Is Aaron Ekblad a #1 D-man?

[Real Smart Sens Fan]

100%. He will compete for a Norris in the next 2-3 years.

 

[Givememoneyback]

Voted yes, but this should be the year where Ekblad begins to prove he's an all around first line defenseman or not.

 

[biturbo19]

Voted yes, but this should be the year where Ekblad begins to prove he's an all around first line defenseman or not.

It's going to be fascinating for me, seeing how Florida deploys their massively renovated blueline this season.

They've moved out both of the guys Gallant buried in defensive starts Gudbranson, Mitchell...as well as Kulikov. They've now got 5 of their Top-7D, and i'd reckon 4 of their 6 best D as RH shots. One way or another, Ekblad is getting pretty much a brand new partner. Presumably either Yandle (not traditionally a big D-zone starts guy) or Matheson (a rookie) as the top LH guys. What that does to Ekblad's deployment will be interesting. If they transition him to a harder minutes role while also giving him a new partner. Kinda get the impression that Demers is more likely to be the guy shifted to a heavy defensive workload though. Gonna be interesting to see though...

 

[Givememoneyback]

It's going to be fascinating for me, seeing how Florida deploys their massively renovated blueline this season.

They've moved out both of the guys Gallant buried in defensive starts Gudbranson, Mitchell...as well as Kulikov. They've now got 5 of their Top-7D, and i'd reckon 4 of their 6 best D as RH shots. One way or another, Ekblad is getting pretty much a brand new partner. Presumably either Yandle (not traditionally a big D-zone starts guy) or Matheson (a rookie) as the top LH guys. What that does to Ekblad's deployment will be interesting. If they transition him to a harder minutes role while also giving him a new partner. Kinda get the impression that Demers is more likely to be the guy shifted to a heavy defensive workload though. Gonna be interesting to see though...

Ekblad looked pretty good playing with Matheson, in his short stint last year. Yandle would be a good fit as well. For all the talk of being sheltered by Campbell, it just wasn't the case last year. Admittedly, during his rookie year, he more or less took the kid under his wing. Although, last year, Campbell seemed out of gas and often out of position in his own zone. As far as a heavy defensive load, I agree that it could likely go to Demers and Petrovic on the right side. But, as a fan, I expect injuries so who knows how the deployment will add up by the end of the year.

 

[Johnny Hoxville]

Florida was hot all last season. When Ekblad got hurt briefly, I'm not sure they won a game. When he came back, they won in first game returning from injury. To me, that says a lot.

 

[Currysux*]

He's a top 30 D-man so he is a #1 D-man.

This is such a flawed argument. There are like 14-16 true #1 dmen. A #1 dmen is a guy who can lead the defense and shut down other teams top lines and can carry a pairing. Ekblad isnt that yet. Muzzin and Barrie were voted top 30 dmen on here, do you think they are #1 dmen as well? Komarov is a top 30 right winger, I guess hes a 1st liner then right? Ekblad is a solid #2 right now but will be an elite franchise dmen soon. He gets heavily overrated on here though. People act like he is already what he will become but he hasnt yet.

 

[I am not exposed]

This is such a flawed argument. There are like 14-16 true #1 dmen. A #1 dmen is a guy who can lead the defense and shut down other teams top lines and can carry a pairing. Ekblad isnt that yet. Muzzin and Barrie were voted top 30 dmen on here, do you think they are #1 dmen as well? Komarov is a top 30 right winger, I guess hes a 1st liner then right? Ekblad is a solid #2 right now but will be an elite franchise dmen soon. He gets heavily overrated on here though. People act like he is already what he will become but he hasnt yet.

Well said.

 

[Sureves]

He's a top 30 D-man so he is a #1 D-man.

Yep.

 

[Sureves]

This is such a flawed argument. There are like 14-16 true #1 dmen. A #1 dmen is a guy who can lead the defense and shut down other teams top lines and can carry a pairing. Ekblad isnt that yet. Muzzin and Barrie were voted top 30 dmen on here, do you think they are #1 dmen as well? Komarov is a top 30 right winger, I guess hes a 1st liner then right? Ekblad is a solid #2 right now but will be an elite franchise dmen soon. He gets heavily overrated on here though. People act like he is already what he will become but he hasnt yet.

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

 

[TNT87]

Yes he is.

 

[Mr Hockey*]

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

So if Karlsson gets injured the #2 d'man becomes a #1 d'man regardless of skill level?

 

[Sureves]

So if Karlsson gets injured the #2 d'man becomes a #1 d'man regardless of skill level?

No. If Karlsson retires (or has a career ending injury) then the #31st best defenseman moves from being a #2D to a #1D.

 

[Arthuros]

Almost certainly.

 

[MessierII]

I think there's only max 15 #1D in the NHL currently I think he's on the cusp.

 

[Royal Thunder]

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

wut

Just because a guy is being utilized as a team's #1 dman does not make them automatically a #1 dman. Calling a guy a #1 defenseman is more a reflection of his ability than of his usage. It is possible for there to be two #1 dmen on a team (see: 07' Ducks, and the Predators (Suter/Weber, Weber/Josi, Josi/Subban).

