Are defensive forwards overrated?

[Choice]

The thing is that playing a defensive forward role takes a lot less skill than that off a playmaker or a sniper. You need some defensive forwards to win, but they are much easier to find. Offensive talent is a rare thing.

I bet that if you took most of the games great point producers to play defensive roles, they could do it, but it would be a waste. Strong defensive forwards however, can't score or make plays, or else they would be doing it.

 

[Habsaku]

If you had five Lehtinens and five Spezza's with equivalent goalies net, who would you take?

Five Lehtinens without even thinking about it. Spezza is so overrated around the league its not even funny. You're talking about the best defensive forward in the league, a guy which people in Dallas think is more valuable then Modano. Look at Spezza play, I cannot imagine him in the playoffs, he will be shut down so easily it wont be funny. Every time the going gets rough, he puts his head in his neck. Can you even imagine him against a playoff Robert Holik and a playoff Scott Stevens? He will be destroyed, as simple as that, did you see him get pasted by freaking Malik? I do mean Marek Malik. Didnt he get concussion like syndromes? Replace that and imagine him on the ice with Scott Stevens... We wouldnt talk of him in the same breath after thats foresure. Alsodont give me +- as an argument, when you have Hasek, Chara, Redden, Philips, Mezsaros, Volchenkov, Alfredsson and such on the ice with you, you're boneheaded plays wont be noticed as much.

Great offensive players also have well rounded games. Staal, Crosby, Sakic, Yzerman, Modano and such.These guys dont play only on one end of the rink, tahts why they're value will be that much greater in the playoffs. Also, the post-season is all about close games. When you have Jere Lehtinen or Robert Holik on the ice, you know you,re not gonna get scored upon because they're play will elevate even more during important games. Thats when the fact they only get 1 point every 1 and half game becomes crucial. Its the difference between losing and winning. Its all about clutch and paying the price.

I'll take Bob Gainey anytime thank you, theres no overrating there. He was that good.

 

[Habsaku]

The thing is that playing a defensive forward role takes a lot less skill than that off a playmaker or a sniper. You need some defensive forwards to win, but they are much easier to find. Offensive talent is a rare thing.

I bet that if you took most of the games great point producers to play defensive roles, they could do it, but it would be a waste. Strong defensive forwards however, can't score or make plays, or else they would be doing it.

Tell me then, did you know that Carbonneau was an offensive star before getting to the NHL? If anything, defensive play is underrated. The fact people say defensive roles take a lot less skill is a proof of that. If that we're true, then why do elite hockey talents like Kovalchuk and Spezza still have problems in that regard? Wouldnt there rare skill allow them to learn that side of the game even faster then the regular player? Ever thought that smarts was also a skill? Not everyone is born with Math skills, not everyone is born with hockey smarts either. Thats a skill, and damn good one at that. There are very few players I'd take over Brind'Amour.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Five Lehtinens without even thinking about it. Spezza is so overrated around the league its not even funny. You're talking about the best defensive forward in the league, a guy which people in Dallas think is more valuable then Modano. Look at Spezza play, I cannot imagine him in the playoffs, he will be shut down so easily it wont be funny. Every time the going gets rough, he puts his head in his neck. Can you even imagine him against a playoff Robert Holik and a playoff Scott Stevens? He will be destroyed, as simple as that, did you see him get pasted by freaking Malik? I do mean Marek Malik. Didnt he get concussion like syndromes? Replace that and imagine him on the ice with Scott Stevens... We wouldnt talk of him in the same breath after thats foresure. Alsodont give me +- as an argument, when you have Hasek, Chara, Redden, Philips, Mezsaros, Volchenkov, Alfredsson and such on the ice with you, you're boneheaded plays wont be noticed as much.

Great offensive players also have well rounded games. Staal, Crosby, Sakic, Yzerman, Modano and such.These guys dont play only on one end of the rink, tahts why they're value will be that much greater in the playoffs. Also, the post-season is all about close games. When you have Jere Lehtinen or Robert Holik on the ice, you know you,re not gonna get scored upon because they're play will elevate even more during important games. Thats when the fact they only get 1 point every 1 and half game becomes crucial. Its the difference between losing and winning. Its all about clutch and paying the price.

I'll take Bob Gainey anytime thank you, theres no overrating there. He was that good.

That is an unfair question, Lehtinen has offensive ability. The correct question is "Who would you rather have, 5 Spezzas and a goalie or 5 Kris Drapers and a goalie."

I'll take the Spezzas.

 

[Habsaku]

That is an unfair question, Lehtinen has offensive ability. The correct question is "Who would you rather have, 5 Spezzas and a goalie or 5 Kris Drapers and a goalie."

