Erik Karlsson III: The Norris Strikes Back

[BigRig4]

Good enough for the NHL, good enough for me.

Are you superior to the NHL? Do you have better stats than them?

Nice thing is, he's been getting the message lately!

This comment physically hurt to read. +/- doesn't take into account: The other 11 players on the ice, quality of teammates, quality of competition, zone starts, special teams, injuries, etc. Tavares has been a minus his whole career they should trade him.

 

[Karlsson2Turris*]

Ehrhoff signed a cheap deal to play with a contender. No way he would have signed here.

This. The myth that "We could've signed _______" needs to die. On FA, a player either wants term, big money, or to play for a contender. WE won't overpay for UFA's and Melnyk has made that pretty clear.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

For people wanting management to go and get Karlsson a partner, it's not so easy. Top 2-3 defenceman aren't available for cheap and there wasn't really any good UFA LD's this year. Imo to get top #2-3 defenceman, you get them from the draft.

Imagine:
Haniffin-Karlsson
or
Kylington-Karlsson

Sick.

Good point. Unless Hanifin not there I'd be more concerned with drafting top line center and then using some pieces we have to deal with a guy who can play with Erik.

 

[Holdurbreathe]

See here's what's wrong with your assessment, Karlsson is a proven winner. And he steps up to the challenge.

Everytime Ottawa has put out an average or better team he has been the best player far and away. Even now he still is the best player outside of Anderson and Lehner most nights.

You can not tell me Karlsson needs to stop being a negative so we can win games when he's playing with borderline NHLer linemates for half his minutes. It just doesn't work like that. Not even the legendary Crosby could get his team outside of a basement pick when his team is trash.

Now I'm not saying Sens are trash, far from it. But we far from good too. Experience and better pieces in next few years will make wonders of differences.

Anyone attempting to defend a player using anecdotal evidence, really has no debate at all.

While EK has been the best player some games, he has been anything but the best too many games this season.

Blaming every player for EK's defensive lapses or high risk play is just refusing to accept the reality.

The team is inexperienced, EK needs to adjust his game to fit the circumstance.

This season EK has 20 points, 13 of them coming on the PP.

This indicates EK has been on the ice for 18 more goals against than he or his linemates have produced 5 on 5.

Of course all this isn't his fault, but IMO too frequently it has been this season.

I don't disagree with the notion that if EK had 15 more points people may not be so critical of his play.

However if he had 15 more points the Sens would likely have a few more wins as well.

Of course the reality is he doesn't have those points and he has struggled with turnovers and defensive coverage.

 

[coladin]

You do realize both have a direct correlation with one another right?

MoO said it perfectly in another thread, Karlsson can't be the best he can be or play his game when he's carrying both the offensive AND defensive responsibilities in his pairing.

Again, I'd welcome any evidence of defenders performing better than Karlsson with the a worse or equal defensive partner.

When Karlsson has played with Methot/Edler/Average Kuba he has looked stellar and top of the league. When he played with Jared Pylon Cowen last year and bottom 6 this year he has looked ok for Karlsson standards.

Coincidence? You'd be a fool to think not.

While he played well last night, the 3rd goal typifies the frustration of many here. Any plug should have stopped that puck. We are not talking Datsyuk to Zetterberg. was that his partner's fault? He wiffed on a clear and allowed Foligno to tap it in.

You can't blame everything he does on who he is with, that is just not accurate. I am not satisfied with him the way he is right now because I have seen how good he can be. People want to lay it on his partners, I have seen enough so far this year to also realize that he has himself to blame as well.

 

[Vaclav Varada]

Good point. Unless Hanifin not there I'd be more concerned with drafting top line center and then using some pieces we have to deal with a guy who can play with Erik.

A lot scouts say there's a very small gap between Hanifin and Werenski from what I've read.

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Don't get me wrong, Karlsson has had terrible moments and he hasn't been the Karlsson we know but at the same time he is literally the least of our worries.

A lot scouts say there's a very small gap between Hanifin and Werenski from what I've read.

Interesting, I've done some research and you seem to be right I thought he was good but not near Hanifin good. Although only thing on him is will be transition to a pro as good seems the major catch.

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

A lot scouts say there's a very small gap between Hanifin and Werenski from what I've read.

The gap after one two is not big. I've seen some ranking having Ivan Provorov at 27 well others have him at the number 2 defensemen after Hanifin in the top 6. I would argue from outside the top 2 the top 15 is very interchangeable based on talent and ability

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

The gap after one two is not big. I've seen some ranking having Ivan Provorov at 27 well others have him at the number 2 defensemen after Hanifin in the top 6. I would argue from outside the top 2 the top 15 is very interchangeable based on talent and ability

But one would say the talent from from first two on wards is prettty big.

 

[Vesa Awesaka]

But one would say the talent from from first two on wards is prettty big.

