Erik Karlsson: 4 games, 7 points, +7 (leads the NHL), 3,27 short handed TOI/GP,

[Pinkfloyd]

114*



tbh, I was talking mostly playoffs and I should have been more specific. Thornton has had a remarkable few seasons, nooo denying that... but they didn't translate into any type of success AT ALL. That's quite an enormous red flag on those seasons.

And im not talking team success...I mean... how do you put up such beautiful numbers like that and not even hit above PPG in any of the 15 playoff years youve been in? Especially since you're mostly just known for your offense? How can you wish to be listed as generational when the specific talents you have haven't been on display in the most focal moments? That's my point.



Touche, but that skill was not in display during the most important times of his career. Not once, or twice but 15 years. Still exceptional but something's up.

No it's 125. You need to learn to read the 2005-06 season stat sheet better. All you're doing with the playoff bit is moving the goal posts because you know that your original argument is crap. Look at his playoff numbers since being a Shark and compare it to the rest of the league. He's perfectly fine in that department. There's nothing up. You just don't know what you're talking about.

 

[Frank Drebin]

Thornton? We talking about Thornton?

 

[Micklebot]

On topic, I think it's early to rave too much about Karlsson's season. 4 games in, and the schedule hasn't been all that tough on the team yet. Sens get a good test on Saturday against the Lightning, here's hoping Karlsson can keep up the good work against some tougher competition.

No it's 125. You need to learn to read the 2005-06 season stat sheet better. All you're doing with the playoff bit is moving the goal posts because you know that your original argument is crap. Look at his playoff numbers since being a Shark and compare it to the rest of the league. He's perfectly fine in that department. There's nothing up. You just don't know what you're talking about.

Pretty sure there`s a poll where they're discussing this kind of stuff, but since you brought it up:

Since becoming a shark, he has .85 pts per game. Not bad, but hardly generational. During the same period, guys like Zetterberg, Spezza, Alfredsson, Kessel, Ovechkin, Crosby, Kane, Giroux, Malkin, Briere, Getzlaf all produced at a higher clip.

 

[swiftwin]

Thornton? We talking about Thornton?

Since people can no longer argue about Karlsson not killing penalties, what else are we supposed to talk about in Karlsson threads?

 

[Roksta]

Anyways EK can do 156 pts, 95 goals, 800 Blockedshot, 99% Corsi +240 and Doughty will win the Norris with 37 pts because hermergerd perfect dman

 

[caymanmew]

Anyways EK can do 156 pts, 95 goals, 800 Blockedshot, 99% Corsi +240 and Doughty will win the Norris with 37 pts because hermergerd perfect dman

There is something seriously wrong with our team if Karlsson gets 800 blocked shots.

 

[Micklebot]

There is something seriously wrong with our team if Karlsson gets 800 blocked shots.

800 blocked shots and 99% corsi would mean a minimum of 80000 shot attempts for while Karlsson is on the ice....

 

[Pinkfloyd]

Pretty sure there`s a poll where they're discussing this kind of stuff, but since you brought it up:

Since becoming a shark, he has .85 pts per game. Not bad, but hardly generational. During the same period, guys like Zetterberg, Spezza, Alfredsson, Kessel, Ovechkin, Crosby, Kane, Giroux, Malkin, Briere, Getzlaf all produced at a higher clip.

That's great that there's a poll. I'm still allowed to respond, thanks. A generational player doesn't need to be exceptional at every facet of the game to be deemed one. Otherwise, we'd have pretty much no generational players ever.

 

[Micklebot]

That's great that there's a poll. I'm still allowed to respond, thanks. A generational player doesn't need to be exceptional at every facet of the game to be deemed one. Otherwise, we'd have pretty much no generational players ever.

or, you know, it would just be a very exclusive group, which I think is kind of the point.

I don't think Karlsson (you know, the subject of this thread) has proven himself to be a generational player. He's pretty damn special, but generational imo requires there to be a distinct gap between him and everybody else for a prolonged time. He might get there, but he's got more to prove right now,

 

[Barrie22]

or, you know, it would just be a very exclusive group, which I think is kind of the point.

