An Interesting Article Defending Karlsson's Defense

[Polaris922]

@ScottM

Taken up that fight for Letang many times... And I agree with you. How can they say these aren't among the best defensemen in the league when all the stats say what they do? Just because the defensive side of the puck is so limited thanks to their ability to skate the puck and make great passes? Somehow it's a negative for their defense when they enable offense? I'm with you. I only WISH I could do what those guys do when I play.

[ScottM]

@ScottM

Taken up that fight for Letang many times... And I agree with you. How can they say these aren't among the best defensemen in the league when all the stats say what they do? Just because the defensive side of the puck is so limited thanks to their ability to skate the puck and make great passes? Somehow it's a negative for their defense when they enable offense? I'm with you. I only WISH I could do what those guys do when I play.

 

Exactly. And I have a feeling that Jets fans would say the same thing about Byfuglien. In the end, I'm not so sure this discussion really has as much to do with one player as it does the way the game is played now. As JR pointed out with some of his quotes earlier, the game is changing. We may be seeing the next step in the revolution that Bobby Orr started.

[JackStraw]

I think you have to ask yourself what exactly do people mean when they say a guy isn't good defensively? Comparing Karlsson to guys like Chara or Weber is pretty meaningless. Those guys are a lot bigger and bring a physical element that Karlsson can't bring. But if Chara and Weber were 5-11 and 190 something, neither of them would be close to the player that Karlsson is, in any aspect of the game. The only real knock you can make on Karlsson (other than lack of size) is that because of his playing style he's more prone to get caught up ice. That's a risk that teams are obviously willing to take. It's why Orr played for years with Dallas Smith- a steady, no-risk, stay at home guy. Criticizing a player for playing the way the coach wants him to play is silly.

[ScottM]

I think you have to ask yourself what exactly do people mean when they say a guy isn't good defensively? Comparing Karlsson to guys like Chara or Weber is pretty meaningless. Those guys are a lot bigger and bring a physical element that Karlsson can't bring. But if Chara and Weber were 5-11 and 190 something, neither of them would be close to the player that Karlsson is, in any aspect of the game. The only real knock you can make on Karlsson (other than lack of size) is that because of his playing style he's more prone to get caught up ice. That's a risk that teams are obviously willing to take. It's why Orr played for years with Dallas Smith- a steady, no-risk, stay at home guy. Criticizing a player for playing the way the coach wants him to play is silly.

 

And honestly, that's the kind of partner Karlsson has in Methot. Methot isn't explosive offensively by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm not afraid he's going to blunder. Those two make a good match, and Karlsson acknowledged Methot's role in helping him win the Norris last season.

[aziz]

I think the comments regarding Karlssons incompetence defensively is heavily overdramatized.

 

while i don't think he is particularly good at the traditional positional defensive game, that really isn't my thing.  for me, it's his choices that bother me.  if there is a 50-50 puck, where winning the 50-50 pushes the offense, and losing the 50-50 results in a heavily odd man break the other way, karlsson will dive in a give it a run.  nick lidstrom would have backed off, stayed in a safe position, and then worked to remove the puck from the carrier and go the other way.  safe first, then offense.  karlsson will win an abnormally high number of those challenges, but of course he is going to lose some, and those lost battles turn into 3-1's against.  the decision to take that kind of risk as the last line of "defense" before the goalie is not something i would want a player on my team to make.  like i said, over the course of an 82 game season, you might very well end up with more goals for than against because of it...but you get to that point of the season where one goal changes everything, and that's a roll of the dice you don't have to take.  shouldn't take.

 

that's the thing with the greens and letangs and mccabes and karlssons:  the priorities with which they approach the position.  the best of the best stay safe, and then find a way to be dangerous.  the one-way offensive guys start off dangerous, and for both teams.  there are enough random factors in the game that you don't need one of the two guys between the puck and your goalie putting all their chips on black again and again the whole game through.  at least not when a playoff series is on the line.

 

like i said earlier, pk subban played a very similar game his first several seasons in the league.  over the last two years or so, though, he has bought into the idea that it isn't ok to gamble that hard all the time, and has moved himself towards the lidstrom-esque ideal.  he's far away from it still, but looks to understand the value in that balanced approach.  if karlsson were to come to the same realization, his point totals might drop by 15%, but his +/- would sky rocket, while his goalies' gaa would shrink.  i have to think that ends up benefiting the entire team.  he really is solely responsible for 2 breakaways per night right now, imagine how the sens would do if that ceased to be the case?

[ScottM]

like i said earlier, pk subban played a very similar game his first several seasons in the league.  over the last two years or so, though, he has bought into the idea that it isn't ok to gamble that hard all the time, and has moved himself towards the lidstrom-esque ideal.  he's far away from it still, but looks to understand the value in that balanced approach.  if karlsson were to come to the same realization, his point totals might drop by 15%, but his +/- would sky rocket, while his goalies' gaa would shrink.  i have to think that ends up benefiting the entire team.  he really is solely responsible for 2 breakaways per night right now, imagine how the sens would do if that ceased to be the case?

 

Again, the stats show that with Karlsson on the ice, the Sens do a lot better in percentage of shots for. Karlsson is playing to his strengths, and that's exactly what the Senators need him to do. Besides, the Senators' offense runs through Karlsson when he's on the ice. If his point production dropped 15%, you might as well put a fork in Ottawa. It would also mean the point production of other players would drop. The team would no longer be a serious playoff contender.