Looks like some of you guys are beginning to go wobbly on the matter. In the beginning the discussion was very clearly about Karllson being nominated. However, it is clear the discussion has now been elevated to consider the possibility that the kid might actually win. I think he might.

One of the problems with the voting is what happened last year. Lidstrom's win over Weber was unjust and many of the voters are embarrassed by the outcome. They will get it right this year. If the kid continues his level of play over the balance of the season he might win. If he does win it might be the right result for this year, but it makes the injustice of last year even more glaring.

Looks like some of you guys are beginning to go wobbly on the matter. In the beginning the discussion was very clearly about Karllson being nominated. However, it is clear the discussion has now been elevated to consider the possibility that the kid might actually win. I think he might.

One of the problems with the voting is what happened last year. Lidstrom's win over Weber was unjust and many of the voters are embarrassed by the outcome. They will get it right this year. If the kid continues his level of play over the balance of the season he might win. If he does win it might be the right result for this year, but it makes the injustice of last year even more glaring.
- spatso

Nope, just you. You were sure he'd win, remember..... remember the nonsense of him maybe winning the scoring race??? Remember??

I think he'll win just as likely as Green did with better Numbers.

Looks like some of you guys are beginning to go wobbly on the matter. In the beginning the discussion was very clearly about Karllson being nominated. However, it is clear the discussion has now been elevated to consider the possibility that the kid might actually win. I think he might.

One of the problems with the voting is what happened last year. Lidstrom's win over Weber was unjust and many of the voters are embarrassed by the outcome. They will get it right this year. If the kid continues his level of play over the balance of the season he might win. If he does win it might be the right result for this year, but it makes the injustice of last year even more glaring.
- spatso

Unreal.

Mike Green, Sergi Zubov say HI!!
- burn

Perhaps the stories of Karllson's defensive play is something of a myth. If you look at the leading candidates in terms of their points as well as plus/minus the kid is looking pretty good. More important, if you were to add their respective team goal differential and their time on ice into the consideration it will become apparent that the notion that the kid is a defensive liability is ludicrous. The good part about the discussion is there are another 8 weeks to go before the nominations and we can follow the debate game by game.

Karllson. 60 pts. +15

Campbell. 40 pts. -9

Weber. 38 pts. +18

Chara. 32 pts. +21

Lidstrom. 31 pts. +26

Unreal.
- burn

Really, it was actually said "Weber should have won" on last night's broadcast.

Nope, just you. You were sure he'd win, remember..... remember the nonsense of him maybe winning the scoring race??? Remember??

I think he'll win just as likely as Green did with better Numbers.
- burn

This is actually pretty rich. Have you checked the scoring race. So what do you think about the kid being in the top 10.

Perhaps the stories of Karllson's defensive play is something of a myth. If you look at the leading candidates in terms of their points as well as plus/minus the kid is looking pretty good. More important, if you were to add their respective team goal differential and their time on ice into the consideration it will become apparent that the notion that the kid is a defensive liability is ludicrous. The good part about the discussion is there are another 8 weeks to go before the nominations and we can follow the debate game by game.

Karllson. 60 pts. +15

Campbell. 40 pts. -9

Weber. 38 pts. +18

Chara. 32 pts. +21

Lidstrom. 31 pts. +26


- spatso

Proves what? +/- isn't a Defensive acumen.

I guess you could say his defense play is a myth, because Myths aren't true... fabricated stories.

Really, it was actually said "Weber should have won" on last night's broadcast.
- spatso

And that they are embarrassed?? I thought that Weber should have won as well, but to say that the voters are embarrassed is asinine.

This is actually pretty rich. Have you checked the scoring race. So what do you think about the kid being in the top 10.
- spatso

So what. Green had better number and didn't get nominated. Scoring PTS isn't a guarantee for a win, let a lone a nomination.

And that they are embarrassed?? I thought that Weber should have won as well, but to say that the voters are embarrassed is asinine.
- burn

I think if go back and check the reports the day after you will see a lot of criticism of the outcome. I think the embarrassment comes out of the observation that the guys who voted were accused of screwing it up. I don't think they will repeat the error this year. The guy who wins the Norris will be the guy who should have won.

If they voted today it would be Weber. Another 8 weeks is a long, long time. If the kid continues his current level of play over the rest of the season he will win very big.

