If Karlsson is completly missing a component of being an "all round defenseman" in penalty killing, should he really win that award?
I say no.
You guys keep brushing off the PK thing and shove it off like no big deal... truth is, it is a big deal. It's part of the game, one of the most crucial/important parts of the game... and Karlsson does not participate in it.
To me it's a big negative and I would not vote for him because of it because Karlsson does not truly represent what the award is.
If you're absent and missing a key component something, you can't be "the best overall" at that thing... it's impossible.
I think if his impact on winning or losing games is greater then everyone else's, then he is the best all round at his position. PK is what, 5% of a game?
Should Malkin not win the Hart because he doesn't play PK? If PK was so important, I think it would preclude him from being the most valuable player in the league would it not?
I guess by your definition Rod Langway doesn't deserve his 2 Trophies.
I think if his impact on winning or losing games is greater then everyone else's, then he is the best all round at his position. PK is what, 5% of a game?
Should Malkin not win the Hart because he doesn't play PK? If PK was so important, I think it would preclude him from being the most valuable player in the league would it not?
I guess by your definition Rod Langway doesn't deserve his 2 Trophies.
Further to his definition, if a defenseman scored 150 points in a season and led the league in scoring by a substantial amount but he didn't PK, he wouldn't win the Norris because he is "completly missing a component" of being the best all-around defenseman.
This whole discussion has become boring, it's running in circles, while both camps brought more and even more useless statistics. This is a fundamental problem and noone will change his mind.
We have to wait until yearly awards celebration.
Long experience says Norris Trophy is given by reputation to some extent and not to very high-scoring d's, Karlsson might be exceptional. We will see.
Further to his definition, if a defenseman scored 150 points in a season and led the league in scoring by a substantial amount but he didn't PK, he wouldn't win the Norris because he is "completly missing a component" of being the best all-around defenseman.
His words, not mine.
Does Karlsson have 150 points?... has any defenseman gotten 150 points in a season?
You're talking extradorinary numbers with 150...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Micklebot
I think if his impact on winning or losing games is greater then everyone else's, then he is the best all round at his position. PK is what, 5% of a game?
Should Malkin not win the Hart because he doesn't play PK? If PK was so important, I think it would preclude him from being the most valuable player in the league would it not?
I guess by your definition Rod Langway doesn't deserve his 2 Trophies.
Come on...
Are you really diminishing the value of a successful PK to a measly "5%" of a hockey game?
Does Karlsson have 150 points?... has any defenseman gotten 150 points in a season?
You're talking extradorinary numbers with 150...
Come on...
Are you really diminishing the value of a successful PK to a measly "5%" of a hockey game?
Little disingenous no?
So Karlsson beating the next highest scoring defenseman by 26 points (only 3 players ever have beaten the next highest scoring defenseman by 20 points: Orr, Coffey, Potvin) is not extraordinary numbers?
What is your threshold for extraordinary numbers which would negate the penalty you impose upon players for not PKing?
If it's not a point per game performance and being 26 points ahead of the next place guy, I'd love to hear what it is.
So Karlsson beating the next highest scoring defenseman by 26 points (only 3 players ever have beaten the next highest scoring defenseman by 20 points: Orr, Coffey, Potvin) is not extraordinary numbers?
What is your threshold for extraordinary numbers which would negate the penalty you impose upon players for not PKing?
If it's not a point per game performance and being 26 points ahead of the next place guy, I'd love to hear what it is.
Does it matter what I say??
You're grounded firmly in your opinion and nothing will change your mind.
Contrary, I don't feel Karlsson has done enough to be given the Norris over Chara or Weber... No matter how much you dismiss PKing to team success or shout out "26 point gap"...
As I have said before, if Karlsson replicates a season like this, than I could consider it... but right now, if I had a vote, Weber/Chara is where my vote would go... I also believe those who vote will go the same way.
That's not to say if Karlsson wins it, he doesn't deserve it... of course he would!!
However, in my eyes... he has yet to do enough and me assigning some arbitrary number won't change anything for you, or myself.
Does Karlsson have 150 points?... has any defenseman gotten 150 points in a season?
You're talking extradorinary numbers with 150...
Come on...
Are you really diminishing the value of a successful PK to a measly "5%" of a hockey game?
Little disingenous no?
No more disingenuous then saying not playing on the PK means you can't be the best all round defensman.
A successful PK will always be about a system employed by 5 players and a goalie. Not just 1 defensman on the ice.
I don't see the point in going any further with you, as we disagree on one of the principles of the discussion, whether PK is a requirement, or just a factor. More an opinion issue, and I can't say either is wrong, but it makes debating Karlsson's merits for the award pointless when you start from that place.
You're grounded firmly in your opinion and nothing will change your mind.
Contrary, I don't feel Karlsson has done enough to be given the Norris over Chara or Weber... No matter how much you dismiss PKing to team success or shout out "26 point gap"...
As I have said before, if Karlsson replicates a season like this, than I could consider it... but right now, if I had a vote, Weber/Chara is where my vote would go... I also believe those who vote will go the same way.
That's not to say if Karlsson wins it, he doesn't deserve it... of course he would!!
However, in my eyes... he has yet to do enough and me assigning some arbitrary number won't change anything for you, or myself.
Well essentially what you're saying is that you agree that a player does not need to PK to win the Norris (see 150 point argument).
The question becomes, at what point does that become true? I'd argue that a player doing better than his competitors offensively by a margin that has only been accomplished by Orr, Coffey, and Potvin, whilst playing a 20 ES minutes a night against top lines and doing (relative to their teammates) a better job than Chara, and nominally almost as good a job as Chara (difference likely due to better goaltending and overall skill of his linemates), leading all defenseman in takeaways by a significant margin, among the intangible offense he brings makes up for the fact that he doesn't PK.
As I have said before, if Karlsson replicates a season like this, than I could consider it...
Yeah, I snipped out the rest of your post. I just wanted to point out that this is ridiculous logic. Reputation should not matter at all; him doing the same (or better) next season does not change the results of this season at all.
The trophy description explicitly says that it's "throughout the season", not seasons or over several years. Granted, the voters don't exactly follow the description all the time but that's a failure on their part; not Karlsson's. Yeah, Weber got shafted last year. It doesn't mean he should get a pity Norris for being second best this year...
Karlsson is not "completely missing" the PKing component. That would mean 0 SH TOI per game, which is not the case.
And if people keep wanting to bring up the idea that you have to take into account multiple years when giving the Norris, well, last season he had 110 minutes of SH TOI and was on the ice for 4 powerplay goals against.
EDIT: That's not to say he's on the same level in terms of PKing as a Chara or Weber. But PKing is not a non-existent part of his game. So then you have to ask whether the level to which Chara and Weber outclass Karlsson defensively and on the penalty kill outstrips the level to which Karlsson outclasses them offensively. And 26 points is an absolutely massive gap. Only 3 defenceman have achieved a 20 point lead and they are Orr, Coffey, and Potvin.
