Makar vs Fox

[biturbo19]

Fox is not as big of a name as the other two...

I don't really understand where this narrative comes from. Fox is far from some hidden gem toiling in obscurity. The guy just won the Norris trophy for cripes sake. He's as big a name as they come, among top young defencemen. He's playing in one of the biggest, most extensively covered markets around the league, drafted and traded by a major Canadian market team, played his college hockey in another of the biggest and most covered hockey markets in the US. He's talked about regularly in the mainstream media (even up in Canada where they had their own segregated division this year), and is all the rage among social media circles. In winning the Norris, obviously has the hype and clout to garner those major award votes which are hugely reputation and "name" dependent, and deeply reflective of media awareness and coverage.

Fox has arrived among the biggest of big names in the sport right now. It's like those fans of some small indie hipster band, who don't seem to recognize their favourite band are no longer "under the radar" when they blow up with a chart topping #1 hit.

 

[Sean Garrity]

I want my #1 to be Fox and my #2 to be Makar. Not literally, but stylistically. I mean come on, Makar didn't even regularly kill penalties, how the f*** could he win a Norris this year?

 

[avsfan9]

I want my #1 to be Fox and my #2 to be Makar. Not literally, but stylistically. I mean come on, Makar didn't even regularly kill penalties, how the f*** could he win a Norris this year?

Because he was arguably the best d man in the league this year

 

[BKarchitect]

I want my #1 to be Fox and my #2 to be Makar. Not literally, but stylistically. I mean come on, Makar didn't even regularly kill penalties, how the f*** could he win a Norris this year?

Because he tilts the ice to an extreme degree whenever he’s out there? Killing penalties is a matter of usage - it doesn’t mean you are a good or bad defensive player at even strength. Makar is a really good defender and his speed and IQ allow him to cover a tremendous amount of ice and get back to help on defense even as he plays a highly offensive style. That’s why he’s not some “offensive maverick” that I think some still perceive him as. He covers 200’ of ice like pretty much no other defender in the game.

That doesn’t mean he’s as - and I think this was a good word somebody used - as “accomplished” defensively speaking as Fox who is an absolute brainiac and certainly isn’t lacking for skill either. Fox was a worthy Norris winner this season. Some may argue Makar would’ve won had he played a full slate but for me it’s like - there’s a reason the Rocket isn’t given based on goals per game - it’s based on actual produced goals. There wasn’t enough separating Makar and Fox this year and an 11 game difference in this shortened season was like a 20% difference in availability - which is no small matter.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

I want my #1 to be Fox and my #2 to be Makar. Not literally, but stylistically. I mean come on, Makar didn't even regularly kill penalties, how the f*** could he win a Norris this year?

Well, he was still a second unit PK guy.

You probably don’t need to look much further than the fact that he’s 5th all time in points per game by a defenceman in the regular season and 7th all time in points per game in the playoffs through his first two seasons.

 

[Unspecified]

Its still Makar

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Did he kill penalties or not? I see so many conflicting viewpoints on this. It shouldn’t be something that there are conflicting answers to.

I think it matters. Top defensemen play in all situations.

 

[BKarchitect]

He was often on the 2nd PK unit.

I think we will see that usage go up some but there's a limit to how much TOI he can get...like Fox, he was over 24 minutes per game on average in the regular season. His ES+PP time per game was 23:23. Fox was at 22:07 of ES+PP. Makar is a devastating player at ES and on the PP - I'm not sure you want to reduce those minutes to feed him PK time. Bednar relied heavily on Graves and a specialist (rotating between EJ/Cole/Nemeth depending on what part of the year) to soak up the big PK minutes.

 

[Volica]

The Calgary kid, or the kid who f***ed Calgary?
Decisions, decisions... de.. cisions.

 

[Regal]

Oh god are we back to Karlsson-era "can't be elite if you don't PK" BS? I swear a defenseman could play 30 minutes a game and be the best player of all time at ES and on the PP and someone would try to diminish him for not PKing.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

He was often on the 2nd PK unit.

