"A Defenseman Scoring 100 Points in a Season is Like a Forward Scoring..."

[BlueBull]

Technically, it's the same, but often, even as an Offensive Defenseman, a Defenseman brings more value on Defense than your Average Forward.

With that being said, what is the equivalent value to a 100 Point Defenseman for a Forward? (Assuming the Defenseman isn't a Liability on Defense)

Click to read more...

 

[blundluntman]

I'd say it's about the same as scoring around 140 points. 8 forwards in NHL history have scored 140 points. 6 defensemen in NHL history have scored 100 points.

I'd say there should be around a 30 point difference when evaluating how offensively skilled a dman is vs a forward. For example, during the lower scoring years in the early to mid 2010s, a dman scoring 70 points was about as rare as a forward scoring 100 points. Now, around 130 points is the benchmark for the best offensive forward in the league while 100 seems to be feasible for players like Karlsson, Makar and Hughes.

Now if you wanna factor in defensive play, that's another story. I'd have to get back to you on that.

 

[AvroArrow]

Depends. Does the defenceman actually defend or does he play rover and routinely essentially play the wing ?

For a guy that's responsible defensively and stays in position, i'd say it's the equivalent of like a 120 points for a forward.

For an all offence no defence guy that just cares about jumping up the rush and actually doesn't pay attention to defending, it's the same.

Assuming it's an actual "Blue liner" 120.

 

[norrisnick]

Define "is like".

Rarity?
Value?
Prestige?

On the face of it, 100 points is 100 points. Unless you look deeper into the players involved, that's it.

Pettersson's 100pt season was, IMO, better than Karlsson's last season. And not by a slim margin...

 

[Regal]

It depends on not just defense, but the team structure. I think there’s a big difference in terms of offensive contribution between Bouchard getting 100 points in Edmonton because their PP went off and Karlsson getting 100 points in San Jose as the main offensive piece. Since they’re the two talked about this year, if we look at what Makar and Hughes bring outside of offense as well as how much of the offense they’re responsible for, I’d say around 120. Maybe a little more. But then, we also need context for the forward.

 

[TageGod]

Same. They get spotted tons of secondary assists.

 

[psycat]

I'd say it's about the same as scoring around 140 points. 8 forwards in NHL history have scored 140 points. 5 defensemen in NHL history have scored 100 points.

I'd say there should be around a 30 point difference when evaluating how offensively skilled a dman is vs a forward. For example, during the lower scoring years in the early to mid 2010s, a dman scoring 70 points was about as rare as a forward scoring 100 points. Now, around 130 points is the benchmark for the best offensive forward in the league while 100 seems to be feasible for players like Karlsson, Makar and Hughes.

Now if you wanna factor in defensive play, that's another story. I'd have to get back to you on that.

Nitpicking but it's 6? Orr, Potvin, Coffey, MacInnis, Leetch, Karlsson.

Kinda shocking that someone like Bourque didn't happen to do it once tbh given how his stature as a player, how much ice-time he got and which era he played in, goes to show how rare it is. Granted we could very well have 1 if not 2 more by the end of the season.

Anyway I agree with 140~.

 

[blundluntman]

Nitpicking but it's 6? Orr, Potvin, Coffey, MacInnis, Leetch, Karlsson.

Kinda shocking that someone like Bourque didn't happen to do it once tbh given how his stature as a player, how much ice-time he got and which era he played in, goes to show how rare it is. Granted we could very well have 1 if not 2 more by the end of the season.

Anyway I agree with 140~.

You're right, I think I accidentally skipped Coffey when skimming over the list.

Bourque got close a few times but missed a couple games unfortunately. I do wish he'd accomplished the feat bc he's definitely one of the greatest offensive talents in NHL history as far as dmen go.

 

[Hale The Villain]

Now with the new PP set up racks up secondary assists for the defenseman at the point, 100 points for a defenseman won't be an unattainable target for the most elite offensive D in the league.

 

[Midnight Judges]

It depends.

For example, if a defenseman has the green light all the time to play offense, then scoring isn't actually any harder than it is for a forward. In fact it might be easier since the forwards are often occupying the defensemen (the best defensive players) on the other team and defensemen playing offense are often up against forwards playing defense - all while playing minutes that are significantly higher than what a forward typically gets.

This is the case for Erik Karlsson - who won a Norris trophy, went to Pittsburgh, and somehow managed not to make the team any better (.521 winning percentage this year vs .555 last season). This is in addition to Pens fans widely claiming other moves made this offseason were addition by subtraction. It's not a mystery, and it was entirely predictable. In fact it was predicted on this very forum by many people.

