Do the Blues have the best defensive forward depth in the league?

[Evocable Manager]

I'd say it is a major factor in goal prevention, which I would also say is not equal to 'playing defense.'

Isn't the purpose of playing defense to prevent goals?

 

[2 Minute Minor]

Can the other team score if your player has the puck?

Possession definitely is a major factor when it comes to defense.

Can you be playing offense and defense at the exact same time? I think if a player is holding possession in the offensive zone, choosing between describing that as offensive player or defensive player: its not defense.

But honestly, this is pedantic. I just think some of the advanced stats are capturing attributes like O-zone possession more than defensive play, and confusing the issue. As a guy who has watched every one of Berglund's NHL games, I agree with KirkOut.

 

[Lord Helix]

For analogical purposes, I have a hard time saying that being involved in a war in another country's land is defense.

Edit: How are you defending if you're the only team that can do damage?

 

[TheGoldenGod]

Sobotka Stastny Steen might be one of the best shutdown lines in all of hockey.

Berglund and Brodziak are both very effective defensively.

Schwartz has to be one of the top pests and puck hounds in the NHL.

The OP mentioned Schenn but Yeo has the top line taking almost every Ozone face off. Still has looked very reliable and all three members of that first line are leading the league in +/- which means their not just scoring but also taking care of their own end.

The Blues forward group are among the best (if not the best) defensive groups in all of hockey. They are also backed up by Petro and Parayko, two very good safety nets for the players up front.

 

[KirkOut]

For analogical purposes, I have a hard time saying that being involved in a war in another country's land is defense.

Edit: How are you defending if you're the only team that can do damage?

The don't call it the US Department of Offense though...

Anyways, to somebody who thinks good possession in the O-zone = good defense, are you prepared to call a stay at home defender who is good at shutting down the other team an offensive player? If the puck isn't in his zone, it means it must be closer to the other team's net...

 

[SirPaste]

This thread is a perfect example of why advanced stats are flawed

 

[Evocable Manager]

The don't call it the US Department of Offense though...

Anyways, to somebody who thinks good possession in the O-zone = good defense, are you prepared to call a stay at home defender who is good at shutting down the other team an offensive player? If the puck isn't in his zone, it means it must be closer to the other team's net...

I think your confusing the meaning of possession with creating actual scoring chances. Those aren't the same.

As for the shutdown defender, why does he stick check, stick lift, intercept passes, block shots, hit, etc.

He does it to get the puck. The purpose of defensive tactics is to recover the puck from the other team. That's because the best way to defend is to have the puck.

But that doesn't mean he's an offensive player.

Examples: Nick Hjalmarsson and Marc Eduard Vlasic

Possession isn't everything, but it's something.

 

[Lord Helix]

^KirkOut's point was proof by contradiction...

 

[duxfan1101]

Isn't the purpose of playing defense to prevent goals?

Correct, but I think you can make an argument that everything you do in a hockey game can be for the purpose of preventing goals. For example, you could just sock the opponent's best player in the face to injure him, and that could be for the purpose of preventing goals, but I wouldn't call that 'playing defense.' What I'm saying is playing defense is a specific way to prevent goals if that makes sense.

 

[STL fan in MN]

Correct, but I think you can make an argument that everything you do in a hockey game can be for the purpose of preventing goals. For example, you could just sock the opponent's best player in the face to injure him, and that could be for the purpose of preventing goals, but I wouldn't call that 'playing defense.' What I'm saying is playing defense is a specific way to prevent goals if that makes sense.

I would agree with this.

Odd how this thread has turned into mostly a debate about Patrik Berglund.

For me, I see Bergy as an excellent possession forward with good positioning that can add some secondary scoring. All in all, a strong 3rd line C.

The one area where he’s elite is at being a complete goofball:

 

[Thallis]

Well stats speaking, Berglund is better than all of them. On the Blues, Jaskin and Paajarvi are better than him defensively so...

The current defensive advanced stats are not useful.

 

[thedustman]

I'm proud that this has almost become a Berglund thread. Almost.

 

[rumrokh]

How could the son of David Backes not be an elite defensive forward?

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Just eye test speaking I thought Berglund was the best defensive forward in the Preds-Blues series last season.

 

[Evocable Manager]

I'm proud that this has almost become a Berglund thread. Almost.

He deserves a thread. Most underrated hair.

 

[izzy]

As a Blues fan I must question mightily your claim that Berglund is their best defensive forward. No, not even close...

he is speaking pure defensive play

 

[Captain Creampuff]

It's really a toss up between Bergy and Schwartz. I will say that the advanced statistics do back up the eye test when it comes to possession and defensive work. Berglund is a solid 3C that can step up to 2C for a short time or play on the wing in the middle 6. Very versatile player and glad he's coming back next game.

 

[izzy]

anyway hate yall love my boy berglund

 

[Lord Helix]

he is speaking pure defensive play

And? Berglund is pretty good as an F3, whom turns the puck over most often in the neutral zone with at least 1 of the forecheckers still in the zone. I love Bergie, but his defensive zone play isn't his strong suit.

 

[thedustman]

anyway hate yall love my boy berglund

This is an amazing post.
Get them skates on

 

[rumrokh]

And? Berglund is pretty good as an F3, whom turns the puck over most often in the neutral zone with at least 1 of the forecheckers still in the zone. I love Bergie, but his defensive zone play isn't his strong suit.

It absolutely is. He's a great backchecker and a monster on the walls.

 

[thedustman]

And? Berglund is pretty good as an F3, whom turns the puck over most often in the neutral zone with at least 1 of the forecheckers still in the zone. I love Bergie, but his defensive zone play isn't his strong suit.

No one loves Bergie until they wear his jersey to the madhouse and sit through a whole game of flack and spit and nuts and corn hitting them in the back of the head, only to see the game come to a shootout, and Berglund with the game on the line hits the post and the hawks win.
Defense is his strong suit for certain.

 

[TheGoldenGod]

The Bergdaddy is an absolute legend. He doesn’t even need to be good at hockey. The 23 twines last season is just a little something extra for the boys.

 

[thedustman]

Rumor has it he has been injured all season, but how’d he find his way into these mainboard threads.

Which begs the question...

 

[TheGoldenGod]

NHL all time leader in baby making. Look it up dudes. Advanced stats are something else