I'm going to say it's subjective based on one's own team.
A gifted offensive team might prefer a big shutdown guy like Chara, while Karlsson could help a weaker team exert more control over the game. Weber can contribute in both ends and complement a strong two-way team.
Scoring dries up in the playoffs as teams match opposition lines hard. Karlsson seems to be matchup-immune. His defensive deficiencies are greatly exaggerated.
Karlsson is playing the best right now, but the one thing that made us win the Cup was a #1 defenseman that could downright shut the 1st line down. Think about it, Montreal didn't really have one, Pronger was injured, Tampa didn't have one. Vancouver had excellent defensive depth, but I strongly believe the one thing that broke them was not having a superstar defenseman like Chara. An individual who would make the difference between a Cup or Nothing in all of those game 7 situations.
Karlsson has clearly improved a lot on defense and has a great offensive game, but no one can match Chara's ability to absolutely dominate a game defensively when he's on, and was he ever in 2011.
Take Chara off Boston and their not nearly as good as they are. Not even close. That D looks very average without him.
Take Karlsson off Ottawa or Weber off Nashville and you can say the same thing.
We don't know what Karlsson or Weber (or others) would be like on Boston. Simply saying that because Boston is a good team (and Chara is a huge part of that) doesn't mean that Chara is more valuable than Karlsson or Weber on a cup run.
Take Chara off Boston and their not nearly as good as they are. Not even close. That D looks very average without him.
Take Chara off Boston and they got an average team. If you take Karlsson or Weber off their teams this year, they've got a one-way ticket for Nathan Mackinnon.
Take Chara off Boston and they got an average team. If you take Karlsson or Weber off their teams this year, they've got a one-way ticket for Nathan Mackinnon.
that says more about the Sens' and Preds' depth than it does about any individual's value as a defenseman
Karlsson has clearly improved a lot on defense and has a great offensive game, but no one can match Chara's ability to absolutely dominate a game defensively when he's on, and was he ever in 2011.
Chara, easily. He's the only one who's captained a team to the Cup before.
Karlsson simply wasn't effective in the playoffs last year, and Weber is just a small step below Chara IMO.
Please tell us how Karlsson controls the game and how it would benefit a team playing game 7, battling for every inch of ice.
Offense dries up in the playoffs. Teams are line matching hard and studying lots of game tape, which is why depth becomes so valuable in the playoffs relative to the regular season.
Karlsson is the kind of player that is more immune to those kinds of match-ups than others, by virtue of his position.
Yea, the Bruins won a cup. That doesn't mean that in every thread all of their players are individually better than other players who haven't won a cup. It's horrendous logic that seems to pervade nearly every sports discussion ever. Boston fans should know better, having seen Ray Bourque go cup-less for 21 seasons despite being one of the best players in the game.
I'd much rather have two of the most physical defenseman in the league when it comes to playoff time. Not only that but Chara and Weber are leaders on there respective teams that have been in the playoffs. Karlesson is so overrated.
Scoring dries up in the playoffs as teams match opposition lines hard. Karlsson seems to be matchup-immune. His defensive deficiencies are greatly exaggerated.
What are you talking about?
Clearly flaming or ignorant, both Chara and Weber had excellent track records in the playoffs, Karlsson doesn't.
Take Chara off Boston and they got an average team. If you take Karlsson or Weber off their teams this year, they've got a one-way ticket for Nathan Mackinnon.
Not only are you wrong on the Chara count but also on Weber and Karlsson.