1C vs 1D - Value and Rarity

[Viqsi]

And yet the most elite defenseman on the planet, who had clearly shown his nature, just got traded for peanuts.

Yes, under extremely specific circumstances, truly special players can be traded for garbage returns.

Speaking of which, what player are you named after, again?

 

[Jimmy Firecracker]

2007 Ducks come to mind. Andy MacDonald was good, but certainly not "elite".

So 10 years ago.

 

[Juxtaposer]

It is infinitely easier to acquire a true #1D than it is to acquire a true #1C.

 

[Kaners Bald Spot]

I dont like the terms 1C and 1D because they're incredibly subjective.
I prefer to define forwards and defensmen by what they do on the ice.
A centerman scores 70 points: is it 40-30? 25-45 or 15-55?
Does said centerman play Selke level defense? Good? Average? Bad?
Ask similar questions about defensemen

 

[Rorschach]

Nashville, Carolina, Calgary. All teams with strong D and arguably multiple #1 D at times. Never won anything. Pens and Kings won due to their strength down the middle.

Kings aren't a good example. They count their 1 and 3 D plus their 1G as part of their strength down the middle.

 

[Rorschach]

1Ds play more minutes.
1Cs take face offs.

1Ds are fewer in number
1Cs have greater demand due to twice as many jobs, two per top six.

They're about equal in value.

However, 1RHD > 1C of the same caliber.

 

[The Head Crusher]

Name the last team to win a cup without an elite center?

I was going to say the 2006 Carolina Hurricanes, but I forgot about Eric Staal and though Brind'amour played the wing. I guess it would ave to be the 2003 Devils. They had Nieuwendyk and Gomez, but neither were a huge offensive threat 45 and 55 points respectively. That team was built on Defense with Rafalski, Niedermayer, Stevens, and Brodeur.

 

[Kettil33]

It isn't a one dimensional question .. so its impossible to answer a linear question of importance.

Elite 1d can carry a franchise moreso than an elite 1c. Strong 1ds typically play at an top level longer than strong 1cs. Edmonton has the top 1c in the league and its not close ... and they arent even a playoff team. If they had the McDavid version of a 1d ... that wouldn't happen.

But there's more than 1 way to skin a cat, so a team can be successful without a real 1d and a team can be successful without a real 1c. It just so happens that this years final had teams with questionable guys in both roles ..., what does that say ... did vegas lack both a legit 1d and a legit 1c ... or were the guys in those roles mis-valued? Was had both a 1c and 1d whose status hasn't always been highly regarded .. what does that say? Pitt has had success even when their 1d was hurt .. but they have had two elite 1cs and got unbelievable goaltending. TB became an elite team and perennial contender .... once they got an elite 1d in Hedman. Karlsson singlehandedly carried a franchise of scholck to intermittent high levels of success without anything resembling a true 1c ... so what does that say?

Barzal? Provorov? I'd start a franchise build with either of these guys in a heart beat and either team would potentially have a Cup chance in their peak of about equal probability assuming comparable team builds around these two budding superstars.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

It is infinitely easier to acquire a true #1D than it is to acquire a true #1C.

Why haven't Leafs acquired one then.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Taking quality into account

Mcdavid vs Karlsson

Crosby vs Hedman

Malkin vs Subban

McDonaugh vs Johansen

Josi Vs Kuznetsov

C's always have more value and are much harder to acquire.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Why haven't Leafs acquired one then.

It's easier to make a million dollars than a billion;

Why aren't you a millionaire?

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Yes, under extremely specific circumstances, truly special players can be traded for garbage returns.

Speaking of which, what player are you named after, again?

Why do these extremely specific circumstances present themselves so much more often with defensemen than they do with forwards?

 

[Frank Drebin]

Why do these extremely specific circumstances present themselves so much more often with defensemen than they do with forwards?

Besides Karlsson, who are you talking about?

 

[b in vancouver]

It depends. Top d-men bring more consistency to a team while top centres can dictate the game more.
Being without a top centre is more frustrating as a fan but it's almost like you don't know what you're missing when you don't have a #1d that you can trust in all situations and just feel better when he jumps over the boards.

At the moment - whom would you rather have for the next decade. Barzal or McAvoy?

 

[ThePhoenixx]

A 1D would be any player who can play top pair but is better than half of top pair defenseman. A 1C is any player capable and a fit for 1C.

I think its quite clear 1D is a step above and the equal comparison would be top pair vs 1C

You have made two different criteria and then tried to compare them using the different criteria.

I know you are trying to create a one on one instead of two on one but there is no way to do it without diminishing the talent quotient.

