I thought Petro was probably the best player on the ice in the Blues/Sharks game.
I don't get to watch Karlsson much, so I'm not gonna throw my hat in as a hater on him, but I will say: Unless he is as great in every aspect of the game as Petro is, I'd say Petro is the better player. I'll take the well rounded player over the specialist.
Maybe Petro was ok or good relative to the rest of the game, but he wasn't good enough by my standards. He needs to be better in all aspects of the game next game. Just being a steady influence isn't good enough; the Blues need him to control the pace of the game and gain momentum when he's out there.
Really? Prust didn't have a breakway at all. Karlsson had to come from the other side of the ice but he was never behind Prust at all. It was a good play but also one you'd expect a pretty good skating defenseman to make. It's also a little hard to tell but Prust might have gotten that chance because Karlsson tried to keep the puck in but it bounced off of him towards the middle of the ice.
I'm pretty sure Prust was well behind him when Karlsson was on the offensive-blueline? Maybe I'm wrong, anyone else care to chime in? In any event, there aren't a lot of defenseman in the league who would have caught Prust there.
Quote:
I thought he was beat along the boards several times, but maybe I'm lending too much weight to an occurrence or two, I dunno. I seem to remember Dubinsky beating him down the boards easily a few times because he didn't maintain his positioning very well. At least one of those times was right before his bad giveaway in front of the net...whole play started because Karlsson's positioning on Dubinsky coming down the boards was poor and Dubinsky just muscled past him easily and Karlsson's partner had to step up to keep Dubinsky from easily walking in on Anderson
He's not terrible at defense but I think a lot of Sens fans think he's better than he really is.
On the other hand, plenty of time for him to improve that as well
For clarity, when you say beat him down the boards, do you mean beat him to the outside? If so, that's just how Karlsson plays. He'll let you have the outside every single time: he will not commit to you body-on-body if you are trying to go to the outside.
Rather, he'll give you that lane but ensure you can't possibly cut into the middle by reaching out his stick as far out as he can and go for a poke check/angling off. Once you're out of room and in the corner (or behind the net if you go that route) he will then commit and try to steal the puck from you via puck-battle (this is a huge reason why he has so many takeaways).
It's not a traditional way of playing defense - but it's very effective. I can definitely understand fans of other teams finding this unusual. You'll see it a ton this series.
Maybe Petro was ok or good relative to the rest of the game, but he wasn't good enough by my standards. He needs to be better in all aspects of the game next game. Just being a steady influence isn't good enough; the Blues need him to control the pace of the game and gain momentum when he's out there.
I thought he clearly did that. His decision making led to a few prolonged moments of pressure, and Niemi robbed him of a goal in the second. His ability to read the correct play at his age is hard to find a comparison to. I would say Lidstrom, but I don't want to open that can of worms.
I'm pretty sure Prust was well behind him when Karlsson was on the offensive-blueline? Maybe I'm wrong, anyone else care to chime in? In any event, there aren't a lot of defenseman in the league who would have caught Prust there.
It was a good play but he wasn't exactly playing catchup, he just had to cover the distance across the ice. But you are right, it probably takes a good skating defenseman to make that play, it just wasn't a "wow" play to me. As it happened real time, I didn't think Prust was actually going to get a chance because he didn't have enough of a head start and Karlsson had the angle to him
Quote:
For clarity, when you say beat him down the boards, do you mean beat him to the outside? If so, that's just how Karlsson plays. He'll let you have the outside every single time: he will not commit to you body-on-body if you are trying to go to the outside.
Wow was I ever wrong, thanks for the link. As I said, still impressive skating but definitely my bad on the lead I said he had.
Quote:
It was a good play but he wasn't exactly playing catchup, he just had to cover the distance across the ice. But you are right, it probably takes a good skating defenseman to make that play, it just wasn't a "wow" play to me. As it happened real time, I didn't think Prust was actually going to get a chance because he didn't have enough of a head start and Karlsson had the angle to him
As for this play, Karlsson could have played it better but he still forced Dubi to the outside and didn't give him much of an angle to drive the net (Foligno on the backcheck helped as well).
I don't really have a problem with this play - could have been better though no question, but not worth criticizing as a bad defensive play IMHO, but the giveaway that followed was certainly atrocious.
As for this play, Karlsson could have played it better but he still forced Dubi to the outside and didn't give him much of an angle to drive the net (Foligno on the backcheck helped as well).
I don't really have a problem with this play - could have been better though no question, but not worth criticizing as a bad defensive play IMHO, but the giveaway that followed was certainly atrocious.
Eh, I mean Dubinsky had room to cut to the net and it was Kuba coming over that kept him from walking in on Anderson. I mean, great that Kuba covered for Karlsson, and also great that Ottawa had players back to prevent Dubinsky from having a passing option before he went behind the net, but I know if a Rangers defenseman made that play I would have been cringing.