I don't think Karlsson (you know, the subject of this thread) has proven himself to be a generational player. He's pretty damn special, but generational imo requires there to be a distinct gap between him and everybody else for a prolonged time. He might get there, but he's got more to prove right now,

So crosby is not a generational player.

 

[Sureves]

or, you know, it would just be a very exclusive group, which I think is kind of the point.

I don't think Karlsson (you know, the subject of this thread) has proven himself to be a generational player. He's pretty damn special, but generational imo requires there to be a distinct gap between him and everybody else for a prolonged time. He might get there, but he's got more to prove right now,

You're certainly a poster I respect, but I have to disagree with you here.

Karlsson is definitely a generational player.

Crosby, Ovechkin, Karlsson

Those are the generational players that entered the league since 2000. McDavid will likely be a part of that group too.

 

[Pinkfloyd]

or, you know, it would just be a very exclusive group, which I think is kind of the point.

I don't think Karlsson (you know, the subject of this thread) has proven himself to be a generational player. He's pretty damn special, but generational imo requires there to be a distinct gap between him and everybody else for a prolonged time. He might get there, but he's got more to prove right now,

Or your idea of what qualifies is far too high that even the slightest bit of scrutiny would have it to where either nobody is in or you won't have a standard that is applied equally and fairly.

 

[caymanmew]

800 blocked shots and 99% corsi would mean a minimum of 80000 shot attempts for while Karlsson is on the ice....

Which means Karlsson needs to play the whole game and they other team needs to average around 1 shot attempt per 3.65 seconds. That would be for all 82 games.

 

[Toene]

You're certainly a poster I respect, but I have to disagree with you here.

Karlsson is definitely a generational player.

Crosby, Ovechkin, Karlsson

Those are the generational players that entered the league since 2000. McDavid will likely be a part of that group too.

Was Lidstrom a generational player? Thornton? Datsyuk? Kovalchuk? They were better than Karlsson. Why dont you include Malkin who at his peak was arguably better than Crosby?

Why should the term generational be used that easily? It loses its value. Karlsson is great, one of the top defensemen in this league. There's no need to pump his tires endlessly like Sens fans do by calling him generational or BS about him belonging in the Super NHL. We get it, your team is stuck in mediocrity and you dont have much to rejoice about these days. You guys just appear too much in every thread about him. Nobody say he sucks, literally nobody, but some prefer more complete and consistent defensemen. It's a totally valid point of view.

 

[Micklebot]

So crosby is not a generational player.

So, Crosby, who has a pts per game of 1.33 over a 707 game sample, a significant gap over the next closest over the same period (Malkin at 1.18, not including this years rookies) isn't a generational player? Does Thornton have that kind of separation over his peers? You could argue he did for the two years he peaked, but a generational player does it over a more prolonged period.

I think it's pretty clear to most that Crosby has been the best player in the game over an extended period of time. While Thornton was the best passer in the game for a bit, he really never separated himself as the best player in the game for more than maybe a season or two.

To me, the litmus test for generational is whether or not a guy (or guys) have a distinct separation from the pack, where that gap is both significant, and over a prolonged period of time. Winning the hart once doesn't make you generational.

So, a guy like Karlsson has yet to establish himself, because he's been up and down. He's had great seasons (2011-12, 2015-16, the last half of 2014-15) and poor ones (2013-14, the first half of 2014-15). Maybe if not for the Achiles injury, he'd have proven himself by this point, but a 17 game season in 12-13, a bad one in 13-14 and an up and down one in 14-15 are all blemishes on his record imo, which leave him with more to prove.

 

[Barrie22]

So, Crosby, who has a pts per game of 1.33 over a 707 game sample, a significant gap over the next closest over the same period (Malkin at 1.18, not including this years rookies) isn't a generational player? Does Thornton have that kind of separation over his peers? You could argue he did for the two years he peaked, but a generational player does it over a more prolonged period.

I think it's pretty clear to most that Crosby has been the best player in the game over an extended period of time. While Thornton was the best passer in the game for a bit, he really never separated himself as the best player in the game for more than maybe a season or two.

To me, the litmus test for generational is whether or not a guy (or guys) have a distinct separation from the pack, where that gap is both significant, and over a prolonged period of time. Winning the hart once doesn't make you generational.

