Defensive Defencemen

[rnhaas]

Since the position of defenseman was created, there have been defenders who contributed to the team’s offense and there have been players who didn’t much. But this difference was exacerbated by the expansion of the NHL in 1967 and the phenomenon of Bobby Orr, who destroyed scoring records for defenders, and showed that teams could expect scoring from the back-end in ways they never imagined.

This change essentially created a dichotomy between “offensive” defensemen, who scored a lot, albeit not quite as much as Bobby Orr, and “defensive” defensemen, who didn’t score much at all. For our purposes, we’ve arbitrarily assumed that a “defensive defenseman” is a defender which manged .35 adjusted PPG or less throughout their NHL career.

The Hall of Fame’s attitude towards defensively inclined defenders also changed since expansion. The Hall of Fame has inducted six NHL defensemen from that era who scored less than .35 adjusted PPG (of a total of 16 legitimate candidates they could have inducted). But the Hall of Fame has inducted exactly one player who fits the bill, Rod Langway, to play the majority of his career since expansion.

This leads to three possible conclusions:

• Rod Langway was the best defensive defenseman since expansion, significantly better than any other, and he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame while no other player with a similar skill set deserves the honour. OR
• There are other players of Rod Langway’s ability who have been forgotten or overlooked because they didn’t get the awards votes (Norris and Hart) that Langway got, and they deserve to be in. OR
• Rod Langway’s awards votes are a historical curiosity that won’t happen again and he didn’t necessarily deserve them, nor do other players who fail to contribute offensively, and no defensive defensemen should be inducted into the Hall of Fame going forward.

How do we sort this out?

That's the topic of the latest, very special episode of The Back Check hockey history podcast. We talk about the following players:

• Rod Langway
  
• Jim Schoenfeld
• Peter Svoboda
• Bill Hajt
• Brad McCrimmon
• Darien Hatcher
• Glen Wesley
• and more

You can listen here or on iTunes. As always, we'd love your feedback.

Show notes

Players considered

Click to read more...

 

[DannyGallivan]

Since the position of defenseman was created, there have been defenders who contributed to the team’s offense and there have been players who didn’t much. But this difference was exacerbated by the expansion of the NHL in 1967 and the phenomenon of Bobby Orr, who destroyed scoring records for defenders, and showed that teams could expect scoring from the back-end in ways they never imagined.

This change essentially created a dichotomy between “offensive” defensemen, who scored a lot, albeit not quite as much as Bobby Orr, and “defensive” defensemen, who didn’t score much at all. For our purposes, we’ve arbitrarily assumed that a “defensive defenseman” is a defender which manged .35 adjusted PPG or less throughout their NHL career.

The Hall of Fame’s attitude towards defensively inclined defenders also changed since expansion. The Hall of Fame has inducted six NHL defensemen from that era who scored less than .35 adjusted PPG (of a total of 16 legitimate candidates they could have inducted). But the Hall of Fame has inducted exactly one player who fits the bill, Rod Langway, to play the majority of his career since expansion.

This leads to three possible conclusions:

• Rod Langway was the best defensive defenseman since expansion, significantly better than any other, and he deserves to be in the Hall of Fame while no other player with a similar skill set deserves the honour. OR
• There are other players of Rod Langway’s ability who have been forgotten or overlooked because they didn’t get the awards votes (Norris and Hart) that Langway got, and they deserve to be in. OR
• Rod Langway’s awards votes are a historical curiosity that won’t happen again and he didn’t necessarily deserve them, nor do other players who fail to contribute offensively, and no defensive defensemen should be inducted into the Hall of Fame going forward.

How do we sort this out?

That's the topic of the latest, very special episode of The Back Check hockey history podcast. We talk about the following players:

• Rod Langway
  
• Jim Schoenfeld
• Peter Svoboda
• Bill Hajt
• Brad McCrimmon
• Darien Hatcher
• Glen Wesley
• and more

You can listen here or on iTunes. As always, we'd love your feedback.

Show notes

Players considered

With all due respect to defensive defensemen and their skill sets, the best defensemen can contribute both offensively and defensively. Orr was exceptionally rare, in that he was both the best offensive defenseman, AND the best defensive defenseman (he could do it all better than anybody else).

