Amazing Karlsson stat

[Barrie22]

Thats maybe even more impressive that hes put up that many points with no stars up front!

Just look at olli jokinen as an example of a star player on a crap team looking like gold. But was nothing when he went to a talented team.

More talent means less ice time and the perfect setup to succeed.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

More talent means less ice time and the perfect setup to succeed.

Of course, it's just as easy to say:

Less talent means more ice time and the perfect setup to succeed.

The answer is that both situations can be optimal, and it depends. Universal maxims are always flawed. (Irony intended)

 

[NickyFotiu]

I really respect Karlsson but you guys make way too much out of his secondary assists. In fact I think both Burns and Hedman had more primary points this season. If memory serves me correct Karlsson had many more primary assists last season than he did this season. Comparing his offense to Paul Coffey (a guy who once scored 48 goals) is a real stretch.

 

[Korpse]

I really respect Karlsson but you guys make way too much out of his secondary assists. In fact I think both Burns and Hedman had more primary points this season. If memory serves me correct Karlsson had many more primary assists last season than he did this season. Comparing his offense to Paul Coffey (a guy who once scored 48 goals) is a real stretch.

I momentarily forgot there are people who think that secondary assist are "noise". Plenty of times a secondary assist is the most important part of the play.

Watch the clips below (from the first 2 months of the season) and tell me Karlsson made plays that should be dismissed.

https://www.nhl.com/video/turris-sla...072/c-45236003
https://www.nhl.com/video/dzingel-bu...068/c-45337003
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffmans-o...280/c-46046603
https://www.nhl.com/video/turris-sni...846/c-46327303
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffman-be...090/c-46627003
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffman-se...124/c-46840103
https://www.nhl.com/video/stone-bats...130/c-47041003
https://www.nhl.com/video/phaneuf-de...130/c-47044603

 

[NickyFotiu]

I do feel some secondary assists are important while other times they are not. I have seen some guys even get secondary assists from the bench. Do you feel Karlssons secondary assists are as important as Coffeys 48 goals?

 

[armani]

I momentarily forgot there are people who think that secondary assist are "noise". Plenty of times a secondary assist is the most important part of the play.

Watch the clips below (from the first 2 months of the season) and tell me Karlsson made plays that should be dismissed.

https://www.nhl.com/video/turris-sla...072/c-45236003
https://www.nhl.com/video/dzingel-bu...068/c-45337003
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffmans-o...280/c-46046603
https://www.nhl.com/video/turris-sni...846/c-46327303
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffman-be...090/c-46627003
https://www.nhl.com/video/hoffman-se...124/c-46840103
https://www.nhl.com/video/stone-bats...130/c-47041003
https://www.nhl.com/video/phaneuf-de...130/c-47044603

The poster you are referring to spends time on most of the active Karlsson threads, yet I highly doubt he has watched much of Karlsson other than here and there. Anyway, thanks for the informative post.

 

[NickyFotiu]

The poster you are referring to spends time on most of the active Karlsson threads, yet I highly doubt he has watched much of Karlsson other than here and there. Anyway, thanks for the informative post.

Interesting do you think that poster watched more of Coffey than you did?

 

[Korpse]

I do feel some secondary assists are important while other times they are not. I have seen some guys even get secondary assists from the bench. Do you feel Karlssons secondary assists are as important as Coffeys 48 goals?

I wasn't speaking to the Coffey comparison, rather the notion that secondary assists are easily demised.

 

[NickyFotiu]

I wasn't speaking to the Coffey comparison, rather the notion that secondary assists are easily demised.

I dont easily dismiss them. I just feel they sometimes have to be seen in context. Some are much more important than others. Take our playoff series vs you guys. I think Glass got an assist after a blocked shot. Lundy may have got one as well. Those I might not look at the same as some that you posted.

 

[ScaredStreit]

Karlsson is much better than both Coffey and Potvin.

Adjusted points:

Karlsson: 92
Potvin: 86 (1st on his team)
Karlsson: 86
Potvin: 85 (2nd on his team, outscoring Bossy--2nd only to Trottier who won the Art Ross)
Potvin: 85 (3rd on his team)
Karlsson: 82
Karlsson: 78
Karlsson: 73
Potvin: 72 (1st on his team)

(below this is before Karlsson's break out season and toward the end of Potvin's career so I didn't include them-but they clearly favor Potvin).

PS: ALL of Potvin's points above were BEFORE they won their first cup.

Offensively Potvin's in the conversation with Karrlson. It's ok to say that Karlsson is better offensively than Potvin was, I think there's a reasonable argument there (just like there's a reasonable argument against he claim). However when you factor in: defensive play, winning, physical play, etc. Potvin is CLEARLY above Karlsson.