And that they are embarrassed?? I thought that Weber should have won as well, but to say that the voters are embarrassed is asinine.
- burn

Well perhaps you should take up the cause and write all the commentators who challenged last year's decision. You might want to suggest they use more temperate language in their discussion of the failing of the Norris voting.

Raymond Ballard and a 1st for Karlsson?

I think if go back and check the reports the day after you will see a lot of criticism of the outcome. I think the embarrassment comes out of the observation that the guys who voted were accused of screwing it up. I don't think they will repeat the error this year. The guy who wins the Norris will be the guy who should have won.

If they voted today it would be Weber. Another 8 weeks is a long, long time. If the kid continues his current level of play over the rest of the season he will win very big.
- spatso

You're not going to get much support from this group of Karlsson haters.

Some of them have been dumping on Senator players since the beginning of the season, because that's what they do. They're trying to explain why the Senators are either no good, or why their winning record in a result of over-achievement, and will not last.

Anderson isn't consistent, you don't know what you're going to get with him.

Alfredsson is to old, Bozak out scored him last year

Michalek has not been a TSF since he played with Thornton

Too many Old guys, playing over their head, on the brink of retirement, are carrying the team.

Spezza is over paid and is blocking the signing the signing of other players.

Turris was not worth future multiple Norris winner Rundblad

Karlsson is NFG, he's a defensive anchor around the team's neck.



But the longer the Season goes on, and there's no substance behind any of those "arguments" other than dishearten leaf fans trying to figure out why the Senators, who found themselves in 30th overall about his time a year age, began a three year re-building plan, and now one year in, the Senators are doing better than the leafs.

Some delusional leaf fans can only lash out at the Senators, grasping at straws, in a feeble attempt to somehow prove that the Senators success is a fluke, and the leafs re-build is on track and are the better team.

So what. Green had better number and didn't get nominated. Scoring PTS isn't a guarantee for a win, let a lone a nomination.
- burn

Green was the beneficiary of playing on an offensive machine. His scoring output was as a direct result of the high production of his team mates. The kid is very different, he is the player that drives the Ottawa offense. I actually like Green as a player and think it is unfortunate that he has struggled with injury. But comparing the kid with Green has no more relevance than comparing him with Paul Coffey. You can always compare players but there is a need for discrimination. In the end, the question that is important is does the player help your team win. When you look at the Senators and what the kid is doing for them you have to be excited.

Is there any more exciting story in hockey right now than the kid and the run he has been leading the Senators on? It is great stuff and you need to lighten up and just enjoy it for the pure entertainment that it is.

Green was the beneficiary of playing on an offensive machine. His scoring output was as a direct result of the high production of his team mates. The kid is very different, he is the player that drives the Ottawa offense. I actually like Green as a player and think it is unfortunate that he has struggled with injury. But comparing the kid with Green has no more relevance than comparing him with Paul Coffey. You can always compare players but there is a need for discrimination. In the end, the question that is important is does the player help your team win. When you look at the Senators and what the kid is doing for them you have to be excited.

Is there any more exciting story in hockey right now than the kid and the run he has been leading the Senators on? It is great stuff and you need to lighten up and just enjoy it for the pure entertainment that it is.
- spatso

I see him close to an Orr type of player.

You're not going to get much support from this group of Karlsson haters.

Some of them have been dumping on Senator players since the beginning of the season, because that's what they do. They're trying to explain why the Senators are either no good, or why their winning record in a result of over-achievement, and will not last.

Anderson isn't consistent, you don't know what you're going to get with him.

Alfredsson is to old, Bozak out scored him last year

Michalek has not been a TSF since he played with Thornton

Too many Old guys, playing over their head, on the brink of retirement, are carrying the team.

Spezza is over paid and is blocking the signing the signing of other players.

Turris was not worth future multiple Norris winner Rundblad

Karlsson is NFG, he's a defensive anchor around the team's neck.



But the longer the Season goes on, and there's no substance behind any of those "arguments" other than dishearten leaf fans trying to figure out why the Senators, who found themselves in 30th overall about his time a year age, began a three year re-building plan, and now one year in, the Senators are doing better than the leafs.

Some delusional leaf fans can only lash out at the Senators, grasping at straws, in a feeble attempt to somehow prove that the Senators success is a fluke, and the leafs re-build is on track and are the better team.
- Doppleganger

I well understand the point you are making. If you remember I predicted at the beginning of the season that there would be rage in Leaf nation if the Senators rebuilt quickly and passed the Leafs in performance. Obviously, the change has come even sooner than even I predicted. A large part of this is the apparent failure of the Leafs to do a proper rebuild through the draft. I am sorry they are so upset. But I have made my position well known on the matter. Senator fans should take the rage of Leaf fans around Karllson, Spezza and their team success as a complement. On the other hand, Leaf fans need to know this is about failing. I will repeat one more time that the author of this failing is Brian Blowhard.

