Is there a stigma against young offensive defensemen ?

[Montreal Shadow]

The stigma is there because none of them have won anything.

Karlsson and Subban share 3 Norrises between them and there will likely be a 4th one.

Or did you mean Cups because these are team awards. Can't fault anyone for not playing for Chicago or L.A.

 

[HarrisonFord]

You can't win a cup with one player.

You don't think there's any correlation at all here? We've got a fairly high number of these offensive defensemen out there, yet it's guys like Chara, Keith and Doughty that have anchored teams to Cups lately.

 

[HarrisonFord]

Karlsson and Subban share 3 Norrises between them and there will likely be a 4th one.

Or did you mean Cups because these are team awards. Can't fault anyone for not playing for Chicago or L.A.

I mean a Stanley Cup. You know, not an individual trophy.

This works both ways. Or else why is it that it's so hard to win without a #1C, #1D or #1G. They can't be unimportant yet also important. That's a flaw in logic.

 

[McBaevid]

Yea there is, you'll never hear anything about a one dimensional Defensive Dman, but the OFDs get criticized unfairly all the time.

 

[Igor Shestyorkin]

You don't think there's any correlation at all here? We've got a fairly high number of these offensive defensemen out there, yet it's guys like Chara, Keith and Doughty that have anchored teams to Cups lately.

Well I mean, if you want to compare a guy like Keith's or Doughty cup winning rosters to the rosters Karlsson has gotten, then go right ahead.

 

[Montreal Shadow]

I mean a Stanley Cup. You know, not an individual trophy.

This works both ways. Or else why is it that it's so hard to win without a #1C, #1D or #1G. They can't be unimportant yet also important. That's a flaw in logic.

You said it yourself. It's not an individual trophy. They need a strong team to win one.

 

[HarrisonFord]

Well I mean, if you want to compare a guy like Keith's or Doughty cup winning rosters to the rosters Karlsson has gotten, then go right ahead.

Fun fact, outside of Kopitar, they're really not all that far off (BUT WAIT I THOUGHT IT WAS A TEAM GAME AND ONE INDIVIDUAL DOESN'T MAKE THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE). That's my pre-response to your response.

You said it yourself. It's not an individual trophy. They need a strong team to win one.

And a defenseman who plays 30 minutes a night seems like a pretty important part of that team, don't you? Or how about a star goalie? I'm sure that him being injured all year wouldn't turn a Division winning team into a lottery team right?

 

[Montreal Shadow]

And a defenseman who plays 30 minutes a night seems like a pretty important part of that team, don't you? Or how about a star goalie? I'm sure that him being injured all year wouldn't turn a Division winning team into a lottery team right?

Your argument doesn't even make sense. You're saying Karlsson and Subban haven't won a cup which is a team award so you cannot fault them for that.

They won individual awards which prove their individual worth to a team. That Stanley Cup argument has been debunked and it's completely stupid.

 

[HarrisonFord]

Your argument doesn't even make sense. You're saying Karlsson and Subban haven't won a cup which is a team award so you cannot fault them for that.

They won individual awards which prove their individual worth to a team. That Stanley Cup argument has been debunked and it's completely stupid.

How about expand outwards from those two and look at the rest. Which one of them have won anything? And take a look at the #1D of all the cup finals teams from the last 15 years. How many of them are offensive defensemen?

 

[Makar Goes Fast]

#stopthestigma

#vlassicsucksoffensively

#jointhemovement

 

[Lebowski]

People pretend they watch more hockey than they do and will parrot most of what they hear on sportscenter.

 

[Lebowski]

How about expand outwards from those two and look at the rest. Which one of them have won anything? And take a look at the #1D of all the cup finals teams from the last 15 years. How many of them are offensive defensemen?

Or maybe good teams with good structure happen to make players appear better than they are on an individual level? Isn't that excuse used all the time for goalies?

 

[Montreal Shadow]

How about expand outwards from those two and look at the rest. Which one of them have won anything? And take a look at the #1D of all the cup finals teams from the last 15 years. How many of them are offensive defensemen?

You either don't read or you're seriously misunderstanding everything. The argument is about there being a stigma against young offensive defensemen. It has nothing to do with cups.

Subban isn't even an offensive defensman. He's well rounded. Just like OEL, Brodie or Keith.

Karlsson could be considered an offensive defenseman but he is far and away the best in the league and the closest comparable we have are guys like Coffey or Macinnis and that was years ago. They also both won cups.

 

[Tripod]

There definitely is that stigma. Sometimes it's warranted, sometimes it isn't. What a lot of the high-end offensive defensemen have in common is the ability to be very quick on transition and maintain offensive zone-time which leads to better shot suppression for their team. This in itself helps the team defensively.

There are times that perhaps the offensive mindset that they have causes them to "cheat" defensively when trying to predict a chance that will go the other way, leading to more high risk plays in their own end. Live by the sword, die by the sword. But most of them also have excellent ability with their sticks whether it be getting it into the lane or stripping the opposing player of the puck along with great skating ability to get themselves back into position.

There will likely be some videos posted in this thread of Karlsson getting walked in the defensive zone off the rush or Subban out of position with a rush coming the other way, however there are plenty of "defensive defensmen" that have the same done to them but can't generate anything going the other way.

There is no doubt to me that their ability to quickly transition offense, enter the zone, maintain zone time, and create offense has a net positive effect on their team despite having some off moments defensively.

Very well said!

I will comment mostly on Ghost. He has helped our transition game A TON. He all have seen hi-lights of him coming out of nowhere to intercept a pass to turn things the other way. Lots of other Dman don't try that for fear of not timing it right and leading to a good scoring chance against. But Ghost has the confidence to do so.

