agree with this. he has no peer offensively, it's not even close. but defensively, i see a guy who just isn't regularly committed. he bails on a lot of plays. to me, he's the Alex Ovechkin of defencemen. generational talent but at the end of the day, i would prefer someone like Suter, Doughty or Weber to anchor a defence.
- DoubleDown

Yeah, agreed for pure defense. But the thing is the league has evolved over the last 10 years and it did so mainly at the back end (defense and goaltending). Due to that evolution in the game, there is now a need to consider different types of defensemen, like Karlsson, Letang, Subban... So really IMO there should be two trophies, one for best shut down D and the other for the best offensive defense. Karlsson is better defensively than ovechkin. I think you might underestimate his defensive play.

not sure why you think you'd get butchered......i'd say 99% of sens fans feel the same.

my one beef with the nominations is how weber at -2 gets in over pietrangelo. the knock on karlsson is his +/-.....and while it's obviously much worse then webers, not sure how you can justify weber over the others.

now, i do think weber is a freak......but based on THIS YEAR, not sure how you justify the nomination.

same with chara....piets was also better than him

alright then......so i guess my beef is that piets wasnt nominated......probably should have just said that.

my 3 would have been
- sensarmy_11

+/- is a team stat. Nashville was abysmal this year, without Weber they would have been competing with Edmonton for the worst in the west.

Weber drug that team to respectability almost single-handedly. Should be the GM fired there, not Trotz.

Not saying whether or not his season was as good or worse than Pietro's, just that I haven't watched enough blues this year to make the call. I just think Weber deserves the nom.

He's the best offensive defenseman, like Paul. Coffey. The nominees are better all-around defensemen, like Ray Bourque. It's really that simple, although I'm sure I'll get butchered for saying so.
- jmatchett383

I think this year you're absolutely right - but I don't think that will be true for his career.

The norris year he played excellent defense, maybe not in Chara's league but better than most, plus scored in bunches.

The expectation is he will get there as he heals and matures.

Duncan Keith on steroids?

Thanks for the laugh.

Duncan Keith on steroids?

Thanks for the laugh.
- TommyHawk

He's talking offensively.......relax

He's not. They're both equally bad in their own end and Green was better offensively when he had his run. Back to back seasons of better than a point per game (Karlsson has never done it) and he scored an absurd 31 goals in 68 games.
I don't blame Yost, if Karlsson played for the Leafs I'd be telling you he was better than Green was as well. It's just funny how quickly people forget.
- MrBen

When green had his run, OV was scoring 60 goals a year, semin was scoring 40, and backstrom was a 90pt player. He put up an absurd amount of pts/goals on the PP (more than half), and let's not forget that he played 32 games a year again Atlanta, Tampa bay, Florida, and Carolina.....arguably the 4 worst teams in the conference, if not the league, at the time. He also didn't have to drag plug partners around the ice.

I'm terrified to think what karlsson would do in that situation.

If you can't look at the 2 players and realize that karlsson is a better offensive player, then you're blind

By the way, you know who really stands out on this? Travis Hamonic.
- Travis Yost

Are Sens fans not concerned about trying to acquire talent through trades again? I know Ryan had a good year, but it kind of seems like a step backwards no? Hamonic is gonna cost you another 1st and prospect if you ask me.

Not meant as trolling at all. Just genuinely curious if you'd be willing to part with more of your future for immediate impact.

Well for one of many things, Karlsson is by far one a better skater, faster skater, more agile, has a better shot and hes got more takeaways. Sure if you compare best to best of years for both players, they seem in the same caliber for one year. Karlsson has stayed at the same pace since then, joined the ranks of superstar status and also overcame a career threatening injury. May I honestly need to say more? Obviously the current Karlsson overshadows the past of Green.
- PtotheY

Again....how quickly people forget. For one, saying Karlsson is a far better skater is a stretch. In his time Green was just as dynamic. You can tell us that Karlsson had more takeaways as a point but give us the whole story and also tell us that he had more giveaways than any player in the NHL.
Also, I don't know what you're basing your "Karlsson has a better shot" on but Mike Green's 31 goals say his shot was just as good or better.
I'm not trying to troll here, Karlsson is awesome and is currently the best offensive D in the NHL. I just don't think it's a given that he is better than what Green was. The offensive stats don't say that (more goals, multiple seasons at over a ppg vs. no seasons). karlsson has a Norris and Green has two second place finishes. It's hard to judge from year to year and what if Green had that season the same year as Karlsson etc etc.

Your "opinion" may be that's he's far better but the statistics (goals, points, +/- etc) just don't back it up.

You know the old saying....Opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one.
Well maybe yours just stinks.