But again, Karlsson's not bad defensively, and he's not really a Byfuglian type that just aimlessly roams around the ice wherever he wants to. He could stand to improve some things but I guess the only reason I even bring it up is that I feel like there's a lot of black and white to this argument...some people think he's terrible, other people think he's great, and he's probably more somewhere in the middle
yeah, it should be obvious the only positives are offensive, and most of the negatives are defensive. the only ones who don't see that, are sens fans. it makes you wonder. but then anyone with a memory will remember that you guys traded Hossa for Heatley, and consider Spezza top 10 something... oh and the goaltending
Aren't all fans a little bit homers though? And in all fairness, Spezza could continue being top 5 in scoring every year and everyone would still say he's not a top 10 centre.
Players like him annoy me, and the fact that he's a front-runner for the Norris trophy makes me want to gag.
Yeah, let's give the best DEFENSE man trophy to the best Offensive D man that doesn't play great DEFENSE.
So dumb
Although I think he is capable in the defensive end, I agree to a certain extent. Chris Pronger had more time on ice shorthanded than Karlsson this year, and I think that for a defense man to be nominated for the Norris they should have to play extensive time on the PK.
It really is amazing how many good young, and I mean young(23 and younger), defenseman there are getting big minutes on these playoff teams.
Alex Pietrangelo-22 years old (33:11 TOI in game 1)
Kevin Shattenkirk-23 years old (33:06 TOI in game 1)
Erik Karlsson-21 years old (24:23 TOI in game 1)
Ryan McDonagh-22 years old (25:04 TOI in game 1)
Oliver Ekman-Larsson-20 years old (31:14 TOI in game 1)
Drew Doughty- 22 years old (28:18 TOI in game 1)
Dmitry Kulikov-21 years old (Will probably see around 22-23 minutes)
Karl Alzner-23 years old (23:01 TOI in game 1)
John Carlson-21 years old (21:23 TOI in game 1)
Michael Del Zotto-20 years old (20:14 TOI in game 1)
The league is just flush with great young defensemen.
It really is amazing how many good young, and I mean young(23 and younger), defenseman there are getting big minutes on these playoff teams.
Alex Pietrangelo-22 years old (33:11 TOI in game 1)
Kevin Shattenkirk-23 years old (33:06 TOI in game 1)
Erik Karlsson-21 years old (24:23 TOI in game 1)
Ryan McDonagh-22 years old (25:04 TOI in game 1)
Oliver Ekman-Larsson-20 years old (31:14 TOI in game 1)
Drew Doughty- 22 years old (28:18 TOI in game 1)
Dmitry Kulikov-21 years old (Will probably see around 22-23 minutes)
Karl Alzner-23 years old (23:01 TOI in game 1)
John Carlson-21 years old (21:23 TOI in game 1)
Michael Del Zotto-20 years old (20:14 TOI in game 1)
The league is just flush with great young defensemen.
Eh, I mean Dubinsky had room to cut to the net and it was Kuba coming over that kept him from walking in on Anderson. I mean, great that Kuba covered for Karlsson, and also great that Ottawa had players back to prevent Dubinsky from having a passing option before he went behind the net, but I know if a Rangers defenseman made that play I would have been cringing.
But again, Karlsson's not bad defensively, and he's not really a Byfuglian type that just aimlessly roams around the ice wherever he wants to. He could stand to improve some things but I guess the only reason I even bring it up is that I feel like there's a lot of black and white to this argument...some people think he's terrible, other people think he's great, and he's probably more somewhere in the middle
Yeah I think most of us Sens fans would agree with this. The play in question certainly wasn't a flawless defensive play (far from it in fact) but no defenseman is perfect and those things to happen. One bad/terrible shift defensively from a player who played 25 minutes is pretty okay with me - especially considering he made some very good plays defensively throughout the game as well (with some meh plays and some strong plays sprinkled throughout the game which roughly net themselves out).
Most of us Sens fans think he's decent defensively for a top pairing defenseman: somewhere in the top 30-40 defensively amongst the top 60 players who are on first pairings in the NHL.
His numbers from behind the net support that belief fairly well (he's 32nd in GA/60, and not far behind some notable names), though you could certainly argue that he faces lower levels of competition than most top pairing defenseman, but you could also consider that Ottawa is #24 in goals against in the league as a whole.
As I said, somewhere in the 30-40 range defensively in terms of top-pairing defenseman seems reasonable to me.
There will always be detractors (see a couple posts above who I'm not going to waste my time with) who say otherwise, but overall he's a pretty well-rounded player (minus the size).
Players like him annoy me, and the fact that he's a front-runner for the Norris trophy makes me want to gag.
Yeah, let's give the best DEFENSE man trophy to the best Offensive D man that doesn't play great DEFENSE.
So dumb
What's dumb is suggesting he should play forward. Dastyuk won several selke's...should he play defense?
This thought is actually soooo funny. do you even watch hockey? Do you understand hockey? Can you comprehend positions? Wow man.
I'll explain this AGAIN for the 5 year old who has apparently missed every other karlsson thread.
Karlsson get's all his points from the breakout and from the point. How the hell is he supposed to get points on the breakout and on the point if he's playing forward? He'd be lost out there. He'd get LESS points playing forward. You still following? Almost half his assists are from a breakout pass and almost half his assists are tip ins off his shot from the point. Do you comprehend this? He doesn't get his points by pinching and playing down low like a forward like green has a lot. Do you understand this? He get's his points as a defenseman. Manage to keep up?