As a counter example, when the Sabres were terrible, Myers was played as the #1 dman but he clearly isn't that and wouldn't have been that on any other team. Same thing with Petry when he was an Oiler.

 

[Regal]

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

It makes no sense to me to use an evaluation that isn't rooted solely in ability. Especially when there's so little separation between large groups of players after the top 10-15 or so.

 

[biturbo19]

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

So at exactly what point does another 1 Center, 1 Defenceman, and 2 Wingers get the "promotion" to #1C/W/D with Las Vegas entering the league? Does it happen now, knowing that it's coming? Does it happen the day they're selected in the expansion draft? Does it happen at the end of Las Vegas' first game?


You can take a hardline stance on there being as many #1s of everything as there are teams, but tying the quantity of #1s to the number of teams is latching on to a convenient, but practically irrelevant number. What really doesn't make sense, is offering up that promotion based on something that in no way reflects a talent/ability level in the player.

As in the example...Las Vegas entering the league doesn't magically upgrade the talent of 1 extra C/LW/RW/D/G to "#1" level. Assessing the talent level and ability is a massively more useful and descriptive definition of #1C/D/etc. Which is where there are typically less than 30 (or 31) true #1 Defencemen - it's a completely reasonable and logical premise.

 

[Regal]

So at exactly what point does another 1 Center, 1 Defenceman, and 2 Wingers get the "promotion" to #1C/W/D with Las Vegas entering the league? Does it happen now, knowing that it's coming? Does it happen the day they're selected in the expansion draft? Does it happen at the end of Las Vegas' first game?


You can take a hardline stance on there being as many #1s of everything as there are teams, but tying the quantity of #1s to the number of teams is latching on to a convenient, but practically irrelevant number. What really doesn't make sense, is offering up that promotion based on something that in no way reflects a talent/ability level in the player.

As in the example...Las Vegas entering the league doesn't magically upgrade the talent of 1 extra C/LW/RW/D/G to "#1" level. Assessing the talent level and ability is a massively more useful and descriptive definition of #1C/D/etc. Which is where there are typically less than 30 (or 31) true #1 Defencemen - it's a completely reasonable and logical premise.

I wouldn't say it's practically irrelevant as the number of teams to some degree determines how good a player needs to be to fill a particular role. If there was only 6 teams in the league the talent would be so concentrated that the ability needed to be a true number one in that case would be higher. But it's definitely fairly random to tie it directly to the number of teams

 

[Sidney the Kidney]

There are exactly 30 #1D in the league, 30 #1C, and 60 #1W.

That's the way I see it. It makes no sense otherwise.

You're looking at the description way too literally, and not looking at it from a more contextual sense.

For instance, Malkin is 2C in Pittsburgh, while Kadri was 1C in Toronto. Does it make any sense whatsoever to argue that Kadri is a true #1C, while Malkin is only a 2C just because that's how their respective teams employed them?

A #1 defenseman is a guy who any coach/team would feel comfortable utilizing as a #1 defenseman if he was on their roster. Just because the worst team in the league employs a guy the most minutes, doesn't mean he's actually a #1 because if he played for any other team in the league he'd be buried on the second or third pairing (see Schultz, Justin as proof of this).

 

[clunk]

He is. Just watch him play.

 

[Zaddy]

He's played way too sheltered minutes to be called a #1D as of this moment. Maybe he plays tough minutes and shows he can handle it as soon as next year but until then I wouldn't call him a #1D.

 

[Regal]

You're looking at the description way too literally, and not looking at it from a more contextual sense.

For instance, Malkin is 2C in Pittsburgh, while Kadri was 1C in Toronto. Does it make any sense whatsoever to argue that Kadri is a true #1C, while Malkin is only a 2C just because that's how their respective teams employed them?

A #1 defenseman is a guy who any coach/team would feel comfortable utilizing as a #1 defenseman if he was on their roster. Just because the worst team in the league employs a guy the most minutes, doesn't mean he's actually a #1 because if he played for any other team in the league he'd be buried on the second or third pairing (see Schultz, Justin as proof of this).

Most people who argue for this mean top 30 league wide, not the 30 who play the position on each team. So some teams may have more than one and some may have none. I'm assuming this is also how he feels.

 

[ThatSaid]

Voted no, but believe he has the potential to be one of the best in the league. As others have stated, it usually takes a few years for D-men to hit their stride. Sheltered or not, he has played well to this point. This year will be key to his development.

 

[mgd525]

I voted yes. I have faith, He's close enough to it right now I can't imagine him not being one. I think in a few more years he's gonna be great. With the HUGE turnover on their defense I wouldn't be surprised however if he didn't have an un flattering first half of the year. IMO I really liked FLA defense for the most part. I don't like it as much now. I understand the making moves and salary cap but you can't have that much turnover on a blueline without s drop off.

 

[Dogewow]

He's got tremendous skill and I think he'll be there eventually. But like stated before, he played with a good partner in Campbell and behind a solid defensive pairing, which allowed his skills to really shine. Will be interesting to see how he looks with the new defense that Florida has assembled. Voted no for now, but can change very quickly.