I'll take the Spezzas.

So now defensive forwards cant have ability? You do realize that players can play in more then one zone and excell?

Playoff game
Draper-Draper-Draper
vs
Spezza-Spezza-Spezza

?


yeah, I still take Draper by a mile. He's elevated his play every playoffs up to now. He's shut down the best, he's willing to use his face as a shot blocker and he's can score the opportunistic goal. Spezza has been a major disapointment all his life in the post-season. He just cant stand getting hit. Thats what happens when you float, you do boneheaded plays, you dont pay the price and you cant backcheck properly.

 

[Mr Brownstone]

Defense creates offense. Remember that. You can't create rushes without taking care of your own zone first because you are bound to be there at some point. The transition game is the most important part of offense and I'd rather have three responsible forwards than three irresponsible floaters. Defensive forwards create opportunities for themselves through defense. Essentially, it's just a longer process of creating chances than offensive forwards who seem to always be in the right place at the right time.

 

[Ogopogo*]

OK, let's put thin into perspective. Many of you are clouding the argument.

The best offensive player ever: Wayne Gretzky

or

The best defensive player ever: Bob Gainey


I'll take Wayne, thank you.

 

[Mr Brownstone]

OK, let's put thin into perspective. Many of you are clouding the argument.

The best offensive player ever: Wayne Gretzky

or

The best defensive player ever: Bob Gainey


I'll take Wayne, thank you.

You're clouding this argument. The topic asks if defensive forwards are overrated. When's the last time you heard Gainey's name in a discussion about elite forwards? You're oversimplifying this too much. This isn't a cut-and-dry, one example answer.

 

[Ogopogo*]

I think Team Canada's performance in the Olympics is making a great case for my theory.

 

[God Bless Canada]

I think Team Canada's performance in the Olympics is making a great case for my theory.

Predictable post. Are you trying to pin Canada's play thus far on Doan and Draper? Doan and Draper's performance have been far from Canada's biggest concern. The lack of production/sub-standard performances from players like Bertuzzi, Nash, Thornton, Heatley, Richards, Lecavalier and St. Louis is the reason Canada is in the position they're in.

If you want an overrated thread involving Team Canada, it might be: "Are round-robins in international competitions with a medal round overrated?"

If you want to see the value of a checking line in international play, pop in a tape of the 2003 Gold Medal Game, and watch Draper-Doan-Maltby shut down Peter Forsberg in one of the great checking line performances in Canadian history. Or watch Canada's best line from the 2004 World Cup, the DDT line (Draper-Doan-Thornton), which didn't surrender an even strength goal the first five games of the tournament, and intimidated opposing defencemen with their fierce forechecking.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Predictable post. Are you trying to pin Canada's play thus far on Doan and Draper? Doan and Draper's performance have been far from Canada's biggest concern. The lack of production/sub-standard performances from players like Bertuzzi, Nash, Thornton, Heatley, Richards, Lecavalier and St. Louis is the reason Canada is in the position they're in.

If you want an overrated thread involving Team Canada, it might be: "Are round-robins in international competitions with a medal round overrated?"

If you want to see the value of a checking line in international play, pop in a tape of the 2003 Gold Medal Game, and watch Draper-Doan-Maltby shut down Peter Forsberg in one of the great checking line performances in Canadian history. Or watch Canada's best line from the 2004 World Cup, the DDT line (Draper-Doan-Thornton), which didn't surrender an even strength goal the first five games of the tournament, and intimidated opposing defencemen with their fierce forechecking.

My point is, Staal, Spezza, Crosby and Tanguay would be doing a lot more to help the team than having nearly the entire forward brigade made up of defense first types.

When you are shutout twice in a row it means you lack dynamic offensive production. Picking players based on what they did 2 or 3 years ago and the fact that they are responsibe defensively is hurting the team. You NEED some gifted offensive players, you can't just check teams into submission. Youthful, pure offensive ability would give this team the spark it needs.

 

[God Bless Canada]

My point is, Staal, Spezza, Crosby and Tanguay would be doing a lot more to help the team than having nearly the entire forward brigade made up of defense first types.

When you are shutout twice in a row it means you lack dynamic offensive production. Picking players based on what they did 2 or 3 years ago and the fact that they are responsibe defensively is hurting the team. You NEED some gifted offensive players, you can't just check teams into submission. Youthful, pure offensive ability would give this team the spark it needs.

There are gifted offensive players. Nash, Thornton, Heatley, Lecavalier, Richards, Iginla, etc. They haven't always shown it at different times this year, but to deny their offensive prowess would be a mistake.

