You are looking at one set of facts and ignoring the others yet are indignant that I do not see our number 3/4 defenseman as elite.
Neither do I. I've only ever stated that he's a top-4 defenseman, which the numbers prove. My issue with your opinion is that you believe he is mediocre defensively (he's not; he's great defensively), and that he is (or could potentially be) top-tier offensively (he's not; he's not effective offensively). You're merely perpetuating a trite narrative.
Clearly my position is unreasonable and yours is infallible. Your "facts" are presented without context so how can I take them seriously ? Who are his match ups ? What are the zone starts etc etc ? Considering he is second pairing PK that suggests he is not facing the toughest competition very much.
Phaneuf's match-ups lead to Phaneuf's opponents scoring 1.8 more goals per 1200 ES minutes (roughly what elite players play at even-strength over the course of a season) than Gardiner's, and Gardiner's usage statistics (widely believed to be the future of QoC measurements) are fantastic. Gardiner also led the Leafs defense in even-strength minutes this past season, and has averaged top-pairing ES minutes over the last three seasons (which I already brought up). All of the stats I've posted are either directly, or indirectly, adjusted for zone-starts and teammates.
Being a good penalty-killer does not make you a good defensive player at even-strength (y'know, the situation in which the bulk of the game is played). Roman Polak was a perfect example of that this season.
I notice you were unable to address any of the valid points I brought forward and clung to stats with no context. That you place your opinion so high above your peers says it all to me. You are the only one calling a number 3/4 D on one of the worst defensive team in the league "elite". That you cannot see the weakness of that position is cause for concern.
My opinion is no better than anyone else's, I'm simply capable of recognizing my shortcomings (shortcoming that we all inherently suffer from) and adapting accordingly.
Also, you're making **** up, which is far worse than failing to address your 'good points' (which don't actually exist).
Regarding trade offers, which is what I said we would be getting, not trading him (I'll assume you are better at reading stats
) . Considering we are told everyone but Rielly is available and no one is interested in Gardiner from what we hear does imply his value is not where you place it. That rebuttal is clearly desperate.
That rebuttal is clearly desperate? You're downright flailing at straw men marred in bias. Do you actually know that the Leafs are shopping Gardiner? I'm sure they're listening to offers on
everybody, but they're also capable of recognizing his value. You're not actually
saying anything. You haven't raised a single point that isn't predicated on a giant leap into a massive abyss.
Don't you find it odd no one else seems to have expressed your opinion he is elite when our fan base is famous for overhyping our players ? Ah but you have already made it clear that your opinion has more value than the HF majority so I suppose that would hardly matter.
We're not famous for
overvaluing our players, we're famous for
improperly valuing our players. We laud the efforts of grinders, and shun the effectiveness of skill players. Proof? Steen, Stralman, Grabovski, Kadri, Gardiner. Those are just the five that immediately come to mind.
NHL.com rates the top 17 two way defensemen in the league:
http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=729524
You will note Gardiners absence. Interestingly enough they also used advanced stats to calculate them so this suggests you need to work on your context to make better use of your statistics though you would know your error if you actually watched the guy play.
First of all, this article is almost a year old. Second of all, they don't actually discuss which advanced metrics they used (I'll go out on a limb and assume they didn't use advanced metrics since Shea Weber is second on that list). Finally, this article is
two-way defensemen, not defensive-defensemen.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://public.tableau.com/shared/5NK534MD7?:display_count=yes
http://public.tableau.com/shared/STWTQB54X?:display_count=yes
http://public.tableau.com/shared/4FWQ5HF8C?:display_count=yes
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=f10&pos=defense&minutes=300&teamid=28&type=corsi&sort=PCTRelTM&sortdir=DESC
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201415&sit=f10&pos=defense&minutes=300&teamid=28&type=fenwick&sort=PCTRelTM&sortdir=DESC
http://stats.hockeyanalysis.com/ratings.php?disp=1&db=201215&sit=f10&pos=defense&minutes=1000&teamid=0&type=goals&sort=A60RelTM&sortdir=ASC
http://puckalytics.com/players/#!/?pid=1513
http://war-on-ice.com/WARboard.html
http://war-on-ice.com/hexplayers.html
http://war-on-ice.com/burtch-dcorsi.html