So, a guy like Karlsson has yet to establish himself, because he's been up and down. He's had great seasons (2011-12, 2015-16, the last half of 2014-15) and poor ones (2013-14, the first half of 2014-15). Maybe if not for the Achiles injury, he'd have proven himself by this point, but a 17 game season in 12-13, a bad one in 13-14 and an up and down one in 14-15 are all blemishes on his record imo, which leave him with more to prove.

So leading in points for 10 years by over like 150 points is not a significant gap?

 

[Micklebot]

So leading in points for 10 years by over like 150 points is not a significant gap?

Generational isn't about being very good over a long period of time, it's about being an outlier over a long period of time. Thornton was consistently very good and had a couple years where he was great. But during that 10 year period, was there ever a time where he was the best player in the game for an extended period? For the first half of that 10 year period, he was second fiddle to guys like Fosberg, Lemieux, Jagr and depending on your start and end point, maybe guys like Sakic. For the second half, guys like Ovechkin and Crosby had a clear advantage over him.

Being generational is about consistently having wide gaps over your competition, not consistently being among the best, but actually being the best. If there's always somebody that's better than you, you aren't generational. Being second best (or third) all the time just isn't good enough (unless we're talking about a Lemieux/Gretzky type situation).

 

[armani]

Was Lidstrom a generational player? Thornton? Datsyuk? Kovalchuk? They were better than Karlsson. Why dont you include Malkin who at his peak was arguably better than Crosby?

Why should the term generational be used that easily? It loses its value. Karlsson is great, one of the top defensemen in this league. There's no need to pump his tires endlessly like Sens fans do by calling him generational or BS about him belonging in the Super NHL. We get it, your team is stuck in mediocrity and you dont have much to rejoice about these days. You guys just appear too much in every thread about him. Nobody say he sucks, literally nobody, but some prefer more complete and consistent defensemen. It's a totally valid point of view.

Except for Lidstrom, I would pick Karlsson over any of the others mentioned. And it took Lidstrom 10 years IIRC to win his first Norris. Karlsson is the youngest to win two since Orr and the first dman to lead the league in assists since, once again, Bobby Orr. Of course, he is also the first defenceman to lead his team in scoring four consecutive times since Denis Potvin and he is well on his way to break that record as well. A record even Bobby Orr doesn't have the distinction to.

Damn straight Karlsson is once in a generation type of defenceman. His body of work in the NHL backs it up.

 

[Toene]

Except for Lidstrom, I would pick Karlsson over any of the others mentioned. And it took Lidstrom 10 years IIRC to win his first Norris. Karlsson is the youngest to win two since Orr and the first dman to lead the league in assists since, once again, Bobby Orr. Of course, he is also the first defenceman to lead his team in scoring four consecutive times since Denis Potvin and he is well on his way to break that record as well. A record even Bobby Orr doesn't have the distinction to.

Damn straight Karlsson is once in a generation type of defenceman. His body of work in the NHL backs it up.

If he's a generational defenseman, playing with a good defensive partner, behind a stacked group of forwards, with an average-to-good goalie, then why does his club doesnt make the playoffs?

Why was he outplayed by many other 1Ds in the POs

 

[TeamRenzo]

The peak for Thornton includes an accomplishment that only Gretzky and Lemieux did as well. To say that isn't exceptional is utterly ridiculous.

That is a misleading comparison. Thortons accomplishment is not comparable to what WG and ML have done in their careers. ML has seven 90+ assist seasons and WG has 13 seasons with over 90 assists, eleven of those seasons were 100+.

Bobby Orr has a much higher assist/games played ratio then Thorton.

My original point is that I believe that JT will be in the HOF but not necessarily a lock like people believe. To date, the Sharks have consistently disappointed in the playoffs a number of those years he was the captain of the team.

 

[Novak Djokovic]

If he's a generational defenseman, playing with a good defensive partner, behind a stacked group of forwards, with an average-to-good goalie, then why does his club doesnt make the playoffs?

Why was he outplayed by many other 1Ds in the POs

I wish the Senators were as good as you're making them to be.