Theyre all good players but no one screams franchise player. What i'm saying is you might be just as likely to get a franchise player at 12 as you are at 5

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

There all good players but no one screams franchise player. What i'm saying is you might be just as likely to get a franchise player at 12 as you are at 5

Definitely. Considering the last two really deep drafts(2003 and 2008) Murray and Co walked away with Getzlaf, Perry and Karlsson 15 and after is ****ing brilliant.

Here's hoping we still have the proper personnel to pull **** like that again. We really, need just 1 more top end talent to be a force.

 

[SilverSeven]

This comment physically hurt to read. +/- doesn't take into account: The other 11 players on the ice, quality of teammates, quality of competition, zone starts, special teams, injuries, etc. Tavares has been a minus his whole career they should trade him.

I agree +/- isnt the best stat, but generally if you stick out as much as Karlssons does its a good indicator. He is 738th in the NHL in +/-.

 

[SilverSeven]

Ehrhoff signed a cheap deal to play with a contender. No way he would have signed here.

Probably not, though we could have afforded to massively overpaid him. I am aware it takes two to tango.

I was responding to this...which is wrong:

For people wanting management to go and get Karlsson a partner, it's not so easy. Top 2-3 defenceman aren't available for cheap and there wasn't really any good UFA LD's this year. Imo to get top #2-3 defenceman, you get them from the draft.

Imagine:
Haniffin-Karlsson
or
Kylington-Karlsson

Sick.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

While he played well last night, the 3rd goal typifies the frustration of many here. Any plug should have stopped that puck. We are not talking Datsyuk to Zetterberg. was that his partner's fault? He wiffed on a clear and allowed Foligno to tap it in.

You can't blame everything he does on who he is with, that is just not accurate. I am not satisfied with him the way he is right now because I have seen how good he can be. People want to lay it on his partners, I have seen enough so far this year to also realize that he has himself to blame as well.

**** happens

 

[Micklebot]

Anyone attempting to defend a player using anecdotal evidence, really has no debate at all.

While EK has been the best player some games, he has been anything but the best too many games this season.

Blaming every player for EK's defensive lapses or high risk play is just refusing to accept the reality.

The team is inexperienced, EK needs to adjust his game to fit the circumstance.

This season EK has 20 points, 13 of them coming on the PP.

This indicates EK has been on the ice for 18 more goals against than he or his linemates have produced 5 on 5.

Of course all this isn't his fault, but IMO too frequently it has been this season.

I don't disagree with the notion that if EK had 15 more points people may not be so critical of his play.

However if he had 15 more points the Sens would likely have a few more wins as well.

Of course the reality is he doesn't have those points and he has struggled with turnovers and defensive coverage.

Karlsson's partner has a minimal effect on his defensive play. I'm not sure why people keep bringing up his defensive play as his own fault when debating the effect of his partner as it's not the big issue.

Playing with Phillips has had a big impact on his offensive game, which has led to more turnovers, and more agressive forchecks against him. the effect is quite noticable both with the eye test and in the numbers.

When Karlsson is on the ice with one of Boro, Cowen or Wiercioch, the line gets a 15% increase in CF/20 and 25% increase in GF/20 compared to when Karlsson is paired with Phillips. Phillips is a drain on the offense, there is no denying it. He's potentially fine as a defensive shutdown line, but he has no business on an offensive line at this stage in his career

Karlsson will always leave you a bit wanting on the defensive side of the puck; he's young and thinks offense first. If we can get him to clean up his game a bit, that would be great, but in the meantime, why are we pairing him with someone who is not going to be able to mitigate his deficiencies, and is a drain on his positive contributions?

Putting him with anyone but Phillips will likely result in more time in the oppositions end leading to more shots for, leading to more goals for. As a side benefit, this also means less time in our end, less shots against, and less opportunity for Karlsson to make defensive gaffs.

The only downside to playing Karlsson with anyone but Phillips is that Phillips will no longer benefit from Karlsson's offense. To this point, he's actually faired well garnering 83% of the GF while away from Karlsson, but that's unlikely to continue as it's a smallish sample, and he's been substantially out posessed by the opposition.

 

[Micklebot]

I agree +/- isnt the best stat, but generally if you stick out as much as Karlssons does its a good indicator. He is 738th in the NHL in +/-.

OEL must be a trainwreak at 743rd and Pietrangelo must be pretty bruttal at 695th. And hey, Erhoff is 10th this year up from 880th last year. Must have turned his game around completely.

+/- is a good indicator of how a team is doing, but not of anything specific about an individual player. Sure a players struggles will show up in the +/-, but burried so far under all the other noise that it's really not worth while looking at.

 

[SilverSeven]

OEL must be a trainwreak at 743rd and Pietrangelo must be pretty bruttal at 695th. And hey, Erhoff is 10th this year up from 880th last year. Must have turned his game around completely.

+/- is a good indicator of how a team is doing, but not of anything specific about an individual player. Sure a players struggles will show up in the +/-, but burried so far under all the other noise that it's really not worth while looking at.

I dont recall calling Karlsson a trainwreck or brutal.

And yeah, Pietrangelo and OEL are certainly not having their best years defensively.

 

[Micklebot]

I dont recall calling Karlsson a trainwreck or brutal.