However, if all you bring to the table is good positioning, defensive awareness, good decision-making and an ability to get the puck out of your zone, then perhaps you don't have the overall talent required to also contribute offensively.

You can teach defensive skills to an offensive defenseman, but you can't teach the hockey sense, shot, skating and puck handling necessary to put up points.

 

[rnhaas]

I tend to agree with you.

 

[Michael Farkas]

A goal prevented or is more valuable than a goal scored. We just don't have a measurement for the "prevented" part...so it's tricky waters to navigate.

As a skill development coach, I can tell you that I can fix skating, shot and technical skill to a fair degree...hockey sense is unlikely to improve notably once you get to a certain age group...with hockey sense, typically comes adaptability...which is the "grounding" of offensive defensemen - a la Paul Coffey in the playoffs, Erik Karlsson's steady improvement defensively, etc. For players that don't have it, the same mistakes are made routinely: Byfuglien, Phaneuf, etc.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Two-way defensemen are the ones who should be getting into the Hall, with the exceptions of the very few one-way defensemen who are so good at that way that they alter games with it. For example, I think Derian Hatcher was at least as big an impact player as Sergei Zubov when they spent time together.

But just as Mike Ramsey shouldn't get into the Hall, neither should have Phil Housley.

 

[Theokritos]

A goal prevented is more valuable than a goal scored.

Is it?

 

[rnhaas]

Maybe I'm missing something, but it seems like they are worth the same value.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Is it?

Pythagorean's expected win% suggests the goal prevented is more valuable than a goal scored.

400 goals for - 300 goals against has a lower expected win% than 300 goals for - 200 goals against, for instance...

 

[rnhaas]

Ah thank you

 

[Canadiens1958]

Pythagorean's expected win% suggests the goal prevented is more valuable than a goal scored.

400 goals for - 300 goals against has a lower expected win% than 300 goals for - 200 goals against, for instance...

Very true but this was recognized by hockey coaches, management and executives when the original Vezina was awarded for fewest goals. Didn't matter how or who.

The interesting part about the Pythagorean is that it holds for first goals scored vs allowed and other scenarios such as first period goals scored and allowed.

 

[DannyGallivan]

Pythagorean's expected win% suggests the goal prevented is more valuable than a goal scored.

400 goals for - 300 goals against has a lower expected win% than 300 goals for - 200 goals against, for instance...

This site has just proven to be more pertinent that the Canadian school system.

 

[double5son10]

With all due respect to defensive defensemen and their skill sets, the best defensemen can contribute both offensively and defensively. Orr was exceptionally rare, in that he was both the best offensive defenseman, AND the best defensive defenseman (he could do it all better than anybody else).

However, if all you bring to the table is good positioning, defensive awareness, good decision-making and an ability to get the puck out of your zone, then perhaps you don't have the overall talent required to also contribute offensively.

You can teach defensive skills to an offensive defenseman, but you can't teach the hockey sense, shot, skating and puck handling necessary to put up points.

You may be able to teach them, but that doesn't mean said defenseman is a good student. Housley, Sandis Ozolinsh, Reed Larson, Mike McEwen, Gaston Gingras, Dmitri Mironov, etc. etc., etc. Even Coffey. Hockey is littered with defensemen who had long careers who were below average to atrocious in their own end.

I'll have to give this a listen simply because I'm curious how Petr Svoboda fits with the others listed. I certainly wouldn't rank him with the others as a great defensive D.

 

[Canadiens1958]

The Pythagorean Expectation was devised by Bill James. History, details and calculations follow:

Pythagorean expectation - Wikipedia

 

[tony d]

Yeah, they can play big roles in the game. Still as good a defensive defenseman as they were a guy like Bill Hajt or Jim Schoenfeld aren't Hall of Famers IMO.

 

[seventieslord]

You may be able to teach them, but that doesn't mean said defenseman is a good student. Housley, Sandis Ozolinsh, Reed Larson, Mike McEwen, Gaston Gingras, Dmitri Mironov, etc. etc., etc. Even Coffey. Hockey is littered with defensemen who had long careers who were below average to atrocious in their own end.

I'll have to give this a listen simply because I'm curious how Petr Svoboda fits with the others listed. I certainly wouldn't rank him with the others as a great defensive D.

I was hoping someone would say that. Same with Wesley. he was good, not great. I'd name a couple hundred before I got to him.