What is the argument for Karlsson being better than Potvin (or Lidstrom/Bourque who're on Potvin's tier)?

 

[armani]

Interesting do you think that poster watched more of Coffey than you did?

Unlikely, I have watched Coffey in his prime, live, in person, a few times to go along with the Oilers dynasty on TV. Old enough to have watched the tail end of the Islanders dynasty.

Your handle, Nicky Fotiu, was a tough SOB. I invite you to watch the subject matter, Erik Karlsson, a bit more closely next season, don't rely on stats on paper and secondary assists. Your questions will be answered I promise.

 

[Cursed Lemon]

I've posted this in another thread, but I'll re-post it here, since it certainly qualifies as an "amazing Karlsson stat":

DEFENSEMEN CONTRIBUTION TO TEAM OFFENSE

Players | Season | Team | Points | TeamG | Percentage
Bobby Orr | 1970 | BOS | 120 | 277 | 43.3%
Bobby Orr | 1975 | BOS | 135 | 345 | 39.1%
Erik Karlsson | 2016 | OTT | 82| 230 | 35.7%
Bobby Orr | 1972 | BOS | 117 | 330 | 35.5%
Bobby Orr | 1974 | BOS | 122 | 349 | 35%
Erik Karlsson | 2017 | OTT | 72 | 206 | 35%
Bobby Orr | 1971 | BOS | 139 | 399 | 34.8%
Brent Burns | 2017 | SJS | 76 | 219 | 34.7%
Phil Housley | 1992 | WIN | 86 | 251 | 34.3%
Denis Potvin | 1976 | NYI | 98 | 297 | 33%
Paul Coffey | 1989 | PIT | 113 | 347 | 32.6%
Paul Coffey | 1990 | PIT | 103 | 318 | 32.4%
Paul Coffey | 1986 | EDM | 138 | 426 | 32.4%
Erik Karlsson | 2014 | OTT | 74 | 229 | 32.3%
Paul Coffey | 1995 | DET | 58 | 180 | 32.2%
Erik Karlsson | 2012 | OTT | 78 | 243 | 32.1%
Brian Leetch | 1992 | NYR | 102 | 321 | 31.8%
Ray Bourque | 1987 | BOS | 95 | 301 | 31.6%
Brian Leetch | 2001 | NYR | 79 | 250 | 31.6%
Ray Bourque | 1994 | BOS | 91 | 289 | 31.5%

This statistic looks at the percentage of their team's offense a defenseman has contributed to. I don't remember how far back the data goes, but it's at least to 1950, if not earlier.

As you'd expect, Bobby Orr dominates the list. He has the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 7th highest-ranking seasons of all-time.

What was surprising is how well Karlsson fares. He ranks 3rd, 6th, 14th and 16th. He already has as many spots on the list as Coffey (but consistently ranks higher). He fares better than Bourque and Leetch. Most impressively, Orr and Karlsson combined to up all of the top seven positions.

I feel like Coffey might be getting the shaft here considering who he played with. Karlsson has played for a very offensively average team for almost his entire career.

 

[SabreOil]

Blues had him ranked #1 on their draft board.
I picked him high in my keeper draft that year as well because plenty of scouts liked him more than the general consensus.

Proof?

 

[Barrie22]

Blues had him ranked #1 on their draft board.
I picked him high in my keeper draft that year as well because plenty of scouts liked him more than the general consensus.

Blues had karlsson #1 on there draft board but did not pick karlsson with the 4th overall pick? Makes perfect sense lol

 

[trentmccleary]

Blocked shots are a defensive stat, like a lot of others. Defensive stats are imperfect because they only tell a piece of a story that's difficult to capture with a number. That said, there are quite a few different ones that capture many different aspects of the story and Karlsson typically fairs well in most of them (BS, TKY, CFRel%, etc).

Just look at olli jokinen as an example of a star player on a crap team looking like gold. But was nothing when he went to a talented team.

More talent means less ice time and the perfect setup to succeed.

No, Jokinen is an example of Mike Keenan making useless big guys much better (something he did his entire coaching career). The spell usually doesn't last long though.

The 2012 Senators had a pretty solid offense. Spezza @ 4th in scoring, Michalek with 35 goals and Alfie still producing pretty well. Karlsson still produced a lot of team offense and outscored the 2nd highest scoring d-man by nearly 50% (25 points).

 

[TeamRenzo]

I really respect Karlsson but you guys make way too much out of his secondary assists. In fact I think both Burns and Hedman had more primary points this season. If memory serves me correct Karlsson had many more primary assists last season than he did this season. Comparing his offense to Paul Coffey (a guy who once scored 48 goals) is a real stretch.