People immediately say Ghost is bad at D. Yet in college, he was named best defensive Dman....at 160 lbs. His shortcoming come from his size, but he is very good with his stick, and anticipation to help cover for it.

Look at Parayko. Beast of a Dman. Yet just last week, Panarin shoved him off the puck on the faceoff to set a goal. Nothing said. If that was Ghost, it would be that he has issues handling guys.

And it's just not Dmen. ELITE SCORING forwards RARELY get the recognition for their defensive play. That is held for the lesser scoring forwards.

 

[HarrisonFord]

Or maybe good teams with good structure happen to make players appear better than they are on an individual level? Isn't that excuse used all the time for goalies?

I have no idea. I hear a lot of excuses that are made for why offensive defenseman aren't that bad on here.

You either don't read or you're seriously misunderstanding everything. The argument is about there being a stigma against young offensive defensemen. It has nothing to do with cups.

Subban isn't even an offensive defensman. He's well rounded. Just like OEL, Brodie or Keith.

Karlsson could be considered an offensive defenseman but he is far and away the best in the league and the closest comparable we have are guys like Coffey or Macinnis and that was years ago. They also both won cups.

I actually agree with you. I think Subban is the most well rounded of the "offensive" dmen listed. I'd put him more in the category of the two-way guys

 

[Oneiro]

To me, it's less about points or offense vs. defense.

It's about efficiency. This game belongs to the ones who make the right play at the right time and nothing more. Gretzky, Lemieux, Lidstrom, Crosby.

Who makes it easier on their teammates time and time again? Who makes it harder?

 

[ManofSteel55]

There's a stigma against young offense based players of any position on HF.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

There's a stigma against young offense based players of any position on HF.

Yeah right.

 

[Sureves]

There's a stigma against young offense based players of any position on HF.

Yeah right.

I can't believe there are people like you who disagree with his statement.

Defensive play is MASSIVELY overrated on HF. It's actually bordering on delusion at this point.

It's not to say that defensive play isn't important - it is - but holy smokes people take it a football field too far.

I mean there are people that used to think that Toews was better than Kane. Hell there still are. It's insanity. Insanity.

 

[Bounces R Way]

There's always going to be a stigma against young offensive minded defenceman because the success of their teams often rely so heavily upon them. Their probably going to have the most TOI, and the most time with the puck. With the systems currently established in the NHL puck moving defenceman have never been as important to a team's offence as they are now. So their mistakes get emphasized (Karlsson, Ghostisbehere, Subban) more so than a young forward will because if they make a mistake it'll more often lead to a high danger scoring chance. To be successful offensively in today's NHL it's more or less a requirement to make plays that have some risk involved. People have to realize you have to take the good with the bad with these players.

 

[Mr Positive]

it's easier to appear better if you have a defensive identity because you can just hang back and always do the safe play. Usually those Dmen have the size to back that up as well, although I would say that teams that rely on these types don't succeed unless they can get more Dmen who will push the play forward.

Offensive Dmen are expected to play in all three zones, not just the defensive one. As a result they get caught up ice a lot more and their mistakes are magnified because the mistakes are often dramatic. They often get labelled as having a lack of hockey IQ, when it really amounts to them just learning the NHL in the style they play, and that it takes time. As they develop their hockey intelligence grows, so much so that I would say that a developed offensive defenseman knows the game a lot better than a defensive defenseman (usually)

To answer the question, yes, there is a stigma against offensive defensemen and it is not all fair. Even those safer defensive types need time to grow as well, and until they do they often spend time in the defensive quite a lot, and look extremely clunky when they are tasked with pushing for offensive more.

 

[Sting]

People see what they want to see based on how they label players.

Karlsson routinely makes stellar defensive plays. Rarely, if ever do they get noticed. People remember him by create offensive instincts and the times he gets caught defensively because it fits what an offensive d-man is.

Doughty can have several poor defensive games in a row but it doesn't fit with what people think of him...the impenetrable wall that is the two-day d-man. Not only have I witnessed many games from DD where he played poorly, but the whole nation did as well when they lost to San Jose this year. Will that get remembered? Not a chance.

At the end of the day, offensive d-men are generally underrated for what they bring to the table. Some posters, including one in this thread, have a very close-minded way of thinking.

 

[WetcoastOrca]

I don't think there's a stigma against offensive defensemen at all.
They get most of the major awards and the highest salaries. In fact, I think if anything there is a stigma against defensive defensemen. I suppose that a lot of it is due to the fact that most people voting on the awards don't watch all of the defensemen and offensive stats are the easiest thing to compare defense men on.

I mean people talk about Drew Doughty as if he's a purely defensive defenseman and yet he's tied for 9th in points for defensemen. Josi is said to have now passed Weber when Weber is tied for 9th in points among defensemen.
Brent Burns is a finalist for the Norris primarily because he put up huge offensive numbers. How many people voting for him for the Norris even know what his defensive play is like. And I'm not saying at all that he's poor defensively.

For the record, I think Karlsson, Subban etc were fully deserving of winning the Norris. I'd just like to see some of the less offensive guys get more consideration.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Yea there is, you'll never hear anything about a one dimensional Defensive Dman, but the OFDs get criticized unfairly all the time.

The difference is that those guys aren't typically paid as much, so the expectation is less.

Ask Sharks fans how nice it is to have Polak on the 3rd pair.

 

[struckbyaparkedcar]

Yes.

Way too many people seem to think that "clearing the front of the net" is the main job of a defencemen.

If you're team controls the puck for most of the game you don't have to worry about that job.

Yeah, high end possession defensemen don't have to worry about the 40% of total shot attempts they still have to deal with...

What?