 

[blogofmike]

Pythagorean's expected win% suggests the goal prevented is more valuable than a goal scored.

400 goals for - 300 goals against has a lower expected win% than 300 goals for - 200 goals against, for instance...

In theory, yes.

In practice the only post-expansion teams between 295-305 GF vs 195-205 GA were:
2001 Devils - 111 PTS (82 GP, 3 OTL PTS)
1978 Flyers - 105 PTS (80 GP)

The 400-300 club (395-405 GF vs 295-305 GA) was almost exactly the same:
85 Oilers - 109 PTS (80 GP)
88 Flames - 105 PTS (80 GP)

Has anyone studied how teams with the same goal differentials vary in terms of their records in practice? It looks like a mixed bag with high GD teams. Team Game Finder | Hockey-Reference.com

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

• Jim Schoenfeld
• Peter Svoboda
• Bill Hajt

a sabres fan?

and no mike ramsey?

 

[crobro]

Brad McCrimmon was as good as Langway

 

[double5son10]

OP: Do you guys EVER go back and TRY to watch old games? At All?? You talk on the podcast like footage of Langway doesn't exist, or is locked away in a vault somewhere. I understand the skepticism over Langway's Norris' as seen from afar. But there's plenty of full games of the man, from his first full season in Montreal right through his peak, of playoff and international games, to provide for the eye test.







1984 Canada Cup Canada Vs USA Round Robin

Game 4 1985 Patrick Division Semi-Final Capitals @ Islanders

SPORTSCHANNEL NEW YORK 1987 EASTER EPIC!!!!!!!!!!

Rendez-vous '87 - NHL All-Stars vs. U.S.S.R. - 2-11-87

1988 NHL Playoffs Flyers at Capitals Game 7 (Full Game)

Your research just seems so incomplete. You've crunched numbers in a vacuum. There's no context, whatsoever. The harping on "old-timer" accounts got silly, fast. You talk like people who were fans of the man's game are 100 yrs. old and their fading memories can't be trusted. That's pretty insulting to a lot of the people on this board, imv.

Yes those Norris' look like an aberration, given the era, but they're not one-off votes like Randy Carlyle, where he wins a Norris and is never a top 5 finalist again. Langway has FIVE Top 5 finishes, THREE Top 5 Hart votes, played on all three Canada Cup Team USAs in the 80s AS THE TEAM CAPTAIN, and was chosen for the NHL All-Stars Rendez-vous '87 team against the Soviets. In the 1984 coaches' poll he's not surprisingly voted best defensive defenseman and fifth best bodychecker, but he's also runner-up to Gretzky as MVP and that same season topped the players' poll along with Bourque as the two best D. It's one thing to question a vote or two by the hockey writers, and quite another to willfully ignore all other evidence.

No, his teams never went far in the playoffs, but they're losing to the dynasty Islanders in his best years, they never had top centers nor top goaltending (Pat Riggin, Al Jensen, Bob Mason, Pete Peeters, Don Beaupre were all #1s in his 11 yrs as captain of the Caps. A rotating cast you wouldn't exactly call world class) , and well Bryan Murray isn't gettin' in the Hall. While the Caps only finished first once as the leagues best in GA as you mention, you failed to point out they were the runner-up three times and top 5 three others, and he's a top 4 player on two league best defenses in Montreal as well (that also had mediocre goaltending, no top centers and questionable coaching).

Yes, he's the best defensive defenseman of his generation. Yes, he played 30 minutes a game in his prime. Yes, he deserves to be in the HoF. Yes, he was THAT good.

 

[psycat]

With all due respect to defensive defensemen and their skill sets, the best defensemen can contribute both offensively and defensively. Orr was exceptionally rare, in that he was both the best offensive defenseman, AND the best defensive defenseman (he could do it all better than anybody else).

However, if all you bring to the table is good positioning, defensive awareness, good decision-making and an ability to get the puck out of your zone, then perhaps you don't have the overall talent required to also contribute offensively.

You can teach defensive skills to an offensive defenseman, but you can't teach the hockey sense, shot, skating and puck handling necessary to put up points.

But Orr wasn't the best defensive defenceman, no more than Gretzky was the best defensive forward- I mean if you follow the old device that offense is the best defence it might be arguable in both cases. That's not to say he wasn't well above average obviously.

