The fact that Johnson, Hedman and Garrison are on this list but Phaneuf, Timonen and Tyutin aren't is just sad.
I won't make a case for Johnson or Hedman, but you are wrong on Garrison. The only thing he is missing is pedigree. Meaning, he hasn't done what he has done for a long time yet. Even so, his _ability_ in the Dzone from what he has done cannot be denied.
I think this article made people take notice, only to have him follow up with _another_ strong defensive season in FLA on their top pair...
A little shocked Enstrom isn't on there, he's essentially paired with a 4th forward.
I would take him in my top pairing over most of these big slow 'defensive' guys on this list.He does more for a blueline than a blocked shot or a big hit
I won't make a case for Johnson or Hedman, but you are wrong on Garrison. The only thing he is missing is pedigree. Meaning, he hasn't done what he has done for a long time yet. Even so, his _ability_ in the Dzone from what he has done cannot be denied.
I think this article made people take notice, only to have him follow up with _another_ strong defensive season in FLA on their top pair...
Garrison is good defensively, I just don't think he's better than those other guys.
And that article's methodology is a joke. Just simply looking at GA ON/60 without context (e.x. GA OFF/60) is silly. Stats like that are so heavily influenced by team defensive play and perhaps most importantly, goaltending. Looking at 2010-2011 goaltending stats, only 5 of those guys (Carlson, Schultz, Grossman, Stuart, and White, worth noting that only one of those guys, Carlson, was in the top 15) were on teams whose starting goaltender had a below average (16th or worse) SV%, and only 2 of those guys were on teams whose starting goaltender was in the bottom 3rd (21st or worse) in SV% (Stuart and White, 24th and 27th). It's not a coincidence that almost all of the guys on the list had good starting goaltenders.
7th in blocked shots
T-13th in hits
Played the toughest minutes of any defenseman on the Oilers (17:28 EV, 3:22 PK) and still managed a +4
Not to trash on Smid since he's solid, but you'd probably want better stats than those to make an argument. Toughest minutes out of any defenseman on the Oilers doesn't mean much considering their entire d-unit is pretty subpar. Blocked shots and hits don't really say anything about defensive play either. Douglas Murray is constantly near the top of the league in hits and blocked shots, and he belongs no where near this list.
Garrison is good defensively, I just don't think he's better than those other guys.
And that article's methodology is a joke. Just simply looking at GA ON/60 without context (e.x. GA OFF/60) is silly. Stats like that are so heavily influenced by team defensive play and perhaps most importantly, goaltending. Looking at 2010-2011 goaltending stats, only 5 of those guys (Carlson, Schultz, Grossman, Stuart, and White, worth noting that only one of those guys, Carlson, was in the top 15) were on teams whose starting goaltender had a below average (16th or worse) SV%, and only 2 of those guys were on teams whose starting goaltender was in the bottom 3rd (21st or worse) in SV% (Stuart and White, 24th and 27th). It's not a coincidence that almost all of the guys on the list had good starting goaltenders.
Wasn't it a balance of a number of stats including GA ON/60, CORSI and Qualcomp?
Also, couldn't it be argued that having strong defensive defencemen must help goalies' save percentage.
I think the Canucks are heavily favoured from their team overall having a statistically dominant season in 2010-2011 on that list for sure (led in a lot of categories, more than most President Trophy winners). Looking at that list, there's a lot of names which I think fit the defensive defencemen mold very well, enough that I think it's a good starting point. You have to control for players having an abnormally good year and stuff, but a similar comparison over a number of years should give you a good picture of the best defensive defencemen.
Wasn't it a balance of a number of stats including GA ON/60, CORSI and Qualcomp?
Also, couldn't it be argued that having strong defensive defencemen must help goalies' save percentage.
I think the Canucks are heavily favoured from their team overall having a statistically dominant season in 2010-2011 on that list for sure (led in a lot of categories, more than most President Trophy winners). Looking at that list, there's a lot of names which I think fit the defensive defencemen mold very well, enough that I think it's a good starting point. You have to control for players having an abnormally good year and stuff, but a similar comparison over a number of years should give you a good picture of the best defensive defencemen.