If Karlsson really is the equivalent of a 131 point forward - massively better than Sidney Crosby - as this poll result seems to imply, something tells me the Pens would have likely improved as a team.

Maybe, just maybe, preventing goals against is a valuable attribute for a defenseman, and should perhaps garner a bit more focus than it currently does.

 

[psycat]

It depends.

For example, if a defenseman has the green light all the time to play offense, then scoring isn't actually any harder than it is for a forward. In fact it might be easier since the forwards are often occupying the defensemen (the best defensive players) on the other team and you are largely free to go up against forwards playing defense - all while playing minutes that are significantly higher than what a forward typically gets.

This is the case for Erik Karlsson - who won a Norris trophy, went to Pittsburgh, and somehow managed not to make the team any better (.521 winning percentage this year vs .555 last season). It's not a mystery, and it was entirely predictable. In fact it was predicted on this very forum by many people (virtually none of them Pens fans).

If Karlsson was the equivalent of a 131 point forward, as this poll result seems to imply, something tells me the Pens would have improved.

Maybe, just maybe, preventing goals against is a valuable attribute for a defenseman, and should perhaps garner a bit more focus than it currently does.

Ok and McDavid is not very good defensively and Oilers aint winning despite having 2 mega offensive players, maybe they should play some defence? Harder to score 130+ as a forward while being defensively great aswell, I mean a Bergeron who scores 130 would be better than McDavid.

I mean it's silly arguing like you do, how come Bourque didn't score 100 despite having the fortune to be on bad teams in a high scoring era? Or why is noone in SJ doing it this year? Or why doesn't someone every year on a tanking team, not like they would care about defence anyway.

Nothing wrong with thinking responsible two-way players are the best but why is it so often defencemen that get lambasted for "not playing defence" while forwards, and mainly "centers", who cheat constantly doesn't get the same treatment?

 

[norrisnick]

Nothing wrong with thinking responsible two-way players are the best but why is it so often defencemen that get lambasted for "not playing defence" while forwards, and mainly "centers", who cheat constantly doesn't get the same treatment?

I remember there being some obscure reason for that, but I can't quite put my finger on it right now.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Nothing wrong with thinking responsible two-way players are the best but why is it so often defencemen that get lambasted for "not playing defence" while forwards, and mainly "centers", who cheat constantly doesn't get the same treatment?

It seems to me having defensemen who are great at defense and forwards who are great at offense can be a winning combination.

I'll take Doughty/Weber/Chara over Karlsson any day.

Ok and McDavid is not very good defensively and Oilers aint winning despite having 2 mega offensive players, maybe they should play some defence?

McDavid is the last person to blame there.

Blue liners and goal tending have been the problem near as I can tell. That's on the GM.

 

[wetcoast]

Technically, it's the same, but often, even as an Offensive Defenseman, a Defenseman brings more value on Defense than your Average Forward.

With that being said, what is the equivalent value to a 100 Point Defenseman for a Forward? (Assuming the Defenseman isn't a Liability on Defense)

When is an apple an orange was my first thought...seriously it's not the off season already is it?

 

[Machinehead]

There have been 15 100-point seasons by six defensemen.

There have been 17 150-point seasons by six forwards.

It's 150.

 

[CanadienShark]

None of the options are suitable except 130+, and even that undersells it.

 

[Midnight Judges]

There have been 15 100-point seasons by six defensemen.

There have been 17 150-point seasons by six forwards.

It's 150.

The percentage of forwards going all-out for offense is significantly higher than the percentage of defensemen going all-out for offense.

 

[authentic]

There have been 15 100-point seasons by six defensemen.

There have been 17 150-point seasons by six forwards.

It's 150.

I was about to chime in and say it's not even worth 140 because was Karlsson last year as good as McDavid? Very doubtful, but this comparison shows that it is atleast extremely rare but I don't know if this means it's equal to a 150 point season.

 

[Machinehead]

The percentage of forwards going all-out for offense is significantly higher than the percentage of defensemen going all-out for offense.

That's why there's a 50-point difference.

I was about to chime in and say it's not even worth 140 because was Karlsson last year as good as McDavid? Very doubtful, but this comparison shows that it is atleast extremely rare but I don't know if this means it's equal to a 150 point season.

When we're comparing value and throwing in defensive play, it very much becomes something that you can't really put a number on.

Karlsson's offense was just as good as McDavid's last year. They were both historic seasons that we hadn't seen the likes of in some time.