 

[BigBadBruins7708]

But Orr wasn't the best defensive defenceman, no more than Gretzky was the best defensive forward- I mean if you follow the old device that offense is the best defence it might be arguable in both cases. That's not to say he wasn't well above average obviously.

no, he was

in terms of the defensive defenseman and the HOF debate, for me you cant be a pure stay at home guy (like Hjalmarsson). You at least need to chip in some offense otherwise you arent among the best of the best.

prototypical "defensive" defenseman as a HOF'er to me would be Chara. His biggest asset is by far how much he shut everything down in his own zone as well as his physical play. But he also pitched in 50 pts per season in his prime, and most years was above 40

 

[DannyGallivan]

But Orr wasn't the best defensive defenceman, no more than Gretzky was the best defensive forward- I mean if you follow the old device that offense is the best defence it might be arguable in both cases. That's not to say he wasn't well above average obviously.

Of course he was the best defensive defenseman, and it's not just me who said that. He had the speed to back check after his own rushes and beat the point. Look at his insane plus/minus stats (in 1971, for example HE WAS A PLUS 124!). You don't get that from offensive alone. Phil Housley was offense. Doug Wilson was offense. Bobby Orr was everything.

 

[The Panther]

I feel like (not having seen the dude play) that Orr was a really, really good defensive defenceman.

Just looking at stats, maybe 1967-68 and 1968-69 are good case studies -- Orr's 2nd and 3rd seasons. Boston was just an average team defensively in the former and only slightly better defensively in the latter. This is also just before Orr went supernova offensively, so we see his results as a more balanced two-way D-man.

What we see here is that Orr was, in '68, on the ice for 56 goals-against in 48 games; and in '69, for 87 goals-against in 67 games. The proportions are similar -- he's on the ice for about 1.17 to 1.30 goals-against per game (say, 1.24 average).

The Bruins as a team, in those two respective seasons, gave up about 2.92 goals-against per game. Disregarding that Orr missed time in both of those seasons and just pro-rating the numbers based on these averages, it would appear that Orr would be on the ice for about 42% of the goals-against Boston from 1967 to 1969.

As regards in comparison to just the Bruins' team, then, the question is how much ice-time was Orr getting? The Bruins had only six defencemen who played 30+ games in 1968 (and only three who played 50+), so I think we can assume Orr, as the best player on the team, was playing around 30 minutes per game? Then, assuming he often killed penalties as soon as 1967-68, if he was on the ice for roughly 42% of the team's goals against, that would make him a well-above average defensive player in his only 2nd and 3rd seasons. More to the point, if he was playing 30 minutes and was killing a lot of penalties that early, then he was undoubtedly one of the best -- and probably the very best -- defensive player on his team. Rugged Don Awrey, for example, who was five years older than Orr and presumably just hitting his prime then, was on the ice for more goals-against-per-game than Orr was, and, since he scored only 14 points per season (1 PP-point per season), I think we can assume he was getting way less ice-time than Orr.

What about other teams in the League, for comparison? In 1968, a team with the same goals-against as Boston (surprisingly) was expansion Pittsburgh. It appears their top defensive D-men were Al McNeil and Noel Price. McNeil looks pretty good here with 75 goals-against in 74 games played (a little bit better rate than Orr's), but Price was on for 105 goals against, far more than Orr. These are guys who were getting 33 and 12 points per season respectively, whereas Orr is almost a point-per-game. Thing is, I have no idea how much and to what extent each of these players was killing penalties, which really makes the difference. Orr blows both of those guys away in ES plus/minus, even as a sophomore when he played only 46 games.

Only in 1974-75, really, does Orr's personal 'goals against' get a bit higher than normal for big-minutes defensive defencemen who kill penalties, and that's the one season he was "coached" by no-system Don Cherry, whose philosophy seemed to be "Get out of Bobby's way!".

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

As an 18 year-old, Orr came into the league with the last place Bruins. They were 14 points behind the 5th place Red Wings and came in last in goals for and last in goals against. Or was a +1. Only Eddie Westfall (+1 also) was also a plus player. He had 59 more shots on goal than any teammate and was 4th in the league in shots, despite missing 9 games. Quite remarkable.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Brad McCrimmon was as good as Langway

Loved McCrimmon.

Not as good as Langway.