Make sure to follow Travis on Twitter!
--
When Erik Karlsson stepped up to the podium to claim his first Norris Trophy in Las Vegas on Wednesday night, I couldn't help but speculate on the kind of vitriol that would inevitably spewed from stone-age relics who simply refuse to acknowledge the positive developments experienced in the sport of hockey.
Erik Karlsson's not the first offensive defenseman in the National Hockey League. In fact, he's not even the first offensive defenseman to put together a statistically brilliant offensive campaign since the lockout was lifted -- that much was accomplished by the likes of
in 2008-2009, and Nicklas Lidstrom a year prior.
Somewhere in the middle of Mike Green -- a true one-dimensional weapon -- and Nicklas Lidstrom -- your ideal two-way player; perhaps the model of such a blue liner going forward -- lies Erik Karlsson. Offensively, he's as strong as both were in their primes. Defensively, he's made tact improvements, placing emphasis on his elite speed and positional play rather than boorish physicality oft-lauded around the National Hockey League.
That's not to say players like Shea Weber and Zdeno Chara don't have a positive, measurable effect through their tough play. They're absolutely terrifying, and the kind of shutdown mentality they have from the blue-line in certainly reaches the stat sheet. The pair -- along with plenty of others -- are terrific at limiting scoring opportunities, and subsequently, limiting goals against.
Erik Karlsson's in a position -- a generous 6'0", 180 lb. position -- where physical play simply doesn't produce maximum efficiency. Playing the rough-and-tumble game isn't favorable to him as a player or the unit collectively, so he's modified his game to terrorize the opposition in an alternative, equally effective manner.
But, that's really just a tip of the proverbial iceberg with respect to Erik Karlsson and his Norris Trophy legitimacy. I've seen the deathless back-and-forth in the hockey blogosphere about the definition of the James Norris Memorial and how it should be awarded. There's one side that will lazily look at the stat sheet, noting the offensive numbers and total point output as the foremost hockey analytic. I'm sure Erik Karlsson benefited in some ways from this nonsense.
There's another side that believes a true Norris Trophy candidate must prioritize defensive play. Truthfully, I'm positive that this crowd, and this argument, is the worst of all. It's denying every kind of development the game's undergone. And really, it's perpetuating this vicious cycle of putting player's in a box -- often times, in a box where they don't belong.
Sports fans in general look for every opportunity to define a player's skill set in a vacuum. If a player's tough, he's not skilled. If a player's skilled, he's soft. If a goalie comes from a less-developed hockey country, he's not technically sound. If a player's Russian, he's mercurial.
These aren't causal relationships. They're silly and unsubstantiated descriptors that we recklessly throw around because we're constantly trying to define an entity.
Largely, that's what some parties tried to push against Erik Karlsson in his quest for the Norris Trophy and place amongst elite NHL defensemen. He's a point-scorer, sure: But, as said point-scorer, he must suffer defensively. And, since he's an undersized Swedish player, he's probably soft.
When you think of such ill-informed, somnolent arguments, you think of guys like
Jack Edwards and
Stan Fischler. Edwards is what he is -- glossy Boston shtick that's far more concerned with an internal climb through the local media ranks through polarization of the masses than acting as a credible voice to the game of hockey. Stan Fischler's a fully-depreciated relic in the industry with a laundry list of blunders, including his famed preference of
steady defenseman Brad Lukowich over Hall of Famer Brian Leetch.
The one thing they have in common, though, is that they are both a part of old-time hockey media, and have both watched as their relevance -- paired with the development of new media, which allows many the voice to offer criticism in various forms -- has reached diminishing marginal returns. Rather than adapting to the game, they've opted for the alternative, commonly known as the Skip Bayless approach -- staunch refusal of true value, and preferred employment of shock commentary and polarizing opinions to drive the masses in a thousand directions.
Fischler, Edwards, et al. are simply voices for the stone age of hockey -- those who truly believe a kill shot across the defensive zone adds more value than, say, a shot created up ice. Advanced statistical analysis continues to prove that puck possession ad shot margins are what drives wins and losses, and are great tools in measuring value.
What's great about statistics -- advanced or otherwise -- is that they don't take away from guys like Shea Weber, Zdeno Chara, or plenty of other terrifying blue liners who impose their will on every shift. Rather than goals and goals against, fans are looking at scoring opportunities and scoring opportunities against, noting the direct correlation between the latter and the former. Chara and Weber are vastly superior to Karlsson in terms of limiting scoring chances -- it's a natural byproduct of a freakish combination of strength, size, and speed, all of which create this omnipotent presence when trying to enter zones in Boston(or Nashville, or wherever).
Against Ottawa? Well, not so much. Erik Karlsson may have been a solid defender, but elite he was not, and paired with a league-average type in Filip Kuba, their chance at
stopping the opposition from creating scoring opportunities, and subsequently, scoring goals was almost a war of attrition.
So, what did Paul MacLean do? While maintaining the same level of importance at keeping the puck out of his own net, the first-year bench boss brought over a puck possession system from Detroit that placed a priority on the offensive game of hockey.
Above all else, including the physical, mental, and emotional developments for Erik Karlsson, this was the single-most important piece of #65's eventual Norris Trophy campaign. A system that allowed him to thrive. A system that gave him the opportunity at running the ice in every third. A place where his most desirable attribute, a seemingly innate ability to score and score often, translated to the most important measurement of all -- wins.
Karlsson's brilliant offensive play took so much pressure off of a generally porous blue line and often inconsistent goaltending. The Ottawa Senators finished fourth in the National Hockey League in goal-scoring, then went on to reach the playoffs in what many expected to be a surefire lottery year.
The reason? Goals for. Goals against. Karlsson was the most important piece -- this season, I'd argue even ahead of C Jason Spezza -- in keeping that average on the positive side.
Teams couldn't score on Ottawa as much as they would've liked, and there's one reason for that: They never had the puck. The best defense is defense, unless the alternative -- offense -- is an option. See, it's hard to score on players like Zdeno Chara and Shea Weber, especially when they're back-stopped by guys like Tim Thomas and Pekka Rinne, respectively.
It's
impossible to score when you're not in possession. Try it one day. You'll see what I mean.
That's why my definition of the Norris Trophy hasn't always jived with the old boys groupthink of yesteryear. To me, the best defenseman in the National Hockey League is the one that creates the most scoring opportunities while yielding the least scoring opportunities, creating the most-plus differential. Show me a player that fits that bill, and I'll show you a player whose value-added to the team's overall productivity ranks at the top of the list.
This year, that man was Erik Karlsson. And the PHWA concurred.
When it boils down, this idea --
this argument -- runs far deeper than a twenty-two year old defenseman from Landsbro, Sweden. It's about embracing a talent for who he is, rather than who you want or believe him to be.
--
--
Thanks for reading!
Ottawa Senators Blogger • 
Join the Discussion:
»