The two consecutive shutout losses are symptomatic of a problem far greater than a lack of offensive talent. It's reflective of a lack of desperation and urgency in the play of the team as a whole. It's reflective of not playing as a team and not making adequate use of your linemates. It's reflective of starting poorly in back-to-back games, falling behind 2-0 in both, and then trying to mount a comeback against teams that skate well and execute strong defensive systems.

And in this instance, it's reflective of what we saw at the 2002 Olympics and the 2003 and 2004 World Championships: Team Canada starts slowly, struggles to adjust to the Olympic-sized ice and the international rules, and doesn't mesh as a cohesive unit. (Am I the only one who hasn't forgotten the awe-inspiring third period comeback that led to a 2-2 tie against Austria in the opener of the 2004 Worlds?) This happens every time for this country on the big ice. Why didn't we have the struggles in the 2004 World Cup, when Canada played a steady, consistent tournament from the start? It was played on NHL-sized ice, with Canada playing their games in Canada.

The offensive talent is there. They've shown it this year. Guys like Thornton, Gagne and Heatley are among league statistical leaders. Richards is 20 months removed from winning the Conn Smythe and finishing in the top 10 in scoring. Lecavalier was the MVP of the World Cup. Iginla and Nash tied for the league lead in goals in 2003-04. Do we even need to talk about some of St. Louis' accolades? And these guys are defence-oriented?

I'd don't care how much offensive talent you have, if you don't play as a cohesive unit, and don't give it everything you've got, you're not going to produce.

Today's game vs. Finland is actually an example of how valuable defensive forwards are. They executed their system to perfection. Only one breakaway for Canada, and no other odd-man rushes to speak of. That was textbook play by the Finns. Team Canada 1987 couldn't have done anything against that team.

Honestly, Ogopogo, as much as I don't want to say this, the spark this team needs is to get into the quarter-finals. I think once we reach the playoffs, once they've made the adjustments this team will show its metal.

And despite this team's troubles scoring goals, they've still scored more in the first four games than the first four games in 2002.

 

[MXD]

Defensive forward, Guy Carbonneau/Bob Gainey/late-era Bryan Trottier mold/early-era Mike Peca, and every player that was skilled yet played defensively for whatever reason, no.

Defensive forward, Kris Draper/Kirk Maltby mold, who are having a career a defensive forwards because they obviously do not have any other usefulness on a team, yes....

 

[jiggs 10]

There's a reason for the saying "Offence wins game, defence wins championships."

Yes, it was made up by a guy who couldn't score!

Seriously, both types are needed to be sucessful, but offense is what wins games in the long run. Otherwise, Buffalo would have won 5 or 6 Cups with Hasek. A great goalie is the best type of defense, right?

I will reverse Scotty Bowman's quote here to fit the truth nowadays: "You take 6 Bobby Clarke's and I'll take 6 Bobby Orr's and I will beat you every time." This is an extreme situation, because Orr was the best defensive defenseman of his time, as well as the greatest offensive defenseman EVER, but it is true. The Oilers didn't win their Cups because of Dave Lumley (as someone pointed out). In fact, you could argue they won IN SPITE of players like that.

Anyone can play defense. It just takes hard work and a little bit of hockey sense and grit. NOT anyone can shoot the puck through a gnat's a** and score 60 goals a year and win games. There is a BIG difference. I'm all for defensive players being honored (or more appropriately-noticed) for what they do, because if they can slow down or shut down the other team's big guns for a game, they have given their team the chance to OUT-SCORE the other team, which is how you win games. By scoring more goals than them.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I will reverse Scotty Bowman's quote here to fit the truth nowadays: "You take 6 Bobby Clarke's and I'll take 6 Bobby Orr's and I will beat you every time." This is an extreme situation, because Orr was the best defensive defenseman of his time, as well as the greatest offensive defenseman EVER, but it is true. The Oilers didn't win their Cups because of Dave Lumley (as someone pointed out). In fact, you could argue they won IN SPITE of players like that.

If that was Bowman's actual quote, he certainly could have chosen different players to make his point.

Orr is the best offensive defenseman to ever play the game, and Clarke is probably the best defensive forward among the great offensive forwards in the games history.

 

[pappyline]

Yes, it was made up by a guy who couldn't score!

Seriously, both types are needed to be sucessful, but offense is what wins games in the long run. Otherwise, Buffalo would have won 5 or 6 Cups with Hasek. A great goalie is the best type of defense, right?

