Adam Fox, Cale Makar or Miro Heiskanen?

[a mangy Meowth]

Yeah, yikes on that decision by Fox there

Fun to watch these 2

 

[J bo Jeans]

Tough dash 3, 0 point night for Fox. Makar on the other hand 1 apple +2

 

[Eltuna]

Just noticed something funny. Makar loves to beat up on the bad, non-playoff teams but has trouble scoring goals on the good, playoff teams...

Scored goals vs:
Philly
Habs
Dallas
Ducks
Ott (2x)
Sea (2x)
Stl
Vegas

Only one team out of those is in the top 8 of their conference.

He actually only has 5 of his points 22 points vs playoffs teams (and 3 came in 1 game vs Nashville)

I think this argument loses a lot of muster when you factor in his actual playoff scoring (which is obviously solely against playoff teams).

Maintaining a near ppg pace for 35 games as a a defenceman in your first few years is pretty insane.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

Just noticed something funny. Makar loves to beat up on the bad, non-playoff teams but has trouble scoring goals on the good, playoff teams...

Scored goals vs:
Philly
Habs
Dallas
Ducks
Ott (2x)
Sea (2x)
Stl
Vegas

Only one team out of those is in the top 8 of their conference.

He actually only has 5 of his points 22 points vs playoffs teams (and 3 came in 1 game vs Nashville)

This random ‘stat’ has so much weight to it, then you realize Makar has 117 points in his 121 regular season games and 31 points in 35 playoff games.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Makar AINEC. Adam Fox is already -1 tonight. So much for that great defense. Just terrible, five minutes into the game and -1 already! End of discussion.

Tough dash 3, 0 point night for Fox. Makar on the other hand 1 apple +2

Just saying a player is a minus or plus really means little. He could have just stepped on the ice and had nothing to do with the play, or covered his man perfectly and had someone else mess up.

The first goal, Makar did nothing, beyond being in position. Fox made a low percentage long pass, which got easily cut off (by Toews), and then screened his goalie on the shot.

Second goal, Fox not on the ice. Makar lost sight of the puck, and the man he should have been covering screened the goalie.

(I don't know where Fox was when the Avs almost got a shorthanded breakaway. He was the only defenceman on the ice, but not one of the three Rangers back.)

Third goal (PP), Fox not on the ice. Makar had his man.

Fourth goal, Fox not on the ice. Makar had just stepped on, and was not involved in the play (a perfect example of a 'free' plus).

Fifth goal, Makar with the shot, Fox with a wild kick at the puck, not tying up a man.

Sixth goal (PP), Makar not on the ice. Fox made a good defensive play just before, but again wasn't covering anyone on the goal.

Seventh goal, Makar not on the ice. For caught up ice on a bad pinch, didn't get back in time.

Eighth goal, neither on the ice.

Ninth goal, neither on the ice.

Tenth goal, neither on the ice.

So, in summary:

Makar gets a - on the second goal and a + on the fifth, not involved in the first and fourth. Even, but credited with +2.

Fox with a - on the first, fifth and seventh, and also a culprit on the sixth (PP). Genuine -3.

Because some posters were talking about -/+, I've focused on the actual goals. This is not to say that neither of them had other good or bad plays in the game, and of course this was just one game.

 

[avsfan9]

Just saying a player is a minus or plus really means little. He could have just stepped on the ice and had nothing to do with the play, or covered his man perfectly and had someone else mess up.

The first goal, Makar did nothing, beyond being in position. Fox made a low percentage long pass, which got easily cut off (by Toews), and then screened his goalie on the shot.

Second goal, Fox not on the ice. Makar lost sight of the puck, and the man he should have been covering screened the goalie.

(I don't know where Fox was when the Avs almost got a shorthanded breakaway. He was the only defenceman on the ice, but not one of the three Rangers back.)

Third goal (PP), Fox not on the ice. Makar had his man.

Fourth goal, Fox not on the ice. Makar had just stepped on, and was not involved in the play (a perfect example of a 'free' plus).

Fifth goal, Makar with the shot, Fox with a wild kick at the puck, not tying up a man.

Sixth goal (PP), Makar not on the ice. Fox made a good defensive play just before, but again wasn't covering anyone on the goal.

Seventh goal, Makar not on the ice. For caught up ice on a bad pinch, didn't get back in time.

Eighth goal, neither on the ice.

Ninth goal, neither on the ice.

Tenth goal, neither on the ice.

So, in summary:

Makar gets a - on the second goal and a + on the fifth, not involved in the first and fourth. Even, but credited with +2.

Fox with a - on the first, fifth and seventh, and also a culprit on the sixth (PP). Genuine -3.

Because some posters were talking about -/+, I've focused on the actual goals. This is not to say that neither of them had other good or bad plays in the game, and of course this was just one game.