Also, Garrison was in Florida at the time that list was written up.
Also, Garrison was in Florida at the time that list was written up.
I know. Just pointing out that Hamhuis, Bieksa, Ehrhoff and Edler all being top 30 defensive players is a large reflection of the overall statistical dominance of the Canucks in 2010-11.
They actually don't use CORSI for that list, but if you look at Garrison's CORSI stats, he ranked very well last two years.
Not to trash on Smid since he's solid, but you'd probably want better stats than those to make an argument. Toughest minutes out of any defenseman on the Oilers doesn't mean much considering their entire d-unit is pretty subpar. Blocked shots and hits don't really say anything about defensive play either. Douglas Murray is constantly near the top of the league in hits and blocked shots, and he belongs no where near this list.
Not sure what else I could include
49.3% offensive zone start with a 52.6% zone finish.
1.366 Quality of Competition(QoC) (1.101 Rel QoC), which means he faces top opposition, similar to what guys like Keith and Seabrook do.
-0.6 Rel Corsi, which means more shots go towards his net than the opposition's net, but not by much.
Hard to make a convincing case for a defensive defenseman
7th in blocked shots
T-13th in hits
Played the toughest minutes of any defenseman on the Oilers (17:28 EV, 3:22 PK) and still managed a +4
Trying to be as objective as possible...
- A lot of blocked shots isn't necessarily good. A defenseman who blocks a lot of shots usually does so because they're allowing a lot of shots, and thus the puck is spending a lot of time at the wrong end of the ice.
- A lot of hits are somewhat similar. It's illegal to hit someone who doesn't have the puck (at least, if they didn't have it very recently), so by definition, by having a lot of hits, you're saying "I didn't have the puck very often". Similar to blocking shots - it's better than nothing if the other team has the puck, but it's still much preferable to have the puck in the first place and force the other team to block shots and throw hits.
I'm not saying Ladislav Smid is bad, by any means. He had a very good season, showed notable improvement, and there is reason for optimism moving forward:
Quote:
As a whole the blue line is still an utter disaster and it would appear that Tambellini has no clue as to how to fix it but there were a couple of very pleasant surprises on the blue line this season in the form of Ladislav Smid and Jeff Petry. Both had shown that they belonged in the NHL but their progression this season was quite impressive. Smid established himself as a true top pairing defenceman and Petry went from a part-time NHLer to permanent fixture on the Oilers blue line. With the departure of Tom Gilbert at the trade deadline, Perty and Smid finished first and third on the Oilers blue line in ice time per game, playing against the best the opponent had and more often than not ]coming out on the right side of the equation.
...just some notes on why Smid probably isn't legitimately in the discussion for top-20 defensive dmen.
- A lot of blocked shots isn't necessarily good. A defenseman who blocks a lot of shots usually does so because they're allowing a lot of shots, and thus the puck is spending a lot of time at the wrong end of the ice.
- A lot of hits are somewhat similar. It's illegal to hit someone who doesn't have the puck (at least, if they didn't have it very recently), so by definition, by having a lot of hits, you're saying "I didn't have the puck very often". Similar to blocking shots - it's better than nothing if the other team has the puck, but it's still much preferable to have the puck in the first place and force the other team to block shots and throw hits.
I'm not saying Ladislav Smid is bad, by any means. He had a very good season, showed notable improvement, and there is reason for optimism moving forward:
...just some notes on why Smid probably isn't legitimately in the discussion for top-20 defensive dmen.
Wow This is just so wrong and bad at the same time.
We are talking about the better D-man in the league who defend their zone the best when the opposition have controll of the puck comming in their zone or in controll of the puck while in there zone.
A good defensive D-man does exactly this.
He blocks a lot of shots.
He lays out big hits.
He strips the puck from the opposition.
