Why Erik Karlsson should win the Hart

[Karl]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Much more useful, thanks.

That blog was basically a fan piece though, which said the same thing everyone is saying: his offensive skills and contribution are undeniable. And Ottawa runs all of their offense through him.

But we are still left with the elephant in the room that is the fact that the Senators, built around Karlsson, are not very good.

Of course that is not all his fault. In fact, it might not be any fault of his at all. But that doesn't change the fact that him being the centre-piece of that team has not been a recipe for success, or even improvement, for the team that he is so valuable to and is built around him.

Considering Erik Karlsson's skills, the Sens, in theory, should be a much worse team without him.

Doesn't always work that way in the real world, but he is by miles the Sens best offensive D-man and probably their best player notwithstanding the fact he still has his defensive warts. The Sens have Karlsson & Methot. Ceci has a bit of promise too but the rest of their D-men are little short of horrible.

[BigTuna]

Ottawa is not a very good team in general though. This isn't the NBA where two stars has be on the court 95% of the time. The NHL is a team game. To put that on Karlsson is unfair.

Quite simply, if they have goaltending like last season they automatically are quite a bit better.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Ottawa is not a very good team in general though.

This. Ottawa would probably be close to last place in the NHL bad without Karlsson & Anderson (or Hammond's season of his life last year). Just like this team would probably be close to a lottery contender without Brodie & Johnny Hockey.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Ottawa is not a very good team in general though. This isn't the NBA where two stars has be on the court 95% of the time. The NHL is a team game. To put that on Karlsson is unfair.

Quite simply, if they have goaltending like last season they automatically are quite a bit better.

Yet he's on the ice for an average of 28:39 per game which mean's he is on the ice for half the game. So either the guys on the ice for the other 31 minutes a game are god awful enough where all the goals are coming against when he's not on the ice or he's contributing a lot of offense at times at the expense of defense. All their goaltenders are over .912 SV% so it's not like they have had to deal with the type of goaltending the Flames have received this season. Better goaltending would make any of the 30 NHL teams better so that point doesn't really stand as their goaltending is average and average goaltending was good enough to get the Flames into the playoffs and into the 2nd round of the playoffs.

They have four forwards with over 30 points so don't tell me they lack talent it's just that collectively they aren't good enough and Karlsson is part of that so I would have a hard time putting him in the discussion. He's not going to win anyway so this discussion is kind of moot.

[The Yen Man]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Too much focus on defense. He wins games with his offence. Has anyone watched the NHL? No one can score. Karlsson is truly elite.

People say guys like Weber are better. Do people actually watch hockey?

The fact that Doughty has never won a Norris is borderline criminal. Ask any GM who they would rather start a team with, Doughty or Karlsson. I'm willing to bet 9/10 GMs take Doughty in a heartbeat.

Karlsson has elite offensive skills, but the guy gets walked around at least once a game it seems. Guy's defensive game is about as good as Phaneuf's.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by BigTuna

Ottawa is not a very good team in general though. This isn't the NBA where two stars has be on the court 95% of the time. The NHL is a team game. To put that on Karlsson is unfair.

Quite simply, if they have goaltending like last season they automatically are quite a bit better.

Goalies almost never win the Hart. But who has more direct impact on winning or losing, and good seasons or bad, than the goalie?

[Tinordi]

Originally Posted by Erick Estrada

Yet he's on the ice for an average of 28:39 per game which mean's he is on the ice for half the game.

They have four forwards with over 30 points so don't tell me they lack talent it's just that collectively they aren't good enough and Karlsson is part of that so I would have a hard time putting him in the discussion. He's not going to win anyway so this discussion is kind of moot.

There's a very good argument that the reason they have four forwards with 30 points is because of Karlsson. Look at each forward's gf/60 with and without Karlsson. Essentially it more than halves when he's not on the ice. Methot's corsi for drops 14 percentage points when Karlsson isn't out with him. That dude is stirring the drink in a big way.

Karlsson is leading the eastern conference in points for Pete's sake. How does that not qualify him for the Hart?

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

The fact that Doughty has never won a Norris is borderline criminal. Ask any GM who they would rather start a team with, Doughty or Karlsson. I'm willing to bet 9/10 GMs take Doughty in a heartbeat.