I think we will see that usage go up some but there's a limit to how much TOI he can get...like Fox, he was over 24 minutes per game on average in the regular season. His ES+PP time per game was 23:23. Fox was at 22:07 of ES+PP. Makar is a devastating player at ES and on the PP - I'm not sure you want to reduce those minutes to feed him PK time. Bednar relied heavily on Graves and a specialist (rotating between EJ/Cole/Nemeth depending on what part of the year) to soak up the big PK minutes.

Wouldn’t it make sense to play your best players more and the worst players less? I think that’s the easy solution to what you are saying.

Shouldn’t Makar also be better on the PK than those four you name? A PP is much more likely to see a goal influence the score of the game than the two minutes after a PP. I’d want my best players playing those minutes, and then you let the bottom of the lineup take the less important minutes directly after a PP. I don’t think it’s a good strategy to take the 4 biggest players on the roster and say they are the PK’ers because they should be best at a situation with less players on the ice. I think that’s way too simplistic thinking. That can apply, but sometimes smaller players are your best PK’ers.

A team’s best players should be among their best PK’ers. If I was a coach, I would mandate my best players learn to PK, if they can’t. For players with top tier hockey sense they should be able to play that situation well. It’s not all about blocking shots, winning board battles and clearing the front of the net.

 

[Raspewtin]

this thread is one big cope lol

Makar will win several norris trophies. he will live losing one that he deserved to lose.

I chose Fox but completely understand the Makar votes

 

[Regal]

Wouldn’t it make sense to play your best players more and the worst players less? I think that’s the easy solution to what you are saying.

Shouldn’t Makar also be better on the PK than those four you name? A PP is much more likely to see a goal influence the score of the game than the two minutes after a PP. I’d want my best players playing those minutes, and then you let the bottom of the lineup take the less important minutes directly after a PP. I don’t think it’s a good strategy to take the 4 biggest players on the roster and say they are the PK’ers because they should be best at a situation with less players on the ice. I think that’s way too simplistic thinking. That can apply, but sometimes smaller players are your best PK’ers.

A team’s best players should be among their best PK’ers. If I was a coach, I would mandate my best players learn to PK, if they can’t. For players with top tier hockey sense they should be able to play that situation well. It’s not all about blocking shots, winning board battles and clearing the front of the net.

Skaters objectively have less influence on the PK than they do 5v5 or on the PP, and being good on the PK is less about skill than 5v5 or the PP. This means that the difference between your best players and your mid-range players is almost always greater at 5v5 and on the PP. Since PKing also generally takes the most energy and your best players usually play the most, it's actually good strategy to limit your best players from playing on the PK regularly, and give them more 5v5 and PP minutes since it means you're maximizing their difference between them and the rest of the players in your lineup. It's obviously situational, and if you have a 1-goal lead late in a game, killing a penalty at that point is probably more important than maximizing your 5v5 play. In that situation, ideally your best defenseman can step in and do that, but that doesn't mean he should be playing heavy PK minutes every game nor does it mean that not playing those minutes means he isn't an effective PKer when called upon.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

Anybody can kill penalties. There’s a ton of bad defenceman in the league that play on the PK.

 

[Tralfamadore]

Wouldn’t it make sense to play your best players more and the worst players less? I think that’s the easy solution to what you are saying.

Shouldn’t Makar also be better on the PK than those four you name? A PP is much more likely to see a goal influence the score of the game than the two minutes after a PP. I’d want my best players playing those minutes, and then you let the bottom of the lineup take the less important minutes directly after a PP. I don’t think it’s a good strategy to take the 4 biggest players on the roster and say they are the PK’ers because they should be best at a situation with less players on the ice. I think that’s way too simplistic thinking. That can apply, but sometimes smaller players are your best PK’ers.

