Players who don't get enough criticism for their poor defensive plays?

[FerrisRox]

How much criticism does Jake Gardiner get? Because it's not enough, that guy sucks.

Jake Gardiner is pretty lousy defensively in large part because he's very dumb. He makes stupid decisions all the time and he often seems to over-estimate his ability and attempts extremely low percentage plays and will often willing throw the puck away when he has pass options (a sense of panic, he throws the puck away without looking for better options.)

I have found him extremely frustrating to watch, because he has all the tools to be a very affective blue liner but instead, he's largely a car-crash because he so rarely puts all of it together and it's maddening to see him make so many stupid plays out there.

I think despite his skills - and he is a talented guy - the Maple Leafs would be a much better team without Gardiner eating the ice time he does. Much like JVR, while it doesn't make much sense on paper to improve by losing talented players, I think the Leafs are better off without him.

 

[MessierII]

Brent Burns

 

[Gonzothe7thDman]

Brad Marchand.

He used to he a great two way guy, but the last season or two, he has been really lazy/soft on the defensive side.

I think he's quickly becoming one of those guys who coasts when he's supposed to be playing defense and tries to save his energy every shift for an offensive rush.

Definitely not as good as he used to be in the defensive zone

 

[BHD]

Crosby. I wouldn't call it poor defense, per say. However, he does make bad plays with the puck, and people look past it. Geno, though, makes one misplay and every broadcaster picks up on it.

 

[TomasHertlsRooster]

Most people understand that Brent Burns is bad defensively but he might have been the worst defenseman in the NHL this year defensively.

Vlasic totally fell off a cliff but he still isn’t bad defensively so I guess he doesn’t fit. But he’s still worth a mention since HFBoards posters who don’t watch him will say he is the best defensive defenseman in the NHL
when he hasn’t been near that level of play since the Stanley Cup Final.

 

[ManofSteel55]

Erik Karlsson.

Karlsson gets called out for being awful defensively all the time. Doesn't belong in this thread at all.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Crosby. I wouldn't call it poor defense, per say. However, he does make bad plays with the puck, and people look past it. Geno, though, makes one misplay and every broadcaster picks up on it.

His "bad plays" are rarely costly or high-risk. They may be plays that don't work out, but most of the "bad plays" that he makes are not in dangerous situations...

Malkin on the other hand, will try to deke out an approaching player in open ice at his own blue line from a stationary position.



On the topic... Geno is actually my answer to OP's question.

My gripe with Malkin is that, rather than trying to disrupt the play, his style of defense is to almost always steal the puck from his opponent and go the other way with it. When it works, it leads to some great breaks, when it doesn't work he's doing a useless fly-by, getting himself way out of position, and letting the opponent skate right by him.

 

[rent free]

How much criticism does Jake Gardiner get? Because it's not enough, that guy sucks.

jake gardiner is not a correct answer. he gets a lot of criticism from the leafs fanbase and other fans. they were all over him after his game 7 performance

 

[BHD]

His "bad plays" are rarely costly or high-risk. They may be plays that don't work out, but most of the "bad plays" that he makes are not in dangerous situations...

Malkin on the other hand, will try to deke out an approaching player in open ice at his own blue line from a stationary position.



On the topic... Geno is actually my answer to OP's question.

My gripe with Malkin is that, rather than trying to disrupt the play, his style of defense is to almost always steal the puck from his opponent and go the other way with it. When it works, it leads to some great breaks, when it doesn't work he's doing a useless fly-by, getting himself way out of position, and letting the opponent skate right by him.

Yet Geno takes the brunt of the criticism between the two. Crosby has made plays leading directly to goals, but - as your post proves - people forget about them.

 

[SotasicA]

Pat Kane for the Hawks.

 

[Rodgerwilco]

Yet Geno takes the brunt of the criticism between the two. Crosby has made plays leading directly to goals, but - as your post proves - people forget about them.

I think it's just that Malkin's gaffs are typically a lot more "dangerous" and more numerous. Crosby's are fewer and far between, and are in typically less dangerous areas... Trust me, I'm a huge critic of both of these two, I'm not glossing over Crosby's short-comings.

The other thing to take into consideration is, like I said, Crosby makes a lot more frequent defensive plays than Malkin, often breaking up the play and then resetting the break-out, whereas Malkin's brand of defense is to steal the puck and take it the other way himself.

