Why Erik Karlsson should win the Hart

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by IgiTang

I hate the Sens. Karlsson is a beauty for sure!

But I vote no!

Good thing my vote doesn't count.

He'll likely be in the running due to the Eastern Media Machine.

He'll be in the running because he is objectively one of the most valuable players in the league.

[troutman]

His last name isn't Hockey. So, no.

[mdubz]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

How many Hart trophies does Alex Selke Ovechkin have?

Uhh what?

I was pointing out his play in that specific video and how it reminded me of the way Russell usually defends one-on-ones. What does Ovechkin even have to do with that?

[Fire of the Phoenix]

Originally Posted by Cali Panthers Fan

I don't disagree with the OP that Karlsson is an insanely valuable player that deserves Hart consideration, but if you look at the Sens, nobody is more valuable to that team than Craig Anderson. He sometimes has lulls in play, but he stops more pucks than any goaltender in the game today, and most are extremely high quality saves. That team is probably the worst defensive team in the league, yet are propped up by a goalie that battles his ass off every night for them. He's seriously undervalued.

Anderson is so strange to me. He alternates between looking like a Hall of Famer and total crap from year to year, or sometimes month to month, in the same season.

[Street Pharmacist]

The other thing that blows my mind, is that he's a month older than TJ Brodie and has two Norris trophies already

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

What do you think the Hart is for?


If you take what the NHL's definition is (player most valuable to his team), you're either trolling of wilfully ignoring what was written with a statement like that. His team is miles worse without him. He plays over 30 minutes a night while outscoring every defenseman since Brian Leetch.

I can see lots of reasons why you may disagree he's the best fit for the award, but not close is really silly

The team sucks with him too.

How bad would the Flames be without Gaudreau? How bad are the Habs without Price?

By the definition that you are presenting, Price should win the Hart THIS YEAR because his absence is proving how important he is to his team.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

The other thing that blows my mind, is that he's a month older than TJ Brodie and has two Norris trophies already

With how important scoring seems to be with voters nowadays he's going to win a lot more as well.

Which is just gross too me. Comparing him to Lidstrom just feels wrong.

[memphusk]

Originally Posted by DJones

With how important scoring seems to be with voters nowadays he's going to win a lot more as well.

Which is just gross too me. Comparing him to Lidstrom just feels wrong.

They should just make an award for most points by a defenceman already, and leave the Norris to the best all around.

[Enoch Root]

A case could be made for Brodie beingg as important to the Flames as Karlsson is to the Sens.

[trackercowe]

I think both Capitals (Holtby and Ovechkin) should get a lot of consideration here. Did you see Ovie blow by Karlsson last night? Karlsson is having a great year without a doubt and should be a candidate. I just think the Caps being in first place right now speaks volumes about their play.

[Fighting Banana Slug]

He'll be in the conversation due to his elite scoring. I think you are underselling the forward talent on that team and perhaps overselling the defensive prowess as well.

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by mdubz

Uhh what?

I was pointing out his play in that specific video and how it reminded me of the way Russell usually defends one-on-ones. What does Ovechkin even have to do with that?

Well the point would be some weak D one on one is meaningless when it comes to the truly elite talents in the game.

This is a discussion about the Hart trophy candidacy of Erik Karlsson, who is constantly chided for his defensive game not matching his offense.

Alexander Ovechkin has won 3 Hart trophies, more than anyone this century. Defensive game is still loudly criticized.

Is this math really that hard to do?

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by DJones

With how important scoring seems to be with voters nowadays he's going to win a lot more as well.

Which is just gross too me. Comparing him to Lidstrom just feels wrong.

How many points more does Karlsson have to get over a Doughty (for example) before he's considered a better defenceman?

The other end exists too right? Because we always talk about Doughty/Weber/Keith being the best defenders, but it's because they also score. Otherwise, players like Regehr or Mitchell should be the ones winning Norris trophies.

Basically, the argument for Karlsson's Norris' isn't that he just scores a lot points. It's that he is better than Doughty at offence by a wider margin than Doughty is better at him on defence.

As for your other post, if Brodie added to our offence like Karlsson did, I would absolutely want him to play more PP than PK. I'd imagine Brodie would be much better than Wideman on the PP, whereas Wideman wouldn't be that much worse than Brodie on the PK. My reasoning is that the PK is a very simple, positional, shot-blocking, clearing game. Any marginal NHL defencemen can do that. Not many defencemen can do what Brodie does when he is carrying the play, which is completely nullified when PKing.

[CliffFletcher]

It does raise the question of what a defenceman has to do to win the Hart. A defenceman has won it once in the last 43 years. Then you look at the Conn Smythe - defencemen have won 4 times in the last 15 years. Seem defencemen are in fact pretty key to winning the Stanley Cup. And yet they're never league MVP. Doesn't make any sense to me.

[Erick Estrada]

I'm on the fence with Karlsson. I do think he's the best offensive defenseman in the league but I feel guys like Webber, Doughty, Keith, and Suter put up solid offensive numbers while doing more heavy lifting in their own end.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by Regorium

How many points more does Karlsson have to get over a Doughty (for example) before he's considered a better defenceman?

The other end exists too right? Because we always talk about Doughty/Weber/Keith being the best defenders, but it's because they also score. Otherwise, players like Regehr or Mitchell should be the ones winning Norris trophies.

Basically, the argument for Karlsson's Norris' isn't that he just scores a lot points. It's that he is better than Doughty at offence by a wider margin than Doughty is better at him on defence.

As for your other post, if Brodie added to our offence like Karlsson did, I would absolutely want him to play more PP than PK. I'd imagine Brodie would be much better than Wideman on the PP, whereas Wideman wouldn't be that much worse than Brodie on the PK. My reasoning is that the PK is a very simple, positional, shot-blocking, clearing game. Any marginal NHL defencemen can do that. Not many defencemen can do what Brodie does when he is carrying the play, which is completely nullified when PKing.

Brodie is playing at like 0.7 ppg while being our best defender. You would sacrifice our best defender on special teams for a few more 5 on 5 minutes?

I'll never understand that.

The best defensemen in the league should be relied upon in all situations.

[BigTuna]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

A case could be made for Brodie beingg as important to the Flames as Karlsson is to the Sens.

Ridiculous.

[BigTuna]

The problem is, if hot Karl doesn't get it, Kane will. If you look at how many of Kane's production is on the PP, I'm not sure why you can knock Karlsson as a true Hart contender.

[DJones]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

The problem is, if hot Karl doesn't get it, Kane will. If you look at how many of Kane's production is on the PP, I'm not sure why you can knock Karlsson as a true Hart contender.

If he isn't providing his team with elite defense why are his points worth more than a forwards points? If he wants to be a 4th forward he should be compared to forwards.

Holtby is beating Prices numbers from last year right now so don't see how he isn't the favorite.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by DJones

Brodie is playing at like 0.7 ppg while being our best defender. You would sacrifice our best defender on special teams for a few more 5 on 5 minutes?

I'll never understand that.

The best defensemen in the league should be relied upon in all situations.

If you look at PK stats, Brodie is actually one of our worst defencemen on the PK. Small sample size, bad goaltending and all that, but it supports my theory that you don't NEED your best D on the PK.

If Brodie becomes 0.8 ppg due to the additional 5on5 and PP time and less on the PK, is that worth it? What about 1ppg? 1.1 ppg? At what point does it become worth it?

I'm just saying that if Brodie was as generational at offence as Karlsson, I wouldn't want him anywhere near the PK. I want him driving my offence the entire time.