Uh, you basically just said exactly the same thing I did.
I know you're trying to use this only as an example of how good Karlsson is, but you know as well as I do that he had an equally bad first half and that the trophy shouldn't be about how well you performed for one particular stretch of the year.
The argument I was responding to claimed Karlsson was most responsible for Ottawa making the playoffs, and should get Norris votes because of it. If this is true, why - with Karlsson's dominant performance - was Ottawa still struggling until Hammond entered the fray?
Just so we're clear:
1) If Karlsson wasn't bad in the first ~20 games (which btw isn't half a season, Karlsson being bad for the first half is one of the bigger myths going around), there would be no debate. His level of play from the start of December onward has him as one of the leading candidates
dispite an atrocious start. People aren't suggesting Karlsson should win because he had the highest peak, they are suggesting that his peak makes up for the valley and propels him into contention. Some posters might be going a little overboard to suggest he's a lock now that the team made the playoffs, but imo this will be one of the closest Norris votes in history.
2) Teams can struggle to get wins when they are subject to horrible goaltending. The team sv% during the 12 game stretch you identified was around 90.3% and that number bolstered by games against Edm, Buffalo and Arizona. So the reality is you suggesting Karlsson can't be the main reason because he wasn't the last change that happened. Truth is, Karlsson was carrying the team and they lost in spite of it for those 12 games. Of course other players were playing well during the run, you need more than one player to get those kind of results, but you've done nothing to disprove that Karlsson was the driving force. If your complaint is somebody exagerated, welcome to the internet. You've done your share aswell, I'm sure.
All this to say, I don't think the sens making the playoffs should affect Norris voting, though I'm sure it does, and I don't think without
either Hammond, or Karlsson's performance over that stretch the sens make the playoffs. Maybe a healthy Anderson would have been enough, he did have a .927 sv% before breaking his finger against Toronto and playing injured afterwards, or maybe not. But your argument boils down to Karlsson can't have been the main reason because somebody else was also very good. Well, it takes a lot of things going right to have that kind of run, the last change isn't automatically the biggest one, it can be the one that puts them over the hump though.
This is such a tired talking point. Even for fans who don't ever watch any hockey other than their own team, if they would ever look at anything other than point totals they would see Doughty had continuously performed all season long. He had another amazing season despite the issues LA had with their D corps which forced him to average 29 minutes a game (his career average had been somewhere just over 25).
Those minutes, by the way, were not easy ones. He played an average of 2:38 shorthanded (Weber 2:27, Josi 2:26, Subban 2:09, Karlsson 0:33), 22:54 even strength (the only player within even a minute of this is Suter, who played less games overall), and had a higher corsi rel qoc (played against the best players on the opposing team more often) than any of the top candidates other than Josi/Weber.
But yes, I know, it's easier just to follow the usual: point total lower than other defensemen -> team missed playoffs -> not a good season. This type of mentality is why the Norris has been called into question again and again over the years, because many of the voters fall into the same trap.
He also has the lowest raw Corsi QOC, the 2nd lowest TOI%QOC (meaning he faces players who get less of their teams total icetime on average that other candidates do). Had the highest OZ start% too (
I've shown earlier in this thread a more detailed breakdown of the advantage dmen get from zone starts, Doughty doesn't stand out from Karlsson or Subban one way or the other tbh).
I'm not a big fan of QOC stats as their effect on the aggregate is greatly exagerated by the masses, and zone starts are probably one of the more misunderstood stats out there, so I won't try an suggest Doughty had "soft deployment" just point out that he also wasn't getting some sort of super tough deployment that no other Noris candidate did.
As for the issues with LA's D corps, Ottawa would gladly swap situations with LA this season. Doughty's supporting D corps minus Voynov is still far better than Karlsson's minus Methot (lets be honest, maybe even with Methot too).