Although I think he is capable in the defensive end, I agree to a certain extent. Chris Pronger had more time on ice shorthanded than Karlsson this year, and I think that for a defense man to be nominated for the Norris they should have to play extensive time on the PK.
Too bad Nowhere in the definition does it say PK time above 2:00 a game necessary.
The league has proven that PK TOI is not necessary to award a defensive award...right datsyuk?
What makes it even more in karlsson's favour is that the selke only takes in consideration Defense...whereas the norris takes into account both offense and defense.
Selke=just defense
norris=offense and defense.
Both forwards and defense play pk...yet datsyuk won a SOLELY DEFENSIVE award being 9th on his team in pk time and less then a minute a game...
How can you comprehend the above, then say karlsson won't win an award FOR BOTH OFFENSE AND DEFENSE because he doesn't play much pk?
Read the above, about datsyuk winning a DEFENSIVE award with no pk time...soak it in...understand it...then think about how karlsson is up for TWO-WAY award.
That excuse doesn't make any sense.
I just don't understand how pk toi doesn't matter one bit in determining who wins a defensive award, but is the end-all be-all for an all-around award.
In the interest of full disclosure, it was a double overtime game. So it is more like 33 minutes out of ~90. (Second overtime wasn't a complete period.)
What makes it even more in karlsson's favour is that the selke only takes in consideration Defense...whereas the norris takes into account both offense and defense.
Selke=just defense
norris=offense and defense.
Disregarding everything else, this isn't true. There are some fantastic defensive players in the league that will never ever be considered for the Selke no matter who they shut down or how consistently they do it, because they don't score enough points.
To win the Selke you have to have a pretty decent amount of points as well as be regarded as a good defensive player.
Too bad Nowhere in the definition does it say PK time above 2:00 a game necessary.
The league has proven that PK TOI is not necessary to award a defensive award...right datsyuk?
What makes it even more in karlsson's favour is that the selke only takes in consideration Defense...whereas the norris takes into account both offense and defense.
Selke=just defense
norris=offense and defense.
Both forwards and defense play pk...yet datsyuk won a SOLELY DEFENSIVE award being 9th on his team in pk time and less then a minute a game...
How can you comprehend the above, then say karlsson won't win an award FOR BOTH OFFENSE AND DEFENSE because he doesn't play much pk?
Read the above, about datsyuk winning a DEFENSIVE award with no pk time...soak it in...understand it...then think about how karlsson is up for TWO-WAY award.
That excuse doesn't make any sense.
I just don't understand how pk toi doesn't matter one bit in determining who wins a defensive award, but is the end-all be-all for an all-around award.
Umm, you should talk to some Red Wings fans about Datsyuk's Selkes and who on that team actually deserved them. (Hint: His last name starts with a Z.)
There are a few other factors as to why some of us think that Karlsson shouldn't win the Norris, such as the fact he averages more than a turnover a game. (Queue the 'he has the puck so much' and the 'GvA stats are so subjective' arguments.) Or the fact that he didn't match up constantly against top lines throughout the season. (Queue the 'the point is to win games' and 'he played at least one shift against the top line that night so he does too match up against top lines' arguments.)
Also, the Norris is about 'all-around' play, not two-way play or defensive play. Meaning all aspects need to be taken into consideration. That includes PP, ES, and PK.
Disregarding everything else, this isn't true. There are some fantastic defensive players in the league that will never ever be considered for the Selke no matter who they shut down or how consistently they do it, because they don't score enough points.
To win the Selke you have to have a pretty decent amount of points as well as be regarded as a good defensive player.
True. The Selke is like a Gold Glove in baseball. Offensive scrubs don't win it post-lockout.
Too bad Nowhere in the definition does it say PK time above 2:00 a game necessary.
The league has proven that PK TOI is not necessary to award a defensive award...right datsyuk?
What makes it even more in karlsson's favour is that the selke only takes in consideration Defense...whereas the norris takes into account both offense and defense.
Selke=just defense
norris=offense and defense.
Both forwards and defense play pk...yet datsyuk won a SOLELY DEFENSIVE award being 9th on his team in pk time and less then a minute a game...
How can you comprehend the above, then say karlsson won't win an award FOR BOTH OFFENSE AND DEFENSE because he doesn't play much pk?
Read the above, about datsyuk winning a DEFENSIVE award with no pk time...soak it in...understand it...then think about how karlsson is up for TWO-WAY award.
That excuse doesn't make any sense.
I just don't understand how pk toi doesn't matter one bit in determining who wins a defensive award, but is the end-all be-all for an all-around award.
Woah! Anyways, the Selke doesn't explicitly say offense is required, yet it is. The Norris doesn't explicitly say PK TOI is required, but every past winner has practically always been the defense man on their team leading in that stat other than Lidstrom last year who was third.
I just think that in a situation where a defense man is most needed, that for one to hardly play in those situations speaks about their value there. I think others who both thrive in those situations, as well as put points up are more deserving of the award.
Wow was I ever wrong, thanks for the link. As I said, still impressive skating but definitely my bad on the lead I said he had.
