Jacob Trouba a real 1st pair defenceman?

[Mighty Makar]

Yep!

 

[tony d]

Yeah he is, he's towards the lower end of them but he's still a good 1st pairing defenseman.

 

[CupInSIX]

He was the one Jet I feared the most. An absolute beast.

 

[The S5]

Then why did you say "1st pair"? Do some proof reading, you kind of ruined this poll now with your conflicting criteria. He's a pretty clear top pairing but not a 1D.



Most people would consider 1D a role, not just the top defenseman on a particular team. There's plenty of teams that don't have anyone to fill that 1D role.

Is Reilly a 1D? Karlsson? Burns? All have major shortcomings.
What exactly is the 1D role?

 

[The S5]

For d-men, Trouba was:

13th in points
17th in points/gp
22nd in even strength points
T-42nd in goals
T-5th in short handed points
33rd in shots

35th in TOI/GP
65th in hits
6th in blocks
44th in SHTOI/gp

Definitely a top pairing guy, probably could fit in in the 25-31 range of #1 men in the league.

I don't love the guy, but I don't think you can name 25 guys better.

 

[blinds]

Is Reilly a 1D? Karlsson? Burns? All have major shortcomings.
What exactly is the 1D role?

I would say no, yes, no. Everyone's got their own definition of what a 1D is, it's easier to decide if a guy is a 1D than define what a 1D is. The more well rounded guys like Hedman, Pietrangelo, Doughty are obvious but I think the more one-dimensional like Karlsson can be too. I think there's quite a few teams that lack a true 1D, my own team, the Flyers, included.

I feel like a 1D is a guy you can trust in all situations to be able to defend reasonably well and turn any situation to your team's favor more often than not. Trouba isn't a guy that I would always have that confidence in. Burns and Reilly are guys that I would, again, not feel confident in in all situations. They're borderline but they can be taken advantage of by certain players or teams. Karlsson isn't the greatest defender but his unique offensive talent is such that he can create advantage out of nothing in ways other guys can't while still being able to defend reasonably well.

It's a hard quality to pin down but something you know when you see it. I can understand people who want to define it by "is he a top 31 defenseman in the league? Yes? Then he's a 1D." I just think asking if someone is a top 31 D or if they're a 1D are different questions.

 

[biturbo19]

Oh, well now the question is confusing since the title and poll question doesn't match your OP

Yeah. Asking if he's a "real 1st pair" defenceman or a "real #1" defenceman are totally different questions.

Realistically, i don't think there's nearly 31 true #1D in the league right now. The guys who can eat huge minutes, go-to in all situations, can really carry a partner in tough minutes if they have to, etc. Those are comparatively few and far between. The rest of the top-pairings are generally just staffed by combinations of murky Top-3D of various quality, largely dependent on chemistry, depth, and deployment. And that can certainly be enough, with the right mix. Trouba is a guy i'd group toward the upper echelon of that big cluster, but not quite into that bona fide #1D territory.

 

[Falco Lombardi]

Yeah I would say so

 

[Ryan Michaels]

Is Reilly a 1D? Karlsson? Burns? All have major shortcomings.
What exactly is the 1D role?

I would say no, yes, no.

 

[SHANNYPLAN]

Yeah... he's a good #2

Rielly - Trouba

 

[Sasso09]

Border line. Hes a decent #2 so I guess yes

 

[blinds]

Burns Norris

Subban won a Norris too, is he a 1D? Lots of points gets you a Norris, doesn't necessarily make you a 1D. There's better arguments to make than pointing to a trophy.

 

[spiny norman]

Lopsided result.