John Klingberg vs John Carlson

[Filthy Dangles]

Who's the better nhl defenseman?

Click to read more...

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Easily Klingberg

 

[CraigsList]

The one that is getting paid almost half of what the other is.

 

[hairylikebear]

Easily Klingberg

As a Stars fan I like Klingberg, but I don't see how it's easily one or the other. They are both dominant in the offensive roles they play for their team, and the difference in their advanced stats over last season are razor thin.

 

[Filthy Dangles]

As a Stars fan I like Klingberg, but I don't see how it's easily one or the other. They are both dominant in the offensive roles they play for their team, and the difference in their advanced stats over last season are razor thin.

Not an advanced stats guy but....

Kling: 53.7% CF and 4.0%Rel

Carl: 49.2% CF and 1.7% Rel

 

[hairylikebear]

Not an advanced stats guy but....

Kling: 53.7% CF and 4.0%Rel

Carl: 49.2% CF and 1.7% Rel

Klingberg had a much higher (52.88 vs 48.95) offensive zone start percentage which accounts for some of that difference. If you look at the teams as a whole, you'll find Stars defenders had on average a higher CF% than Washington's, which can be attributed to differences in play styles.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

48.39 xGF% for Carlson (+1.6 rel) vs 56.05% (+4.93 rel) for Klingberg.

As a Stars fan I like Klingberg, but I don't see how it's easily one or the other. They are both dominant in the offensive roles they play for their team, and the difference in their advanced stats over last season are razor thin.

Not an advanced stats guy but....

Kling: 53.7% CF and 4.0%Rel

Carl: 49.2% CF and 1.7% Rel

 

[hairylikebear]

48.39 xGF% for Carlson (+1.6 rel) vs 56.05% (+4.93 rel) for Klingberg.

xGF% is just another permutation of Corsi.

 

[tony d]

John Carlson for me.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

yes Carlson did have tougher deployment for sure but not convinced it makes up for the gap there. also Klinger is better offensively (his playmaking gap is larger than carlson's goal scoring one imo)

although carlson was an elite playmaker in 16-17 so idk, but in 16-17 he was an even worse possession player. 16-17 klinger was a strong possession dude who was very good offensively in non-sheltered minutes.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

xGF% is just another permutation of Corsi.

it takes into account shot quality

 

[hairylikebear]

Here's a pretty good comparison of the two players using a variety of analytical tools and data that paints these players to be closer than you'd see from just looking at Corsi based stats:
Player Evaluation Tool

it takes into account shot quality

It takes into account shot distance, there's a big difference. It's an approximation of shot quality, but it is still just a measurement of shot volume weighted for certain areas of the ice and ignores most game situations that actually impact shot quality.

 

[Devil Dancer]

Shot-based metrics aren't useful for analyzing 17-18 Caps players. They used an offensive system that deemphasized shot volume in favor of creating scoring chances.

Shot suppression or blocks could still be relevant.

 

[VoluntaryDom]

Shot-based metrics aren't useful for analyzing 17-18 Caps players. They used an offensive system that deemphasized shot volume in favor of creating scoring chances.

Shot suppression or blocks could still be relevant.

Expected goals numbers should look very good for them then since it takes into account where the shot was from.

 

[Larry Lightning]

I'd take the Stanley Cup winner.

 

[DonM]

I'd take the Stanley Cup winner.

Tom Wilson > McDavid confirmed