A team’s best players should be among their best PK’ers. If I was a coach, I would mandate my best players learn to PK, if they can’t. For players with top tier hockey sense they should be able to play that situation well. It’s not all about blocking shots, winning board battles and clearing the front of the net.

You're only making this argument because Fox happens to play on the PK. I personally think it's stupid to give your most gifted offensive players heavy minutes on the penalty and so do many coaches and that's why it all comes down to coaching decisions. You really think Makar wouldn't do a better job then Patrik Nemeth and Ryan Graves on the penalty kill?

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

You're only making this argument because Fox happens to play on the PK. I personally think it's stupid to give you're most gifted offensive players heavy minutes on the penalty and so do many coaches and that's why it all comes down to coaching decisions. You really think Makar wouldn't do a better job then Patrik Nemeth and Ryan Graves on the penalty kill?

I don’t like that Artemi Panarin thinks he’s too good offensively to take part in a less desirable part of the game. Happy now? You may be all about winning an argument for your team. I say what I think makes sense.

Goals are more likely to take place with less players on the ice, and there are more and better scoring chances with less players on the ice. I don’t know what’s complicated. The situation is more consequential than the two minutes after a penalty.

Yes, top players can’t play 60 minutes, but plenty of players play in all situations, and I think some of the reasons that make a top player so good on the PP like hockey sense and skating make a top player more likely to be a good PK’er than the plug at the bottom of the roster whose a lot less talented at hockey.

Edit: Generally speaking, I don’t like how the discussions of the best players has now devolved into almost entirely a discussion of offense. I think it dilutes the game. I absolutely think it matters if McDavid can win face offs or Dahlin is a PK’er or Matthews is good defensively. The importance of the whole game is diluted if all that matters is who has more points and teams sacrifice their own results to try to get their players more points and individual accolades or awards that everyone realizes have become all about who has how many points.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

Did he kill penalties or not? I see so many conflicting viewpoints on this. It shouldn’t be something that there are conflicting answers to.

I think it matters. Top defensemen play in all situations.

Yeah Makar PK’d. He was fourth among all Avs D. He didn’t PK the most by any means because they have PK specialists and why would you put Makar over the boards to block shots and risk getting injured when you have other guys who are just as efficient on the PK. The Avalanche lead the NHL in time leading in the NHL this year. Would be quite the bonehead decision to put Makar on the PK during a lot of those blowouts.

Among all Avs defenseman who PK’d 20 minutes or more this year Makar was on the ice for the fewest shots against/60, goals against/60 and scoring chances against/60. He was tremendous on the PK.

 

[North Cole]

It sounds like you may not understand how the NHL awards are determined so I can help you out a little here. The trophy is given out to the player who had the best season, not who the better player is.

The James Norris Memorial Trophy, or simply the Norris Trophy, is awarded annually to the National Hockey League's top "defense player who demonstrates throughout the season the greatest all-round ability in the position"

I'm gonna ask you two questions. One I really shouldn't because you are a Ranger fan but i am going to do it anyway.

With your reasoning would you take Fleury over Vasilevskiy? You know since he won the Vezina.
If Makar had played the full season, do you think Fox would have still won the Norris?

One goalie is nearing the end of his career and the other is in his prime, so not the same situation. I think he may still have, but it has no bearing on who actually won the Norris and is not provable either way.

I'm a non Ranger fan and I lean toward Fox. There is no wrong answer to the poll.

 

[Northern Avs Fan]

I don’t like that Artemi Panarin thinks he’s too good offensively to take part in a less desirable part of the game. Happy now? You may be all about winning an argument for your team. I say what I think makes sense.

Goals are more likely to take place with less players on the ice, and there are more and better scoring chances with less players on the ice. I don’t know what’s complicated. The situation is more consequential than the two minutes after a penalty.