I see him close to an Orr type of player.
- yea-ok-buddy

Those are dangerous words on this site. There are many here who desperately want to see the kid fail. Perhaps they watched the game last night. They are deafeningly quiet this morning.

OTTAWA -- With each passing day, the whispers of Erik Karlsson as a Norris Trophy candidate get a little louder.

For those you (Prock I am thinking of you) that insist that the kid is not in the mix for the Norris I suggest you consider the lead line in the lead story on the TSN site this morning.

OTTAWA -- With each passing day, the whispers of Erik Karlsson as a Norris Trophy candidate get a little louder.

For those you (Prock I am thinking of you) that insist that the kid is not in the mix for the Norris I suggest you consider the lead line in the lead story on the TSN site this morning.
- spatso

He will be nominated no doubt, It depends on how the sens finish the season. If the Sens continue to win at this pace, he will have a good chance to win it, but if the Sens falter I don't think he'll have a chance at winning.

He will be nominated no doubt, It depends on how the sens finish the season. If the Sens continue to win at this pace, he will have a good chance to win it, but if the Sens falter I don't think he'll have a chance at winning.
- yea-ok-buddy

I agree.

Looks like some of you guys are beginning to go wobbly on the matter. In the beginning the discussion was very clearly about Karllson being nominated. However, it is clear the discussion has now been elevated to consider the possibility that the kid might actually win. I think he might.

One of the problems with the voting is what happened last year. Lidstrom's win over Weber was unjust and many of the voters are embarrassed by the outcome. They will get it right this year. If the kid continues his level of play over the balance of the season he might win. If he does win it might be the right result for this year, but it makes the injustice of last year even more glaring.
- spatso

I don't even think he should be nominated. Why should they consider that he can't play D, in terms of winning it, but ignore it for a nomination?

I don't even think he should be nominated. Why should they consider that he can't play D, in terms of winning it, but ignore it for a nomination?
- prock

Have no understanding of your intended meaning. Karllson's defensive numbers and TOI are looking very strong. Defense has always been understood as something that can be taught, can be learned. Karllson has made great progress in his defensive play. In fact, there are not many 21 year old kids who have better defensive numbers. His defense is already very good, he is probably the best player in the league for takeaways and he will get an awful lot better. I don't go back and regurgitate past comments from posters. But, it seems to me you have some great whoppers on the kid that you are going to need to accommodate.

Have no understanding of your intended meaning. Karllson's defensive numbers and TOI are looking very strong. Defense has always been understood as something that can be taught, can be learned. Karllson has made great progress in his defensive play. In fact, there are not many 21 year old kids who have better defensive numbers. His defense is already very good, he is probably the best player in the league for takeaways and he will get an awful lot better. I don't go back and regurgitate past comments from posters. But, it seems to me you have some great whoppers on the kid that you are going to need to accommodate.
- spatso

Are you on drugs?

Are you on drugs?
- prock

Just high on life

Karlsson succeeds defensively by outscoring. He's excellent at outscoring, but he's the top TOI getter for a team that allows the 5th worst goals against, he plays the most PP time and the 6th/7th most PK time among sens defensemen. He's got a high amount of both giveaways and takeaways. He's got a good ratio of team GF to team GA, but the 19th most team GA in the league. Among that bottom 30, he gives up the 3rd highest percentage of goals even strength. His team GA is actually better than it was in the beginning of the year (against the pack), but it is a detraction. Trophy consideration in my estimation is a whole year deal.

None of this indicates he's a bad player, or an unremarkable player (he is remarkable), but it certainly indicates a player who succeeds MOSTLY by outscoring. and he's a great outscorer who can make some average, but certainly unspectacular defensive plays. And of course he's only at the beginning of his career and progress.

For my tastes, a defenseman like Weber:
10 less team GF, 13 less team GA, 2 minutes more PK per game, half a minute less PP, better giveaway-takeaway ratio
Or Lidstrom:
18 less team GF, 16 less team GA, more PK, less PP, better giveaway-takeaway ratio

is more Norris-worthy.

But to the kids testament, he seems to be in on the Norris question.