is getting pretty sheltered minutes right now. He'll get better as he gains experience. Honestly, he's been better than I expected him to be in his own end.

 

I'm not trying to bag on him. I'm just pointing out the fact that he's not yet where Karlsson is. I think Ghost will be perfectly fine.

[JackStraw]

I'm not trying to bag on him. I'm just pointing out the fact that he's not yet where Karlsson is. I think Ghost will be perfectly fine.

 

 

Agreed. And I didn't take it that way.

[JagerMeister]

I think the comments regarding Karlssons incompetence defensively is heavily overdramatized. However, I think its reasonable to say that his defense is not in the tier of the other best defenseman of the game. Keith, Weber, and Suter for example.