Why are we discounting secondary assists? If EK carries the puck from his end to the other blue line passes to a player who then shoots the puck, goalie saves it and someone bangs in the rebound...why should that be worth less then the primary?

While I agree that some points are more "valuable" then others such as the fifth goal in a 5-1 games versus OT goal, the bottom line is that EK drives the Sens offense.

There are times when he carries the puck to the opponents end, Ottawa scores and he does not receive credit by way of assist.

When comparing players from different eras you have to look at how they perform against their peers, not the player. That is what the OP used the stat he used.

 

[NickyFotiu]

Why are we discounting secondary assists? If EK carries the puck from his end to the other blue line passes to a player who then shoots the puck, goalie saves it and someone bangs in the rebound...why should that be worth less then the primary?

While I agree that some points are more "valuable" then others such as the fifth goal in a 5-1 games versus OT goal, the bottom line is that EK drives the Sens offense.

There are times when he carries the puck to the opponents end, Ottawa scores and he does not receive credit by way of assist.

When comparing players from different eras you have to look at how they perform against their peers, not the player. That is what the OP used the stat he used.

In the cases you discussed that player played a significant role in creating the goal. Then on the other end of the spectrum you have a puck barely deflected off a stick or skate 180 feet away where a guy goes for a change and is on the bench while getting an assist. Not all secondary assists are significant and not all are silly. They need to be viewed in context.

 

[Anidalife]

In the cases you discussed that player played a significant role in creating the goal. Then on the other end of the spectrum you have a puck barely deflected off a stick or skate 180 feet away where a guy goes for a change and is on the bench while getting an assist. Not all secondary assists are significant and not all are silly. They need to be viewed in context.

So provide some stats on the percentage of secondary assists that are less relevant than primary assists. For you to say that, the onus is on you to provide stats to back it up.

Also on top of that, you very well may be right. Goals are probably better than assists, but to only discount this one facet to discredit one player, Karlsson or Coffey or anyone else, is extremely biased. To take account this one discrepancy yet not mention other things like teammates, era, play style, luck, etc will always be detrimental to one player to fit our narrative. (Please don't pick apart this sentence, I fully realize it's absurd to say things like luck and play style, that's the point.)

 

[NickyFotiu]

So provide some stats on the percentage of secondary assists that are less relevant than primary assists. For you to say that, the onus is on you to provide stats to back it up.

Also on top of that, you very well may be right. Goals are probably better than assists, but to only discount this one facet to discredit one player, Karlsson or Coffey or anyone else, is extremely biased. To take account this one discrepancy yet not mention other things like teammates, era, play style, luck, etc will always be detrimental to one player to fit our narrative. (Please don't pick apart this sentence, I fully realize it's absurd to say things like luck and play style, that's the point.)

I usually dont like to argue stats too often. I believe in Mark Twains quote, "There are lies, damn lies, & statistics". I feel too often on these boards people look for stats that feed their point of view and ignore the rest.

In regards to Karlsson and Coffey I feel they are both two very good defensemen but Karlsson couldn't touch Coffey offensively. Coffey was the only one that has ever come close to Orr offensively.

 

[Anidalife]

I usually dont like to argue stats too often. I believe in Mark Twains quote, "There are lies, damn lies, & statistics". I feel too often on these boards people look for stats that feed their point of view and ignore the rest.

In regards to Karlsson and Coffey I feel they are both two very good defensemen but Karlsson couldn't touch Coffey offensively. Coffey was the only one that has ever come close to Orr offensively.

So are we supposed to take your word for it when you say secondary assists should be ignored? I'm sorry that I'm not convinced.

Considering the above, why should I or anyone take your opinion seriously when you go on to say Coffey is better than Karlsson offensively? You're probably right, everything I've seen says that's probably true right now, yet you don't make it possible to take it seriously. Just my opinion. If you want to provide some stats, I would love to talk about the validity of them, and respect your opinion either way. If not, that's fine too, just don't expect anyone else to respect what you say on a forum. Skewed stats are bad, but no stats is worse.

 

[deckercky]

In the cases you discussed that player played a significant role in creating the goal. Then on the other end of the spectrum you have a puck barely deflected off a stick or skate 180 feet away where a guy goes for a change and is on the bench while getting an assist. Not all secondary assists are significant and not all are silly. They need to be viewed in context.

For great playmakers and play drivers, they probably lose as many third assists that were important to the development of the goal than they gain irrelevant secondary assists.

 

[NickyFotiu]

So are we supposed to take your word for it when you say secondary assists should be ignored? I'm sorry that I'm not convinced.