And yeah, Pietrangelo and OEL are certainly not having their best years defensively.

So what is +/- a good indicator of exactly then? Pietrangelo plays on a far better team and has the worst +/- on it, and while he's not having a great defensive year, he gets no where near the crap Karlsson does.

OEL is on another bad team and while also having an "off" year, gets nowhere near the crap Karlsson gets.

Both these guys are supposed to be significantly better defensively than Karlsson (and are imo, even if they are struggling this year) but +/- doesn't show it. +/- doesn't even show much of a difference between the two despite playing on teams at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Beyond that, I think there's some confimation bias going on with OEL and Pietrangelo's defensive performance. Because their +/- is bad, people are saying they are playing far worse than in previous year. I don't think the difference in their play is as great as some are making it out to be. People were saying Weber was having a bad year for the better part of last year, when imo, he was doing very well despite the poor +/- and goals against.

 

[SilverSeven]

So what is +/- a good indicator of exactly then? Pietrangelo plays on a far better team and has the worst +/- on it, and while he's not having a great defensive year, he gets no where near the crap Karlsson does.

OEL is on another bad team and while also having an "off" year, gets nowhere near the crap Karlsson gets.

Both these guys are supposed to be significantly better defensively than Karlsson (and are imo, even if they are struggling this year) but +/- doesn't show it. +/- doesn't even show much of a difference between the two despite playing on teams at opposite ends of the spectrum.

Beyond that, I think there's some confimation bias going on with OEL and Pietrangelo's defensive performance. Because their +/- is bad, people are saying they are playing far worse than in previous year. I don't think the difference in their play is as great as some are making it out to be. People were saying Weber was having a bad year for the better part of last year, when imo, he was doing very well despite the poor +/- and goals against.

And Karlsson wouldnt be getting nearly the crap he does if the Sens were winning. Also worth mentioning neither plays in Canada, is sporting a C, or are previous Norris winners. Karlsson is (and should be) held to a higher standard...he is a better player.

 

[Burrowsaurus]

And Karlsson wouldnt be getting nearly the crap he does if the Sens were winning. Also worth mentioning neither plays in Canada, is sporting a C, or are previous Norris winners. Karlsson is (and should be) held to a higher standard...he is a better player.

exactly. Some people around here only like to hold him to that high standard when he is playing well.

 

[Micklebot]

And Karlsson wouldnt be getting nearly the crap he does if the Sens were winning. Also worth mentioning neither plays in Canada, is sporting a C, or are previous Norris winners. Karlsson is (and should be) held to a higher standard...he is a better player.

You failed to address my question; What is +/- indicative of? If the higher standard is having a better plus minus, but you can't identify what a high or low +/- is indicative of, then I don't know where to go from here.

You said +/- was indicative of something, the balls in your court.

 

[Senateurs]

Karlsson plays 25+ mins and must carry the puck out of his own end and starts all the break outs on the pp every single time. It's expected that he would have more giveaways than everybody else.

He needs a partner that will stay behind but can also support the offense when we're in the offensive zone. Phillips screws up so many chances or offensive zone time by just making the safe play of dumping the puck instead of taking a shot.

You would think Cowen would be perfect for this role but it seemed like he was trying to do too much when he was paired with EK earlier this year. But I don't want to break up Ceci-Cow right now. They perfect as #3-4 right now.

The obvious choice is Methot but since he's injured, I'd rather see a mix of Wiercioch and Boro than seeing Phillips.

 

[SilverSeven]

You failed to address my question; What is +/- indicative of? If the higher standard is having a better plus minus, but you can't identify what a high or low +/- is indicative of, then I don't know where to go from here.

You said +/- was indicative of something, the balls in your court.

+/- is indicative of how many goals you were on the ice for vs against at even strength.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

+/- is indicative of how many goals you were on the ice for vs against at even strength.

And a player who is on the ice more often is going to be on the ice for more goals against, on average. That's basic math.

 

[SilverSeven]

And a player who is on the ice more often is going to be on the ice for more goals against, on average. That's basic math.

And also more goals for. This year Karlsson has been on for more against than for. This wasnt always the case.


Ottawa is a -10(5v5) team this year while Karlsson is -12.
Last year Ottawa was -8 while Karlsson was -15.
Two years ago Ottawa was even while Karlsson was +8.
Three years ago Ottawa was +5 while Karlsson was +16.
Four years ago Ottawa was -49 while Karlsson was -30.
Five years ago Ottawa was -15 while Karlsson was -5.

What does that tell me? Its a stat that is heavily influenced by the team but outliers can indicate a few things. Karlsson is on the ice a lot and closely follows the team +/-. It can easily be argued that the team +/- closely follows his +/- as he is on the ice so much.

I dont think its a coincidence that the two years he was a + player also are the two years where his game passed the eye test with flying colours...and the two years that the team did well.

+/- isnt gospel, but it isnt trash either. People seem to need to take one of those sides and I dont know why. Combining it with your eyes is useful, and Karlsson hasnt looked very hot defensively this year.