Yes, top players can’t play 60 minutes, but plenty of players play in all situations, and I think some of the reasons that make a top player so good on the PP like hockey sense and skating make a top player more likely to be a good PK’er than the plug at the bottom of the roster whose a lot less talented at hockey.

Edit: Generally speaking, I don’t like how the discussions of the best players has now devolved into almost entirely a discussion of offense. I think it dilutes the game. I absolutely think it matters if McDavid can win face offs or Dahlin is a PK’er or Matthews is good defensively. The importance of the whole game is diluted if all that matters is who has more points and teams sacrifice their own results to try to get their players more points and individual accolades or awards that everyone realizes have become all about who has how many points.

Judging by your post asking if Makar PK’s it sounds like you haven’t watched a single Avalanche game this year.

So, you wouldn’t be able to know that his affect on the game is tremendous, even beyond points.

He draws coverage from the opposition unlike any other defenceman in the league. His play away from the puck also took a good jump from average in his rookie season to the point now where it’s very good. Not to mention he skates the puck out of the zone at a higher rate than any other defender. Additionally, unlike a lot of other smaller PMD’s Makar actually throws hits.

So, two points:

1. Production is still the most important thing.

2. If you’re not watching the games you’re not going to see the impact a player has beyond points. Then you’re just making assumptions.

 

[Saitama]

Aw man, Fox is losing this poll, I guess I'll have to settle for having one of the best young defensemen in the league as a consolation prize. It's rough, but I'll try to handle the disappointment!

I've got no issues with Makar winning this poll btw, although I think that Fox will fight him and a couple others for the Norris going forward. I don't think Makar has them all locked up quite yet!

 

[MattMartin]

Will take the Norris winner for $500 Alex.

 

[Sean Garrity]

Because he was arguably the best d man in the league this year

Isn't that what the Norris is for?

Because he tilts the ice to an extreme degree whenever he’s out there? Killing penalties is a matter of usage - it doesn’t mean you are a good or bad defensive player at even strength. Makar is a really good defender and his speed and IQ allow him to cover a tremendous amount of ice and get back to help on defense even as he plays a highly offensive style. That’s why he’s not some “offensive maverick” that I think some still perceive him as. He covers 200’ of ice like pretty much no other defender in the game.

That doesn’t mean he’s as - and I think this was a good word somebody used - as “accomplished” defensively speaking as Fox who is an absolute brainiac and certainly isn’t lacking for skill either. Fox was a worthy Norris winner this season. Some may argue Makar would’ve won had he played a full slate but for me it’s like - there’s a reason the Rocket isn’t given based on goals per game - it’s based on actual produced goals. There wasn’t enough separating Makar and Fox this year and an 11 game difference in this shortened season was like a 20% difference in availability - which is no small matter.

Can't disagree with anything that you're saying here. Makar will have a couple Norris' before all is said and done. My guess is he'll be the betting favorite going in to the year.

Well, he was still a second unit PK guy.

You probably don’t need to look much further than the fact that he’s 5th all time in points per game by a defenceman in the regular season and 7th all time in points per game in the playoffs through his first two seasons.

Fair points, and again no one is doubting Makar as an offensive dynamo and his ability to control the ice. Team need was likely the biggest factor in his "lack" of PK time, but I'm sure that will change as he continues to blossom and as team needs fluctuate.

 

[Pavel Buchnevich]

Judging by your post asking if Makar PK’s it sounds like you haven’t watched a single Avalanche game this year.

So, you wouldn’t be able to know that his affect on the game is tremendous, even beyond points.

He draws coverage from the opposition unlike any other defenceman in the league. His play away from the puck also took a good jump from average in his rookie season to the point now where it’s very good. Not to mention he skates the puck out of the zone at a higher rate than any other defender. Additionally, unlike a lot of other smaller PMD’s Makar actually throws hits.

So, two points:

1. Production is still the most important thing.

2. If you’re not watching the games you’re not going to see the impact a player has beyond points. Then you’re just making assumptions.