Considering the above, why should I or anyone take your opinion seriously when you go on to say Coffey is better than Karlsson offensively? You're probably right, everything I've seen says that's probably true right now, yet you don't make it possible to take it seriously. Just my opinion. If you want to provide some stats, I would love to talk about the validity of them, and respect your opinion either way. If not, that's fine too, just don't expect anyone else to respect what you say on a forum. Skewed stats are bad, but no stats is worse.

While we are fallible I do not think I ever said secondary assists should be ignored.

I discuss stats but I do not like to argue via stats because too often people make up their minds then look for cherry picked stats that only support their arguments instead of looking at a situation without trying to prove a point.

It is just my opinion that Paul Coffey was a much better offensive player than Karlsson. Im not trying to argue this belief or prove it.

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

I've posted this in another thread, but I'll re-post it here, since it certainly qualifies as an "amazing Karlsson stat":

DEFENSEMEN CONTRIBUTION TO TEAM OFFENSE

Players | Season | Team | Points | TeamG | Percentage
Bobby Orr | 1970 | BOS | 120 | 277 | 43.3%
Bobby Orr | 1975 | BOS | 135 | 345 | 39.1%
Erik Karlsson | 2016 | OTT | 82| 230 | 35.7%
Bobby Orr | 1972 | BOS | 117 | 330 | 35.5%
Bobby Orr | 1974 | BOS | 122 | 349 | 35%
Erik Karlsson | 2017 | OTT | 72 | 206 | 35%
Bobby Orr | 1971 | BOS | 139 | 399 | 34.8%
Brent Burns | 2017 | SJS | 76 | 219 | 34.7%
Phil Housley | 1992 | WIN | 86 | 251 | 34.3%
Denis Potvin | 1976 | NYI | 98 | 297 | 33%
Paul Coffey | 1989 | PIT | 113 | 347 | 32.6%
Paul Coffey | 1990 | PIT | 103 | 318 | 32.4%
Paul Coffey | 1986 | EDM | 138 | 426 | 32.4%
Erik Karlsson | 2014 | OTT | 74 | 229 | 32.3%
Paul Coffey | 1995 | DET | 58 | 180 | 32.2%
Erik Karlsson | 2012 | OTT | 78 | 243 | 32.1%
Brian Leetch | 1992 | NYR | 102 | 321 | 31.8%
Ray Bourque | 1987 | BOS | 95 | 301 | 31.6%
Brian Leetch | 2001 | NYR | 79 | 250 | 31.6%
Ray Bourque | 1994 | BOS | 91 | 289 | 31.5%

This statistic looks at the percentage of their team's offense a defenseman has contributed to. I don't remember how far back the data goes, but it's at least to 1950, if not earlier.

As you'd expect, Bobby Orr dominates the list. He has the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, and 7th highest-ranking seasons of all-time.

What was surprising is how well Karlsson fares. He ranks 3rd, 6th, 14th and 16th. He already has as many spots on the list as Coffey (but consistently ranks higher). He fares better than Bourque and Leetch. Most impressively, Orr and Karlsson combined to up all of the top seven positions.

Shouldn't goals be more valued than assists? Just counting them all as points is an injustice to Burns this season, as he was the best offensive defenseman this year.

 

[Colorado Avalanche]

Woah slow down there buddy.

Orr was doing that on much better teams.

I mean its great that Karlsson is such an impact player for Ottawa but the Sens are a pretty mediocre club on paper too. Of course he stands out.

Exactly. Those numbers look great when Ottawa hasn't had that great offensive player in some time, other than Alfredsson and Spezza. Ottawa's been very mediocre team offensively for some time, at least in my books.

 

[Micklebot]

Just look at olli jokinen as an example of a star player on a crap team looking like gold. But was nothing when he went to a talented team.

More talent means less ice time and the perfect setup to succeed.

I see this kind of argument thrown around, but it really doesn't apply to the claim being made.

In order for more talent to mean "less ice time and the perfect setup to succeed", there needs to be a situation where one players opportunities (OZ starts, PP TOI, linemates ect) are cannibalized by the other talent. When an offensive forward moves to a stronger team as Jokinen did, that's going to happen; he'll lose some PP time, he might get put on the 2nd line or even 3rd line instead of the 1st line, he might not get the lion's share of OZ starts.

But who exactly is going to cannibalize Karlsson's opportunities? Certainly not additional star forwards, which is what you responded to. Perhaps if Karlsson were moved to a team plush with Offensive Dmen, you might have a case, but even in that situation, there are very few teams with offensive Dmen that can match up with what Karlsson provides, so even there, it's unlikely that Karlsson would be losing opportunity.