 

[Vikke]

If he's a generational defenseman, playing with a good defensive partner, behind a stacked group of forwards, with an average-to-good goalie, then why does his club doesnt make the playoffs?

Why was he outplayed by many other 1Ds in the POs

Because it's a team sport. Why didn't Toews lead his team to the Stanley Cup this summer?
Why did Doughty miss the playoffs last year? Why didn't Gretzky win another Cup after leaving Edmonton?

 

[TeamRenzo]

That's great that there's a poll. I'm still allowed to respond, thanks. A generational player doesn't need to be exceptional at every facet of the game to be deemed one. Otherwise, we'd have pretty much no generational players ever.

Uhh, you may want to re-think your definition of generational. There is a reason why they call them generational as in they only come around once in a generation, JT is not that guy.

 

[Sureves]

Was Lidstrom a generational player? Thornton? Datsyuk? Kovalchuk? They were better than Karlsson. Why dont you include Malkin who at his peak was arguably better than Crosby?

Why should the term generational be used that easily? It loses its value. Karlsson is great, one of the top defensemen in this league. There's no need to pump his tires endlessly like Sens fans do by calling him generational or BS about him belonging in the Super NHL. We get it, your team is stuck in mediocrity and you dont have much to rejoice about these days. You guys just appear too much in every thread about him. Nobody say he sucks, literally nobody, but some prefer more complete and consistent defensemen. It's a totally valid point of view.

Except for Lidstrom, I would pick Karlsson over any of the others mentioned. And it took Lidstrom 10 years IIRC to win his first Norris. Karlsson is the youngest to win two since Orr and the first dman to lead the league in assists since, once again, Bobby Orr. Of course, he is also the first defenceman to lead his team in scoring four consecutive times since Denis Potvin and he is well on his way to break that record as well. A record even Bobby Orr doesn't have the distinction to.

Damn straight Karlsson is once in a generation type of defenceman. His body of work in the NHL backs it up.

What this guy said. Without his Achilles injury, it's a virtual certainty that Karlsson would have been either the best or second best defenseman in every NHL season since he broke out in 2011-12. With the injury, he still has that claim in 3 of 4 seasons he played in.

If he's a generational defenseman, playing with a good defensive partner, behind a stacked group of forwards, with an average-to-good goalie, then why does his club doesnt make the playoffs?

Why was he outplayed by many other 1Ds in the POs

I wish the Senators were as good as you're making them to be.

What this guy said.

The Sens have a generational defenseman playing with a hugely overrated defensive partner, behind a mediocre group of forwards, with a below average goalie.

Like Novak said, I'd love it if what you said were true, and you can bet your ass the Sens would be a perennial cup contender.

 

[jbeck5]

So, Crosby, who has a pts per game of 1.33 over a 707 game sample, a significant gap over the next closest over the same period (Malkin at 1.18, not including this years rookies) isn't a generational player? Does Thornton have that kind of separation over his peers? You could argue he did for the two years he peaked, but a generational player does it over a more prolonged period.

I think it's pretty clear to most that Crosby has been the best player in the game over an extended period of time. While Thornton was the best passer in the game for a bit, he really never separated himself as the best player in the game for more than maybe a season or two.

To me, the litmus test for generational is whether or not a guy (or guys) have a distinct separation from the pack, where that gap is both significant, and over a prolonged period of time. Winning the hart once doesn't make you generational.

So, a guy like Karlsson has yet to establish himself, because he's been up and down. He's had great seasons (2011-12, 2015-16, the last half of 2014-15) and poor ones (2013-14, the first half of 2014-15). Maybe if not for the Achiles injury, he'd have proven himself by this point, but a 17 game season in 12-13, a bad one in 13-14 and an up and down one in 14-15 are all blemishes on his record imo, which leave him with more to prove.

Since karlsson's first Norris winning season, doesn't he have similar point separation from the next highest scoring defenseman similar to Crosby over forwards?

I remember making a thread ranking all active defenseman in career points per game (minimum 100 career games) and karlsson was destroying the competition...with guys like Letang and Subban significantly lower followed by another big gap and the rest.

Isn't that exactly what Crosby's doing? Why is one generational but not the other?

I'll try to find the thread.