Forces turnovers.
Guards the front of the net.
Once he has the puck he makes the 1st play to get it out of his zone.
Also it's the team allowing a lot of shots not the D-man in the defensive zone.
Below is one of the worst statments that i have ever read.
You say.....A defenseman who blocks a lot of shots usually does so because they're allowing a lot of shots.
It's not the D-man that are allowing a lot of shots.It's more the forwards who have lost the puck in the offensive zone.D-man have to play their positions.
Better learn about and watch more hockey.
Not sure what else I could include
49.3% offensive zone start with a 52.6% zone finish.
1.366 Quality of Competition(QoC) (1.101 Rel QoC), which means he faces top opposition, similar to what guys like Keith and Seabrook do.
-0.6 Rel Corsi, which means more shots go towards his net than the opposition's net, but not by much.
What you just provided is fine. My point was, the 3 statistics you pointed earlier don't say anything. Hits and blocked shots aren't great indicators of defensive play. And playing the toughest minutes in Edmonton doesn't say much either.
What does winning the Norris this season got to do with being one of the top 20 defensive only D-man.
Any hockey fan knows that Karlsson is not in the top 20 defensive Dman in the league.
I believe people are misunderstanding what the OP is asking in the thread.
I believe people are misunderstanding what the OP is asking in the thread.
I think you're misunderstanding the use of sarcasm.
On that note, the whole "where's Karlsson" bit is getting really old. It's been said a number of times in this thread, and it's even worse considering a lot of people who are saying it are Flames fans.
What does winning the Norris this season got to do with being one of the top 20 defensive only D-man.
Any hockey fan knows that Karlsson is not in the top 20 defensive Dman in the league.
I believe people are misunderstanding what the OP is asking in the thread.
Kuba's play improved by leaps and bounds, and Karlsson also happened.
You say his play improved by leaps and bounds, but what is that based on, other than his +/- and point totals?
As I stated in that post... The Senators took 520 shots for and allowed 505 shots against with Kuba on the ice, in 2009-2010. They took 50.7% of the shots.
The next season, in 2010-2011, they took 653 shots and allowed 630. That's a percentage of 50.9%.
If Kuba's play improved leaps and bounds, why did the Senators control the puck at about the same rate? Where are these improvements, other than in the form of shooting percentages, which have been proven for years to be highly variable and not something a player can control?
Quote:
Originally Posted by overpass
Can you present evidence for your assumptions that 1) goalies are 100% responsible for save percentages and 2) skaters are 0% responsible for quality of shots taken and allowed? Both assumptions ring false to anyone who has played hockey. They may be useful simplifying assumptions for the majority of NHL players but are surely not universal hockey truths.
And can you explain to me why Bobby Orr's career +597 in the regular season, including league-leading totals in six of seven seasons, is meaningless?
I'm not saying that shot quality doesn't matter... but it's been proven that if there are any effects a player can have on the quality of shots taken (both for and against), they're so small that it's completely safe to ignore them. Here's a better explanation:
Some players have a higher on-ice shooting percentage than others. (On-ice shooting percentage is the team's shooting percentage with that player on the ice.) Even including the player's own shooting percentage, four years of data only identifies 10% of players as having unambiguously high or low on-ice shooting percentages (see comments section). We already said that some players have higher shooting percentages than others, so remove the players' own shots and the spread shrinks. Remove the tendency of good shooters to play together, and it looks like over multiple seasons we see only a few top playmakers improving their teammates' shooting.
There are basically a handful of players who have demonstrated any sort of ability to affect the shooting percentage of their teammates - seeing Do playmakers drive shooting percentage shows the list includes Henrik Sedin, Joe Thornton, and Pavel Datsyuk as having the 3 largest effects, which are minimal at best. Even quality playmakers like Giroux and Crosby haven't shown enough ability to drive teammates' shooting percentage - at least, enough that it is notable through the statistical noise/randomness.