You'd be wrong then. I can look up stats on a stat sheet like all of you can, and then pretend to be an expert. I think it makes more sense to ask a question that can be answered by fans of the team that watch him play every game. Thats one of the benefits of this website where fans from different teams can provide context that might not be available to someone who doesn't watch most games a team plays. I didn't mean it as a criticism. I was genuinely asking a question. I don't know why it should be confusing. Either he was a PK'er or he wasn't. It's not a complicated question to answer, and I don't know why you have an adverse reaction to that question. You don't need to try to sell Makar to me. I'm asking a question, not criticizing him.

Anybody can kill penalties. There’s a ton of bad defenceman in the league that play on the PK.

You are making the point for me. It's become a hipster viewpoint to think killing penalties is for the bottom half of the roster and the power play is for the top half of the roster. It's the same type of thing with face-offs, goaltending, and we'll eventually get people saying defense doesn't matter. We already have people who say that being good on the PP shouldn't matter towards evaluating a player, and I'm sure the same would apply towards being good on the PK for the people who say all that matters is ES results.

Why can't a top player PK? Statistically speaking, it'd make a lot of sense. Goals are more likely to happen during a situation where one team has less players than the other team. You should want your best players on the ice in a situation that is more consequential towards goals being scored.

You mention how there's more to the game than points, but then you openly undermine that viewpoint by suggesting that the bad players can kill the penalties. I guess you believe a top player is too good for that lowly task. Do you also not care about defense? Face-offs? Goaltending? Are all of those also unimportant parts of the game?

 

[wetcoast]

Did he kill penalties or not? I see so many conflicting viewpoints on this. It shouldn’t be something that there are conflicting answers to.

I think it matters. Top defensemen play in all situations.

His rookie season no it was a measles 6 seconds a game , last year it was 55 but a lot of that is usage and skill set of other team mates.

For the same time period Fox played 7 seconds and then last season 2:36.

Pavel Datsyuk played very limited MPG on the PK yet he was an excellent defensive center.

 

[wetcoast]

You'd be wrong then. I can look up stats on a stat sheet like all of you can, and then pretend to be an expert. I think it makes more sense to ask a question that can be answered by fans of the team that watch him play every game. Thats one of the benefits of this website where fans from different teams can provide context that might not be available to someone who doesn't watch most games a team plays. I didn't mean it as a criticism. I was genuinely asking a question. I don't know why it should be confusing. Either he was a PK'er or he wasn't. It's not a complicated question to answer, and I don't know why you have an adverse reaction to that question. You don't need to try to sell Makar to me. I'm asking a question, not criticizing him.



You are making the point for me. It's become a hipster viewpoint to think killing penalties is for the bottom half of the roster and the power play is for the top half of the roster. It's the same type of thing with face-offs, goaltending, and we'll eventually get people saying defense doesn't matter. We already have people who say that being good on the PP shouldn't matter towards evaluating a player, and I'm sure the same would apply towards being good on the PK for the people who say all that matters is ES results.

Why can't a top player PK? Statistically speaking, it'd make a lot of sense.

Goals are more likely to happen during a situation where one team has less players than the other team. You should want your best players on the ice in a situation that is more consequential towards goals being scored.

You mention how there's more to the game than points, but then you openly undermine that viewpoint by suggesting that the bad players can kill the penalties. I guess you believe a top player is too good for that lowly task. Do you also not care about defense? Face-offs? Goaltending? Are all of those also unimportant parts of the game?

You need to ask coaches this question last season Fox spent 2:36 on the PK per game the season before it was a mere 7 seconds.

For Makar it was 0:06 and then :55 this year but I doubt the Avs coach is going to change his PK rotation just to satisfy anyone’s criteria for Norris voting on HF boards here.

This isn’t an EK/ Doughty separation going on here both Makar and Fox are very good 200 foot players but Makar really is not only much more dynamic (eye test) but his possession stats also back that up so he really does tilt the ice.