Are Sens fans not concerned about trying to acquire talent through trades again? I know Ryan had a good year, but it kind of seems like a step backwards no? Hamonic is gonna cost you another 1st and prospect if you ask me.

Not meant as trolling at all. Just genuinely curious if you'd be willing to part with more of your future for immediate impact.
- ehabs9

When the core of your team is all under 25 (assuming spezza is dealt), then dealing prospects is fine.

Besides, most of the trade talk is about moving spezza, which isn't exactly "moving our future"

Guys like zibby, Lehner, lazar, Ceci, etc, are almost guaranteed not to be moved.....unless for another young player of equal value

Again....how quickly people forget. For one, saying Karlsson is a far better skater is a stretch. In his time Green was just as dynamic. You can tell us that Karlsson had more takeaways as a point but give us the whole story and also tell us that he had more giveaways than any player in the NHL.
Also, I don't know what you're basing your "Karlsson has a better shot" on but Mike Green's 31 goals say his shot was just as good or better.
I'm not trying to troll here, Karlsson is awesome and is currently the best offensive D in the NHL. I just don't think it's a given that he is better than what Green was. The offensive stats don't say that (more goals, multiple seasons at over a ppg vs. no seasons). karlsson has a Norris and Green has two second place finishes. It's hard to judge from year to year and what if Green had that season the same year as Karlsson etc etc.

Your "opinion" may be that's he's far better but the statistics (goals, points, +/- etc) just don't back it up.

You know the old saying....Opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one.
Well maybe yours just stinks.
- MrBen

At the risk of ruining this future post I'm inevitably going to write, here's a quick thought:

You have to isolate for team effects. This is rather important.

Mike Green was a shot-generating machine. In the timespan of 2007-2010, Green logged 225-games, generated 813-attempts at EV. That is absolutely nutty (and about 3.61 per).

The thing is, Washington was unbelievable in this stretch. They generated 11,196 attempts -- which means Green was, during that timeframe, directly behind 7.2% of Washington's on-ice attempts. 7.2% is ridiculous.

Erik Karlsson, from 2011-2014, generated 924-attempts in 180-games (and about 5.13 per). Additionally, Ottawa as a team generated much less than Washington. (The team was not as good.) Erik Karlsson was responsible for 9.17% of attempts, directly, the team generated at EV. I'm guessing this is sort of uncharted territory, but I don't have the historical data in front of me. I know it's massively disparate from Green's percentage, even though there's only a two-point difference. Two points is huge here.

Now, the first question you should ask in response to the above is, "Well, that's just individually - it doesn't touch on all of the shots Green or Karlsson generated for their teammates," and that's true.

What we know is that their "on-ice" numbers (the five-man units) were virtually identical in those respective timeframes. Green's on-ice units generated 66-attempts per sixty minutes; Karlsson's on-ice units generated 66.45-attempts per sixty minutes.

It's not that Green wasn't great, because he obviously was. It's that Karlsson's shouldering much more of a load on inferior teams. He doesn't have the 8.59% on-ice shooting luxury to pad his numbers like Green did, either; Ottawa, in their timespan, went 7.28%.

And, Green averaged 1.39 EV points per sixty. Karlsson's at 1.53.

All this to say, I'm not sure that the offensive stats say what you think they say. I'm actually pretty sure they say the opposite.

It's a good, thoughtful discussion, though. Which is why I'm expanding on it.

duncan keith best 2 way dman in the league. you east coast writers/fans must not watch the hawks very much bc he impacts the game every shift every night and his stats dont lie. Among Dmen: 2nd in points, 1st in assists, 9th in +/-
Karlsson: 1st in points, 2nd in assists, 283rd in +/-

Karlsson is a glorified 4th forward while Duncan Keith plays 200ft of elite hockey. karlsson is duncan keith minus playing defense.

duncan keith best 2 way dman in the league. you east coast writers/fans must not watch the hawks very much bc he impacts the game every shift every night and his stats dont lie. Among Dmen: 2nd in points, 1st in assists, 9th in +/-
Karlsson: 1st in points, 2nd in assists, 283rd in +/-

Karlsson is a glorified 4th forward while Duncan Keith plays 200ft of elite hockey. karlsson is duncan keith minus playing defense.
- EnzoD

It's a little bit easier to have a good +/- when you play on arguably the best team in the league....and the guys on your bottom D pairing would probably be karlsson's partner on the top pairing.

It's funny that you accuse us of not watching Keith play cuz we're on the east coast, and having a bias opinion....when it's painfully obvious that's what you're doing with your opinion of karlsson.

I wonder how good Keith's numbers would be if he didn't have an all-star and Olympian as a partner, and instead had to be anchored to plugs like kuba and cowen

It's a little bit easier to have a good +/- when you play on arguably the best team in the league....and the guys on your bottom D pairing would probably be karlsson's partner on the top pairing.