 

[ThePhoenixx]

1Ds play more minutes.
1Cs take face offs.

1Ds are fewer in number
1Cs have greater demand due to twice as many jobs, two per top six.

They're about equal in value.

However, 1RHD > 1C of the same caliber.

Top pairing.

 

[Hint1k]

The 25 highest-paid players in the NHL

So top 25 looks like this:
1) 11 centers*
2) 9 wingers*
3) 5 defensemen
4) 1 goalie

*1 player listed as a winger/center.

That's the ranking list you are looking for.

 

[IPS]

I was going to say the 2006 Carolina Hurricanes, but I forgot about Eric Staal and though Brind'amour played the wing. I guess it would ave to be the 2003 Devils. They had Nieuwendyk and Gomez, but neither were a huge offensive threat 45 and 55 points respectively. That team was built on Defense with Rafalski, Niedermayer, Stevens, and Brodeur.

Bingo. So we need to turn the clock back 16 years to find out the last team who won without an elite #1C.

We need to turn the clock back 1 year to see who won without an elite #1D, and then one year again. Both Washington and Pittsburgh won cups with no elite #1D.

It's very obvious at this point that center ice is much more important than defense.

 

[IPS]

Letang played outstanding hockey in the 2016 Cup win? He, along with Crosby, Kessel, and Murray were the four Conn Smythe favorites for that Cup run.

Why do people forget how good Letang was just because of his struggles this past season?

Letang isn't in the top echelon of D-men but he's right on the outside.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Besides Karlsson, who are you talking about?

Okay, so let’s filter out the list and look at only defensemen that were established superstar #1Ds and the #1Cs of the same caliber at the time they changed teams.

#1D:

Chris Pronger
Zdeno Chara
Scott Niedermayer
Ryan Suter
Shea Weber
PK Subban
Dougie Hamilton
Dan Boyle

#1C:

Joe Thornton
John Tavares

Still a much longer list of #1 defensemen. Even if you consider Dougie Hamilton not to meet the bill (or Brent Burns, who was an all star at the time he was traded, but not a Norris guy), you’ve still got 7 Norris level defensemen who changed hands via trade. (I’m a Sharks fan and I forgot Boyle as one of the #1D who were traded in that time frame lol)

Hell, even Brian Campbell was top-5 in Norris votes in the season he was traded and then changed teams via UFA.

Letang isn't in the top echelon of D-men but he's right on the outside.

He was top-5 in the regular season and the playoffs in 2015-2016.

 

[IPS]

He was top-5 in the regular season and the playoffs in 2015-2016.

For sure. It's consistency/health that's his problem.

I consider the top echelon to Doughty/Karlsson/Keith/Hedman/Pietrangelo

Letang is in there with guys like Carlson/Byfuglien/Burns/Josi etc...

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

For sure. It's consistency/health that's his problem.

I consider the top echelon to Doughty/Karlsson/Keith/Hedman/Pietrangelo

Letang is in there with guys like Carlson/Byfuglien/Burns/Josi etc...

I’m assuming you’re just trying to rile me up by suggesting Pietrangelo is not only superior to Burns, but in a whole other echelon at that.

 

[IPS]

I’m assuming you’re just trying to rile me up by suggesting Pietrangelo is not only superior to Burns, but in a whole other echelon at that.

Do you have to be so antagonistic over a simple difference of opinion?

Burns is not even remotely near Pietrangelo when it comes to shutting down team's star players. A true #1D requires this ability. I've always found Pietrangelo disgustingly underrated on HFBoards, Shattenkirk stole his spot on the #1 PP for many years which artificially kept Piet's production down. The guy's easily a 55-65 point D-men with some of the best defensive play in the league, on top of being an incredible puck mover. Feel free to back me up here Blues fans, I know you guys have lived with him being underrated on here for a long time.

 

[Drake1588]

Without going down the semantics rabbit hole, I'd say that it is more rare to find good #1 defense, and that teams don't part with it when they have it.

When you don't have it, you know it, and you covet it. You also find that acquiring it in trade is exceedingly difficult.

Drafting it is not assured, when you're at the nadir of your competitiveess curve, and even when you do, it takes many years to develop a #1 defenseman.

To me, centers are more plentiful, by contrast, and they reach their prime earlier.

Now there is another wrinkle to this. Increasingly, when we debate the makeup of Cup contenders, we like to see teams that are in the elite category with two #1 centers, a 1a/1b sort of scenario. Few contenders ever reach two #1 defensemen. Anaheim in 2007 and San Jose this year are the only two teams that I can recall in the cap era. That may impact the calculus. Don't know.

 

[Cotton]

1C>1D in value and rarity.