Do you really have to justify every single goal? Fox had a bad game and was a non factor. Let it be. Trouba was pretty good out there

 

[TheRarestDangles]

Fox is great but he is no Cale

 

[wetcoast]

The poll results are pretty convincing here.

NYR fans, well a small vocal minority, need to give it a rest.

 

[notDatsyuk]

Do you really have to justify every single goal? Fox had a bad game and was a non factor. Let it be. Trouba was pretty good out there

I wasn't 'justifying' the goals, but more the -/+ that the posters I quoted were blindly using.

Fox was a -3, and, in this particular game, deservedly so, but my main point was that the +2 for Makar was deceptive. He was, for all practical purposes, even for the game.

While +/- can be a reasonable statistic en masse, it's very poor in a small sample such as a game. The fourth goal was a perfect example: Girard started the play (and earned an assist), but as the play went up-ice, the defence changed, and Makar basically stepped on the ice just in time to get a completely undeserved +. (I've been on both ends of that many, many times!) Tomorrow it may happen the other way around, which is why +/- can be useful when looking at a season or a career, but not a game.

They both made some good plays through the game, but I focused on goals because the topic was +/-. Makar was a non factor. Fox was a non factor offensively, but in the eight or nine games I've seen him in this year, his defensive positioning has sometimes been off.

 

[MaKarter]

 

[Regal]

What’s funny is in some ways this shows how volatile goalscoring can be from defensemen. Ellett went on to score 9 goals in his next 54 games. Iafrate had 10 in 56. It’s like when Brent Burns had 27 through the first 59 games in ‘17, then only 2 the following 23. Hopefully Makar can be fairly consistent, because it’d be cool to see some high defenseman totals

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

The poll results are pretty convincing here.

NYR fans, well a small vocal minority, need to give it a rest.

Am I missing something or is Fox not the Norris trophy winner? Are HF polls more important?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

I love how the Leafs fan above always analyzes all of Fox’s weaker games very closely, but somehow goes missing for the other games.

The team was playing the second game of a back to back returning home from a different time zone. The whole team was tired and played terrible. That one game was no more important than any other game. It’s not as if defensemen go head to head against each other on the ice either.

 

[Morgs]

Fox is great but he is no Cale

You want the best offensive defenseman in the league who isn't a slouch defensively, or do you want a defenseman that grades top-5 offensively and defensively. There's a legit argument for both and either way they're the two best defenseman in the league. Miro is way out of his depth in this poll.

 

[TheRarestDangles]

You want the best offensive defenseman in the league who isn't a slouch defensively, or do you want a defenseman that grades top-5 offensively and defensively. There's a legit argument for both and either way they're the two best defenseman in the league. Miro is way out of his depth in this poll.

Yes, I agree. Fox is indeed great--maybe even fantastic--but he is no Cale.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

You want the best offensive defenseman in the league who isn't a slouch defensively, or do you want a defenseman that grades top-5 offensively and defensively. There's a legit argument for both and either way they're the two best defenseman in the league. Miro is way out of his depth in this poll.

Since when is Fox a top-5 defensive defenceman in the league?

 

[Morgs]

Since when is Fox a top-5 defensive defenceman in the league?

Since his rookie season

 

[Tralfamadore]

Since his rookie season

I've never once watched Fox play and thought to myself wow that guy is a top 5 defensive defenseman in the world. Don't be ridiculous.

 

[Morgs]

I've never once watched Fox play and thought to myself wow that guy is a top 5 defensive defenseman in the world. Don't be ridiculous.

Then you don't understand what makes a defenseman elite at defense.

 

[Tralfamadore]

Then you don't understand what makes a defenseman elite at defense.

Ya I guess you're just a better judge of talent than everyone else. Get over yourself.

 

[Morgs]

Ya I guess you're just a better judge of talent than everyone else. Get over yourself.

Whatever you say baby

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Hughes was so overrated he's now underrated.

29

2

23

25

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And a +6, which is up from -24 last season.

 

[summer tooth]

Methinks it would have to be Mario Heiskanen

 

[Regal]

Hughes was so overrated he's now underrated.

29

2

23

25

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And a +6, which is up from -24 last season.

Back to looking like a star despite playing with guys like Poolman and Schenn

 

[notDatsyuk]

Somebody in the NHL isn't doing their job right.

I watched the Arizona/Rangers game, figuring maybe I'd finally see this spectacular Fox.

Meh. Out of position on Arizona's shortie, picked up a kind of nothing assist on Zib's goal, and was one the ice for their other PP goal. A minus 1, but a decent if not great game.

Then I looked at the stats on NHL.com, and he's a +2?

All three goals he was on the ice for were on NY powerplays. Am I crazy? So I looked at the play-by-play. Those three goals all show he was on the ice, and all show six Rangers and five Coyotes. But they also say all three were at even strength. Somebody boo-booed.