Of course, it would be foolish to think that the Canadian vs. Russian bias doesn't play into this as well, though...

 

[rent free]

Jake Gardiner is pretty lousy defensively in large part because he's very dumb. He makes stupid decisions all the time and he often seems to over-estimate his ability and attempts extremely low percentage plays and will often willing throw the puck away when he has pass options (a sense of panic, he throws the puck away without looking for better options.)

I have found him extremely frustrating to watch, because he has all the tools to be a very affective blue liner but instead, he's largely a car-crash because he so rarely puts all of it together and it's maddening to see him make so many stupid plays out there.

I think despite his skills - and he is a talented guy - the Maple Leafs would be a much better team without Gardiner eating the ice time he does. Much like JVR, while it doesn't make much sense on paper to improve by losing talented players, I think the Leafs are better off without him.

how could you say jake gardiner is lousy defensively yet subban isn't bad defensively for doing the same thing (turning the puck over)?

 

[FerrisRox]

how could you say jake gardiner is lousy defensively yet subban isn't bad defensively for doing the same thing (turning the puck over)?

Because Subban is a solid, physical defensemen that has a very high hockey IQ and occasionally gets burned making high risk plays.

I don't think *any* of that describes Jake Gardiner, so I'm pretty confused by the comparison you are drawing.

 

[ricky0034]

The year prior he was actually excellent as a penalty killer which is why he got Selkie consideration. Also it's not a coincidence that he has never played for a real NHL coach in his entire career and last year played for a coach who instructed his team to play defense the exact opposite of how any sane coach has ever done.

it's also worth noting that awards voting drops off really fast after the first few

"8th" sounds nice and all but let's not act like he was anywhere remotely close to the top vote getters, he had a single first place vote/5 second place votes/2 third place votes/6 fourth place votes/7 fifth place votes

out of 167 voters,so he wasn't even 0n the ballot of 88% of them at all

 

[CantLoseWithMatthews]

Because Subban is a solid, physical defensemen that has a very high hockey IQ and occasionally gets burned making high risk plays.

I don't think *any* of that describes Jake Gardiner, so I'm pretty confused by the comparison you are drawing.

Gardiner has a high IQ and gets burned making high risk plays as well though. it's pretty hard to call Gardiner dumb and Subban highly intelligent when they often make similar errors

 

[Seedling]

Man people have been harsh on OEL just because he for once isn't having a great season.

Didn't his mother just die? psychology is a huge factor at the top levels and man I would struggle with performing night in night out if my mother died

Not sure about his mother. Still, years of losing and being in a total $$$$ environment take a tole on a player and he isn't getting any younger. He's a big risk at this point IMO.

 

[FerrisRox]

Gardiner has a high IQ and gets burned making high risk plays as well though. it's pretty hard to call Gardiner dumb and Subban highly intelligent when they often make similar errors

We have polar opposite takes on Gardiner's hockey IQ and additionally, I'm not seeing the same errors from these guys.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

Brad Marchand.

He used to he a great two way guy, but the last season or two, he has been really lazy/soft on the defensive side.

I think he's quickly becoming one of those guys who coasts when he's supposed to be playing defense and tries to save his energy every shift for an offensive rush.

Definitely not as good as he used to be in the defensive zone

He also tries a ton of risky plays in the Ozone

 

[rent free]

Because Subban is a solid, physical defensemen that has a very high hockey IQ and occasionally gets burned making high risk plays.

I don't think *any* of that describes Jake Gardiner, so I'm pretty confused by the comparison you are drawing.

You said that part of gardener being bad defensively was due to his turnovers but when subban was mentioned for being bad defensively you said he wasn't bad defensively and he just turns over the puck a lot.

 

[FerrisRox]

You said that part of gardener being bad defensively was due to his turnovers but when subban was mentioned for being bad defensively you said he wasn't bad defensively and he just turns over the puck a lot.

Actually, no, I didn't. I don't think Subban turns the puck over a lot. I said that when Subban does turn the puck over, it's usually a high-risk play gone wrong, and then people (that I'm assuming watch hilties, not games) craft a narrative that he's poor defensively. The point being, any issues with Subban defensively stem from him trying to do too much or trying to force an opportunity that isn't there, not because he's isn't good or committed to solid defensive play. For every one of those gaffes there are 50 solid plays. Only a fool looks at the outlier and declares it to be indicative of what kind of player he is.