It's funny that you accuse us of not watching Keith play cuz we're on the east coast, and having a bias opinion....when it's painfully obvious that's what you're doing with your opinion of karlsson.

I wonder how good Keith's numbers would be if he didn't have an all-star and Olympian as a partner, and instead had to be anchored to plugs like kuba and cowen
- sensarmy_11

karlsson is amazing at offense. great shot, great skater, great hands. weak along the boards and loses his man in the defensive zone often. duncan keith probably has the best stick and gap control in the nhl. i watch karlsson often (nhl gamecenter) and i stand by my 4th forward comment

At the risk of ruining this future post I'm inevitably going to write, here's a quick thought:

You have to isolate for team effects. This is rather important.

Mike Green was a shot-generating machine. In the timespan of 2007-2010, Green logged 225-games, generated 813-attempts at EV. That is absolutely nutty (and about 3.61 per).

The thing is, Washington was unbelievable in this stretch. They generated 11,196 attempts -- which means Green was, during that timeframe, directly behind 7.2% of Washington's on-ice attempts. 7.2% is ridiculous.

Erik Karlsson, from 2011-2014, generated 924-attempts in 180-games (and about 5.13 per). Additionally, Ottawa as a team generated much less than Washington. (The team was not as good.) Erik Karlsson was responsible for 9.17% of attempts, directly, the team generated at EV. I'm guessing this is sort of uncharted territory, but I don't have the historical data in front of me. I know it's massively disparate from Green's percentage, even though there's only a two-point difference. Two points is huge here.

Now, the first question you should ask in response to the above is, "Well, that's just individually - it doesn't touch on all of the shots Green or Karlsson generated for their teammates," and that's true.

What we know is that their "on-ice" numbers (the five-man units) were virtually identical in those respective timeframes. Green's on-ice units generated 66-attempts per sixty minutes; Karlsson's on-ice units generated 66.45-attempts per sixty minutes.

It's not that Green wasn't great, because he obviously was. It's that Karlsson's shouldering much more of a load on inferior teams. He doesn't have the 8.59% on-ice shooting luxury to pad his numbers like Green did, either; Ottawa, in their timespan, went 7.28%.

And, Green averaged 1.39 EV points per sixty. Karlsson's at 1.53.

All this to say, I'm not sure that the offensive stats say what you think they say. I'm actually pretty sure they say the opposite.

It's a good, thoughtful discussion, though. Which is why I'm expanding on it.
- Travis Yost

karlsson is amazing at offense. great shot, great skater, great hands. weak along the boards and loses his man in the defensive zone often. duncan keith probably has the best stick and gap control in the nhl. i watch karlsson often (nhl gamecenter) and i stand by my 4th forward comment
- EnzoD

Karlsson was very very good in his own zone 2 years ago, was excellent last year.....and then he had his Achilles torn in half, and is still getting his game back......it's noticeable when he try's to pivot, and is why he sometimes loses position.

As for best stick, you do realize that karlsson led all dmen in takeaways......signifies a pretty good stick

I'm not saying he's better defensively than Keith, but saying he's a glorified 4th forward is asinine, and shows you can't look at the big picture.

He's also light years ahead of where Keith was at the same age.......defense is something you can, and he will, improve

Good blog . I was hoping that Giordano would've got a nomination so at the very least my non-flame fan friends would take me seriously when I say he deserved some recognition as one of the top dmen in the league. A plus dman on a minus team, who played the some of the toughest minutes in the entire league (not to mention his advanced stats are off the charts)...once again the professional writers have let me down

I think Ottawa needs to find a Regehr type to play with Karlsson, that man even made Phaneuf look like a top pairing dman . Someone to pick up the slack defensively while Karlsson does his thing.

Karlsson was very very good in his own zone 2 years ago, was excellent last year.....and then he had his Achilles torn in half, and is still getting his game back......it's noticeable when he try's to pivot, and is why he sometimes loses position.

As for best stick, you do realize that karlsson led all dmen in takeaways......signifies a pretty good stick

I'm not saying he's better defensively than Keith, but saying he's a glorified 4th forward is asinine, and shows you can't look at the big picture.