If you want to get into the fact that McDavid is low-key one of the better defensive forwards in hockey and Karlsson is...well, he's Karlsson, then like I said, you can't really enumerate that.

 

[Machinehead]

And then there's the whole "why didn't the Penguins get better??!!?" factor and like, Karlsson's old. The Penguins were already old. Karlsson's 22-23 season was a standout season in his whole career, let alone at the age he's at. It probably wasn't fair to expect 22-23 as the norm.

Then you factor in that the Penguins are significantly underperforming their analytics, and it becomes another thing that's impossible to gauge with a single numerical value.

 

[Midnight Judges]

That's why there's a 50-point difference.

I think I understated it. The vast majority of all defensemen are concerned about pinching at the right time and getting back to cover.

This alone prevents them from achieving maximum points.

Most high scoring forwards are not primarily concerned about that, rather, they cover if they happen to be in position to.

And then there's the whole "why didn't the Penguins get better??!!?" factor and like, Karlsson's old. The Penguins were already old. Karlsson's 22-23 season was a standout season in his whole career, let alone at the age he's at. It probably wasn't fair to expect 22-23 as the norm.

Then you factor in that the Penguins are significantly underperforming their analytics, and it becomes another thing that's impossible to gauge with a single numerical value.

If you look at the predictions for this season, the Karlsson fans and Penguins fans predicted playoffs easily if everyone stayed healthy. They have stayed healthy but a .523 points % doesn't make the playoffs.

 

[Machinehead]

I think I understated it. The vast majority of all defensemen are concerned about pinching at the right time and getting back to cover.

This alone prevents them from achieving maximum points.

Most high scoring forwards are not primarily concerned about that, rather, they cover if they happen to be in position to.



If you look at the predictions for this season, the Karlsson fans and Penguins fans predicted playoffs easily if everyone stayed healthy. They have stayed healthy but a .523 points % doesn't make the playoffs.

I still think they could make it with a bit more puck luck.

 

[Raccoon Jesus]

Ok and McDavid is not very good defensively and Oilers aint winning despite having 2 mega offensive players, maybe they should play some defence? Harder to score 130+ as a forward while being defensively great aswell, I mean a Bergeron who scores 130 would be better than McDavid.

Now you're getting it.

I mean it's silly arguing like you do, how come Bourque didn't score 100 despite having the fortune to be on bad teams in a high scoring era?

Injuries, that's really about it. he was absurdly close many times.

Or why is noone in SJ doing it this year?

Because there's no one there that good to do so. The argument isn't "every tanking team should have a 100 point guy."

Nothing wrong with thinking responsible two-way players are the best but why is it so often defencemen that get lambasted for "not playing defence" while forwards, and mainly "centers", who cheat constantly doesn't get the same treatment?

They are--you're just so myopically focused on your guy being a martyr that you're missing it.

These were absurdly easy questions to answer.

 

[67 others]

Nitpicking but it's 6? Orr, Potvin, Coffey, MacInnis, Leetch, Karlsson.

Kinda shocking that someone like Bourque didn't happen to do it once tbh given how his stature as a player, how much ice-time he got and which era he played in, goes to show how rare it is. Granted we could very well have 1 if not 2 more by the end of the season.

Anyway I agree with 140~.

Bourque is one of the top 5 defensive defensemen of all time who also happened to score 70-90 points quite a bit on a team lacking 120+ point players and depth scoring. Oh he had Neely(generally a 70-90 point forward in the 80's) and for a time, Oates, but when compared to the depth and star power of having a Mike Bossy/ Trottier, Gretzky/Messier/Lemieux, or a 2nd line of Gilmour/Makarov/Roberts, etc

Well, the point is pretty clear. Bourque lead his own team in scoring 5 times. What other defensemen did that?

 

[authentic]

When we're comparing value and throwing in defensive play, it very much becomes something that you can't really put a number on.

Karlsson's offense was just as good as McDavid's last year. They were both historic seasons that we hadn't seen the likes of in some time.

If you want to get into the fact that McDavid is low-key one of the better defensive forwards in hockey and Karlsson is...well, he's Karlsson, then like I said, you can't really enumerate that.

So defensemen who have put up 70-80 points are comparable to 115-130 point scorers in the past? Maybe this is the case but still seems like a bit much to me, this would have an average Lidstrom season higher than most of Crosby’s offensively, doesn’t really check out to me.

Also, McDavid is low-key one of the better defensive forwards… Perhaps you could elaborate on that one, he may have above average defensive impact but he cheats for offense as much as anyone in the NHL.