As for goalies, well, look at goaltenders who have changed teams:
EV shots against
Goals Allowed
EV sv%
Luongo in Florida
7337
517
0.9295
Luongo in Vancouver
8430
592
0.9298
Lehtonen in Atlanta
4693
3520
0.9250
Lehtonen in Dallas
3263
239
0.9268
Vokoun in Florida
6334
445
0.9297
Vokoun in Nashville*
5299
368
0.9306
*Vokoun notably exploded in 2002-2003, being consistently below average before then and consistently above average since, so that's when I started tabulating. I don't claim to know why, but at age 26 he took a huge leap towards being the goaltender he is today. It may seem like I'm intentionally manipulating the numbers, but we're trying to compare team effects, not goaltender development.
I don't have statistics from the 1970s so I can't comment on Bobby Orr at all... But I would suspect that because he was a fantastic player, his team strongly out shot their opponents when he was on the ice, and as such, were much more likely to create goals than allow them. Just like any other player - the correlation between goals for/against and shots for/against (at even strength, where a vast majority of goals that affect +/- happen) is strong over a large enough sample size. The problem is that 82 games isn't a large enough sample size; hence results like Marek Malik/Tom Preissing leading the league or being fantastic in +/-, Kuba's monsterous jump, etc.
I seriously cannot believe that Hedman made the top 20... Every single time I've watched him play, he's stood out as one of his team's worst defensive players. I don't care about the statistics people bring up, I know his elevated TOI makes him stand out somewhat but all I can say is EYES DON'T LIE!!! Hedman is atrocious defensively!!!!!!! There was a game in particular last year where he was getting dangled out of his jock by Mr. Band-Aid Ales Hemsky, almost every time he stepped on the ice. I was like WTF THIS IS A SECOND OVERALL PICK?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Anyways, his inclusion on this list makes me go:
x 1,000,000
Smid******>>>>Hedman RIGHT NOW, Hedman will most definitely be better in a couple years though.
I think Braydon Coburn is overrated, as well as Duncan Keith if we're just talking about last year.
These lists are so difficult because the players that truly excel at defence generally are overlooked around the league. I'm shocked Smid, Orpik, and Scuderi didn't make the list (although Scuderi was at least an HM). I also wouldn't say Garrison is even the Canucks' best D defensively.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluesman91
This thread quickly got flooded with Sens fans screaming Karlsson. How delusional can you all be?
Literally one Sens' fan has posted that Karlsson deserves to be in the top 20.
As to "How delusional can all [one of him]" is, his argument would have some merit if he were backing it up with statistics and/or analysis. It's been re-iterated a million times, but the principle all originates from the classic basic concept: it's hard for the opposition to score if the other team has the puck. The ability to clear the zone and begin the break-out is also an important part of defense.
I vividly recall Volchenkov in his Ottawa days battling for the puck in the D-zone and immediately whipping it around the boards when he'd dig it out. The perfect setup for the other team to grab the puck at the wall and move to the point for a shot. Volchy looked great at D when he'd come flying out of the corner and hurl himself in front of a 100mph slap-shot, but he created that situation himself.
It's also not much help when a defenceman can't keep the puck in the offensive end to save their life, allowing the opposing team to either blow right past with the puck or clear the zone with ease. That puts a team back on the defensive, increasingly the likelihood they'll be scored on. In essence, defensive proficiency is a player's ability to decrease the chance their team will give up a goal.
I still wouldn't put Karlsson on the list, but the argument for ranking more two-way defencemen in the top 20 has some credit.
You say his play improved by leaps and bounds, but what is that based on, other than his +/- and point totals?
As I stated in that post... The Senators took 520 shots for and allowed 505 shots against with Kuba on the ice, in 2009-2010. They took 50.7% of the shots.
You could tell by watching the games, man. I don't deny that the Senators played better as a whole (I could tell that from watching the games too!), but you'll notice that Kuba had one of the most significant turnarounds of all the Sens players.
There's no chance he gets the contract he got this summer after a season like 09-10.