I will reverse Scotty Bowman's quote here to fit the truth nowadays: "You take 6 Bobby Clarke's and I'll take 6 Bobby Orr's and I will beat you every time." This is an extreme situation, because Orr was the best defensive defenseman of his time, as well as the greatest offensive defenseman EVER, but it is true. The Oilers didn't win their Cups because of Dave Lumley (as someone pointed out). In fact, you could argue they won IN SPITE of players like that.

Anyone can play defense. It just takes hard work and a little bit of hockey sense and grit. NOT anyone can shoot the puck through a gnat's a** and score 60 goals a year and win games. There is a BIG difference. I'm all for defensive players being honored (or more appropriately-noticed) for what they do, because if they can slow down or shut down the other team's big guns for a game, they have given their team the chance to OUT-SCORE the other team, which is how you win games. By scoring more goals than them.

Well said. I agree with you 100%. You can teach great defence and great offensive players can play defense if so inclined. Its like the old joke: "you can teach a beautiful woman to type but you can't teach an ugly typist to be beautiful" (sorry for not being politically correct)

 

[VanIslander]

Sweden had the best penalty kill in the tourney and Finland the most shutouts by far.

Defense does win championships.

It takes a Lemieux or Gretzky type to repeatedly and consistently overcome great checking in important games.

Defensive forward, Guy Carbonneau/Bob Gainey/late-era Bryan Trottier mold/early-era Mike Peca, and every player that was skilled yet played defensively for whatever reason, no [not overrated].

Defensive forward, Kris Draper/Kirk Maltby mold, who are having a career a defensive forwards because they obviously do not have any other usefulness on a team, yes [overrated]....

I agree totally!

 

[Ogopogo*]

It takes a Lemieux or Gretzky type to repeatedly and consistently overcome great checking in important games.

Exactly right.

 

[Malefic74]

To really answer the original question I almost think you have to remove Gretzky and Lemieux from the equation. They are clearly freaks of nature who will obliterate ANY defense vs. offence discussion because they basically broke every rule of hockey physics.

To a certain extent Ogopogo and other proponents of offense are right. Goalscorers have value based on supply and demand. There are fewer of them so their value goes up. This same logic also applies to shutdown defensive players though. Case in point: the salaries of Bobby Holik, Mike Peca and John Madden are all over $3 million. Whether they are worth the money or not is up for debate, but those GMs clearly believe the value of those players is very high indeed. Fourth line energy players are indeed interchangeable. Elite shutdown forwards are in as short supply as elite scorers.

The Islanders allowed 210 goals against in 03-04 and scored 237. Their goaltending is the same, but they lost Peca, Aucoin and Hamrlik. Result? They have already allowed 207 goals against and have only scored 171. They were 5th in PK in 03-04. Thus far they are 27th. From playoff team to also-ran.And if you want another example of the value of defensive players look no further than the train wreck in Pittsbugh. A team full of fantastic offensive talent with "spare parts" for defense and look where they are. Dead last in their division, conference and the entire league.

Even the Oilers needed to play some defense before they won. The Oilers had scored 424 goals in 82-83 and allowed 315. +109 goals. The Islanders 302 for and 226 allowed. +76 goals. On paper the Oilers should have won. On the ice? Not so much. Isles sweep the series outscoring Edmonton 17-6. In 83-84 the Oil tightened up and win in 5 allowing only 7 goals in their 4 wins including a 1-0 shutout in Game 1. Did Lumley and Hunter win the championship for Edmonton? Of course not. But they played a much bigger role than many people realize.

 

[8snake]

Forget 5 Drapers vs. 5 Spezzas.....I'll take 5 Fedorov's or Lemaire's and call it a day.

 

[Habsaku]

Sweden had the best penalty kill in the tourney and Finland the most shutouts by far.

Defense does win championships.

It takes a Lemieux or Gretzky type to repeatedly and consistently overcome great checking in important games.


I agree totally!

Defense does not win championships? Dallas and New Jersey would disagree. So would Colorado and Detroit. All those teams had a great mix of offense, defensive forwards and defense. If it took a Lemieux of Gretzky to repeatedly overcome great checking then they'd have all the cups in the last 20 years.

 

[Riddarn]

The question shouldn't be "would you take Kris Draper over Peter Forsberg". I believe this should be about more one-dimensional players than those two.

So, would I take PJ Axelsson over Mariusz Czerkawski? You bet.

 

[arrbez]

The question shouldn't be "would you take Kris Draper over Peter Forsberg". I believe this should be about more one-dimensional players than those two.

So, would I take PJ Axelsson over Mariusz Czerkawski? You bet.

Just 'cause Czerkawski is one dimensional, it doesn't mean he's good at it

I propose Kris Draper vs. Dany Heatley