Karlsson has elite offensive skills, but the guy gets walked around at least once a game it seems. Guy's defensive game is about as good as Phaneuf's.

You haven't watched very much Sens hockey

[BACKCHECK!!!]

Just used my Game Center account to watch a couple of Sens games with a particular eye to Karlsson's defensive game.

BRUTALLY bad defensively. Shockingly bad. Standing in the mid slot, while an attacking player skates around in the crease at will. Taking the shooter on a 2-on-1 instead of playing the pass. Getting walked by attacking wingers.

Offensively, I think he's UNDERrated, if anything. He plays the only high man on the Ottawa PP sometimes, and still holds the line. And his passes routinely thread the needle through the entire neutral zone.

But holy cow. He is terrible defensively.

Honest to god, without a word of exaggeration, he is like Justin Schultz defensively.

[Street Pharmacist]

@DimFilipovic

Just a friendly reminder that Erik Karlsson has 19 more points than the 7 other defensemen the Senators have used this season combined.

[Street Pharmacist]

Not intentionally beating a dead horse, but these last two tweets are from today


@NHLPublicRelations

.@ErikKarlsson65 (11-49—60) is 2nd defenseman in the last 20 years to post three straight 60-point seasons (Lidstrom: 2005-08). @EliasSports

[Enoch Root]

If only he could play defense like Lidstrom

[1qqaaz]

Originally Posted by BACKCHECK!!!

Just used my Game Center account to watch a couple of Sens games with a particular eye to Karlsson's defensive game.

BRUTALLY bad defensively. Shockingly bad. Standing in the mid slot, while an attacking player skates around in the crease at will. Taking the shooter on a 2-on-1 instead of playing the pass. Getting walked by attacking wingers.

Offensively, I think he's UNDERrated, if anything. He plays the only high man on the Ottawa PP sometimes, and still holds the line. And his passes routinely thread the needle through the entire neutral zone.

But holy cow. He is terrible defensively.

Honest to god, without a word of exaggeration, he is like Justin Schultz defensively.

I've always found it curious, how eastern Canada consistently votes Karlsson for the Norris

The more I watch him, the worse he looks defensively. The more I watch Doughty, the better he looks.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by 1qqaaz

I've always found it curious, how eastern Canada consistently votes Karlsson for the Norris

The more I watch him, the worse he looks defensively. The more I watch Doughty, the better he looks.

The point is that offence counts for something.

He isn't the best 1v1 defender (and that's probably being generous), but his overall defence (which includes puck possession), along with his generational offence, is what makes him the best defenceman.

It's basically saying that Ovechkin didn't deserve the Hart just because he isn't an elite defender. It's nonsense. Offence is severely underrated in the modern age on forums and blogs.

Doughty controls the game from the defence, but he's 27 points behind Karlsson. At some point, the elite offence overtakes the defence.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by The Yen Man

The fact that Doughty has never won a Norris is borderline criminal. Ask any GM who they would rather start a team with, Doughty or Karlsson. I'm willing to bet 9/10 GMs take Doughty in a heartbeat.

Karlsson has elite offensive skills, but the guy gets walked around at least once a game it seems. Guy's defensive game is about as good as Phaneuf's.

I bet you 10/10 would take Karlsson. Doughty is good but not elite. Karlsson is by far the better defenceman.

[albertGQ]

Seems to me that Karlson gets punished for being so good offensively.

Over 33 minutes tonight. And not even an OT game. Now that is impressive.

[Samonadreau]

Doughty>Karlsson

Karlsson is the best offensive D in the league. Doughty is the best D in the league.

[calgaryblood]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Doughty>Karlsson

Karlsson is the best offensive D in the league. Doughty is the best D in the league.

Cripes Doughty isn't even better than Weber or Suter let alone Karlsson.

Great player but man is he ever overrated if you think he's the best defenceman in the NHL.

[GioforPM]

Yeah, sure Doughtys not elite.

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I bet you 10/10 would take Karlsson. Doughty is good but not elite. Karlsson is by far the better defenceman.

Drew Doughty is elite. It's not even debatable. He is elite.