Wouldn't the optimistic comparison for Karlsson be Paul Coffey? Why bother comparing almost anybody to Orr? Have we found someone who wants to argue for Karlsson as a top 2, or top 5 or even top 10 D? No? Why bother then?
Some Karlsson/Coffey bullet points:
- Coffey stopped putting up points at 35, Karlsson may have lost his magic at 30.
- Coffey was first traded at age 26, started getting really punted around the league at 30. Karlsson was first traded at 28 but hasn't become a hot potato yet.
- Both carried a negative defensive reputation through their entire careers, with the occasional heroic moments (Coffey's Canada Cup poke check, Karlsson's shot-blocking rampage in the 2017 playoffs)
- Karlsson has been a positive CF% player up until this year, RAPM pegs him as league average at preventing goals against. No such models exist for Coffey's career.
- Coffey's 7-year VsX is about 14 points higher than Karlsson's, which of course reflects changing roles for defensemen, playing on better teams, and playing with Gretzky and Lemieux.
- Coffey has an extra Norris and 4 extra 2nd-team All Star nods.
Without getting deep into quotes and tape, Coffey's had the better career and has been the more valuable player, but they're surely closer to each other than Bobby freaking Orr. I don't think Phil Housley would show as well in the above comparison at all.
I think the biggest advantage Coffey has is longevity. It could easily be argued (I do) that both should have more Norrises than they do. I'd give Karlsson four and Coffey either four or five. I also think Coffey should have a Hart on his mantle. Although, to be fair, I don't think Karlsson ever got the Hart recognition he deserved. He was on some reasonably competitive teams that would have been garbage without him. If that's not a Hart candidate's resume, I don't know what is. So, I'd say both are underrated on awards, though I'll acknowledge that Coffey should still be credited an advantage, as he was good for long enough to keep picking up all star selections.
Both are among the elite offensive defensemen the league has ever seen. Coffey was boosted by the teams he played on, no doubt, but it's also worth noting that he led the 1994-95 Red Wings in scoring, so I can't chalk it up completely to teammates, and I don't think it should be. Karlsson has the distinction of leading the league in assists, something that only Bobby Orr and Harry Cameron had previously done as defensemen, and with the style of the game in Cameron's era, that's a serious apples to oranges comparison. He also managed a top five league scoring finish on a team that he didn't have a lot of support on. Thus, bring Coffey down a little, and lift Karlsson a little. Still, Coffey's overall offensive game was so unworldly that I'm still going to say he's got an advantage, especially when looking at his incredible goal scoring exploits.
I'd give Karlsson a defensive advantage. One thing I don't think is fair about people saying he's bad defensively is that he was asked to take an all-out offensive role for so many years, and even then, he wasn't total dead weight in his own end. When he was asked to play more defensively, he did so very well, while not sacrificing much offense, and the result was a team that got way closer to a Cup than they probably ever should have. I think that if earlier coaches had really considered Karlsson's skating ability and his ability to get up and down the ice so well and asked him for a more two-way game, the narrative on him would be far different.
So, then it comes back to longevity. As things stand, that's why several guys sit ahead of Karlsson. If he were still anywhere near his peak level (i.e., had a more normal career arc and decline), he'd still be steadily climbing the ranks. He's not so old that he can't have an offensive resurgence, but I think a career recovery would be more likely to come as the result of a reinvention. Let's see what he could do in a more solidly defensive role. Then, we'd have a once and for all answer about that aspect of his game, and I think that, in the right situations (which I don't believe is San Jose), and well utilized, we could see a strong defensive Karlsson that still gives decent offensive contributions. The question is, will anyone be willing to try it?