Subban doesn't do it often, but when it does, you can be sure it will be featured in a hilight pack. Subban's defensive gaffes are usually the result of him attempting something difficult to, because he's very dynamic rushing the puck or moving the puck. Gardiner, on the other hand is prone to several brain farts and often I'm not sure at all what leads to many of his turnovers. Sometimes he moves the puck to know one and just surrenders possession. Sometimes he panics and moves the puck too quickly and misses open teammates, sometimes he simply hands it over to the opposition fo reasons only he can understand. And when he's not giving the puck away, he's not very good defensively anyway. Positionally he's hit or miss, he doesn't play with any of the physical edge that Subban and he can make a brilliant play one shift and turn into a totally different player the next shift and play panicked and confused.

To be totally honest, I can't even believe that there is any need at all to explain that P.K. Subban and Jake Gardiner aren't even remotely in the same league as players or in terms of defensive ability. Even for HFBoards, this is pretty surprising that this conversation is even needed.

 

[rent free]

Actually, no, I didn't. I don't think Subban turns the puck over a lot. I said that when Subban does turn the puck over, it's usually a high-risk play gone wrong, and then people (that I'm assuming watch hilties, not games) craft a narrative that he's poor defensively.

Subban doesn't do that often, but when it does, you can be sure it will be featured in a hilight pack. Subban's defensive gaffes are usually the result of him attempting something difficult to, because he's very dynamic rushing the puck or moving the puck. Gardiner, on the other hand is prone to several brain farts and often I'm not sure at all what leads to many of his turnovers. Sometimes he moves the puck to know one and just surrenders possession. Sometimes he panics and moves the puck too quickly and misses open teammates, sometimes he simply hands it over to the opposition fo reasons only he can understand. And when he's not giving the puck away, he's not very good defensively anyway. Positionally he's hit or miss, he doesn't play with any of the physical edge that Subban and he can make a brilliant play one shift and turn into a totally different player the next shift and play panicked and confused.

To be totally honest, I can't even believe that there is any need at all to explain that P.K. Subban and Jake Gardiner aren't even remotely in the same league as players or in terms of defensive ability. Even for HFBoards, this is pretty surprising that this conversation is even needed.

Well you said gardener and subban both make high risk plays while one is bad defensively and the other is not. You should have said other stuff about gardener to make him look bad defensively. I agree with you that subban is better defensively that gardener, which isn't that hard to do.

 

[FerrisRox]

Well you said gardener and subban both make high risk plays while one is bad defensively and the other is not. You should have said other stuff about gardener to make him look bad defensively. I agree with you that subban is better defensively that gardener, which isn't that hard to do.

Actually, I didn't. I didn't say Gardiner made high risk plays, I said he made stupid plays.

"Jake Gardiner is pretty lousy defensively in large part because he's very dumb. He makes stupid decisions all the time and he often seems to over-estimate his ability and attempts extremely low percentage plays and will often willing throw the puck away when he has pass options (a sense of panic, he throws the puck away without looking for better options.)"

 

[rent free]

Actually, I didn't. I didn't say Gardiner made high risk plays, I said he made stupid plays.

"Jake Gardiner is pretty lousy defensively in large part because he's very dumb. He makes stupid decisions all the time and he often seems to over-estimate his ability and attempts extremely low percentage plays and will often willing throw the puck away when he has pass options (a sense of panic, he throws the puck away without looking for better options.)"

Fair enough.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

Let this thread go a while longer and every player in the NHL will end up getting mentioned. There's also a lot of antagonism expressed towards offensive d-men who have the puck a ton which will eventually lead to give aways some of which are highlight worthy (see: Erik Karlsson or PK Subban).

 

[NyQuil]

I think Mike Hoffman may belong here.

The reason he's mediocre defensively is that he always gambles to make a scoring play.

It's an admirable quality in that he desperately wants to help his team, but he'll make ill-advised passes that get picked off or gets the puck stripped in bad situations.

He needs to exercise a little more patience and game IQ. When you're winning, maybe you dump the puck in or make the safe play instead of trying to thread the needle.