He's also light years ahead of where Keith was at the same age.......defense is something you can, and he will, improve
- sensarmy_11

when he has more than 2 championships then you can call him "lightyears ahead of keith"

when he has more than 2 championships then you can call him "lightyears ahead of keith"
- EnzoD

I forgot Keith won those all by himself.

and you also need to learn how to read......I said light years ahead of where Keith was at the same age, 7 years ago....pretty sure he didn't have anything back then

I forgot Keith won those all by himself.

and you also need to learn how to read......I said light years ahead of where Keith was at the same age, 7 years ago....pretty sure he didn't have anything back then
- sensarmy_11

sens wont win anything with that liability on the backend. Until he works on his defense he will continue to be a big contributor on a non-contender.

karlsson is amazing at offense. great shot, great skater, great hands. weak along the boards and loses his man in the defensive zone often. duncan keith probably has the best stick and gap control in the nhl. i watch karlsson often (nhl gamecenter) and i stand by my 4th forward comment
- EnzoD

It sounds an awful lot like quite the opposite WRT who watches what team. When you consider Keith won a cup with a team composed of Toews, Kane, Seabrook, Sharp, Hossa, Campbell, Ladd, Hjalmarsson, Byfuglien, Kopecky, Versteeg, etc., I'm pretty sure Chris Phillips playing 1C with Cowen in net would've won a cup that year. Team composition very much plays a factor when trying to pull at straws to determine the validity of a skater vs. another skater. Not taking this into account and just saying "he's good cause he won a Stanley cup," when we all know that he single handedly did not win it, makes u look like a homer. Just sayin.'

I kept proposing a Spezza + for Yandle deal a while back, good to see based on this graph that it would be a deal worth pursuing and my eyes are not playing tricks when I watch the Yotes play.

The deal would make sense for both teams (offensive sparkplug needed in PHX, solid D in Ottawa) and for the Sens the cap hit is lower, the salary difference is not so bad especially if Spezza is traded with another roster player, and you could replace his production with a quick stop gap in free agency (e.g. Mikael Grabovski on a one year contract) as we let our prospects like Lazar develop into more legit NHL calibre players.

Spezza, Shane Prince and low pick next year for Yandle and Vrbata would be a decent swap.
- ahjnkn

At the risk of ruining this future post I'm inevitably going to write, here's a quick thought:

You have to isolate for team effects. This is rather important.

Mike Green was a shot-generating machine. In the timespan of 2007-2010, Green logged 225-games, generated 813-attempts at EV. That is absolutely nutty (and about 3.61 per).

The thing is, Washington was unbelievable in this stretch. They generated 11,196 attempts -- which means Green was, during that timeframe, directly behind 7.2% of Washington's on-ice attempts. 7.2% is ridiculous.

Erik Karlsson, from 2011-2014, generated 924-attempts in 180-games (and about 5.13 per). Additionally, Ottawa as a team generated much less than Washington. (The team was not as good.) Erik Karlsson was responsible for 9.17% of attempts, directly, the team generated at EV. I'm guessing this is sort of uncharted territory, but I don't have the historical data in front of me. I know it's massively disparate from Green's percentage, even though there's only a two-point difference. Two points is huge here.

Now, the first question you should ask in response to the above is, "Well, that's just individually - it doesn't touch on all of the shots Green or Karlsson generated for their teammates," and that's true.

What we know is that their "on-ice" numbers (the five-man units) were virtually identical in those respective timeframes. Green's on-ice units generated 66-attempts per sixty minutes; Karlsson's on-ice units generated 66.45-attempts per sixty minutes.

It's not that Green wasn't great, because he obviously was. It's that Karlsson's shouldering much more of a load on inferior teams. He doesn't have the 8.59% on-ice shooting luxury to pad his numbers like Green did, either; Ottawa, in their timespan, went 7.28%.

And, Green averaged 1.39 EV points per sixty. Karlsson's at 1.53.

All this to say, I'm not sure that the offensive stats say what you think they say. I'm actually pretty sure they say the opposite.

It's a good, thoughtful discussion, though. Which is why I'm expanding on it.
- Travis Yost

Yes, but on weeks that fall directly before the second quarter of a blue moon Green is hands down better giving him the statistical advantage that counterfeits your data and proves that Green is better than Karlsson.
Not to mention that along with blue and red, Green is a primary colour.

Any Karlsson thread always attracts so many haters.

That's how you know a guy is one of the best.

Good blog . I was hoping that Giordano would've got a nomination so at the very least my non-flame fan friends would take me seriously when I say he deserved some recognition as one of the top dmen in the league. A plus dman on a minus team, who played the some of the toughest minutes in the entire league (not to mention his advanced stats are off the charts)...once again the professional writers have let me down

I think Ottawa needs to find a Regehr type to play with Karlsson, that man even made Phaneuf look like a top pairing dman . Someone to pick up the slack defensively while Karlsson does his thing.
- Saskabush

People who really watch hockey understand Giordano's value. The NHL awards are arbitrary and when things get close, name recognition plays more of a role than it probably should.

People who really watch hockey understand Giordano's value. The NHL awards are arbitrary and when things get close, name recognition plays more of a role than it probably should.
- MrBen

Ya true. It's just the fans that don't really watch that seem to be the most vocal, I was hoping to shut a few of them up