Ranking NHL Teams By Defencemen

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I do'nt really see why you care where they came from. Atkinson and PLD are decent players on their own, but on their own, a lot more is needed for a "good" offense. Werenski is good, on his own, but Jones is better, quite clearly. Werenski isn't a guy you build a defense around (yet anyway), but Jones is. I'm not sure why it matters that he was traded for.
That's exactly my point. It shouldn't matter that Jones was traded for, or that Bobrovsky was traded for, or that Panarin was traded for, but they're the only ones getting any credit from the OP for any success the Jackets have had.

Obviously when one starts getting into the details and the depth players, things get a little more murky. Which is why I don't come into these things expecting folks to pick the Jackets as a playoff team, and indeed that's a reasonable (if conservative) pick to make. I do, however, take umbrage when the quality guys we have who are still here - and still want to be here - are dismissed as so much insignificant trash, like the OP has unapologetically done.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
That's exactly my point. It shouldn't matter that Jones was traded for, or that Bobrovsky was traded for, or that Panarin was traded for, but they're the only ones getting any credit from the OP for any success the Jackets have had.

Obviously when one starts getting into the details and the depth players, things get a little more murky. Which is why I don't come into these things expecting folks to pick the Jackets as a playoff team, and indeed that's a reasonable (if conservative) pick to make. I do, however, take umbrage when the quality guys we have who are still here - and still want to be here - are dismissed as so much insignificant trash, like the OP has unapologetically done.

And you interpret the writer pointing to Jones and Bobrovsky as elite players as some sort of knock because they weren't drafted by the Blue Jackets? Has he ever said that? I mean, those are basically the 2 best players on the Blue Jackets. They're the only two that are legitimately elite players at their position. Atkinson and PLD are good players, but they're not elite wingers. I do'nt really care where they came from, those are the 2 best players.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
And you interpret the writer pointing to Jones and Bobrovsky as elite players as some sort of knock because they weren't drafted by the Blue Jackets? Has he ever said that? I mean, those are basically the 2 best players on the Blue Jackets. They're the only two that are legitimately elite players at their position. I do'nt really care where they came from, those are the 2 best players. Atkinson and PLD are good players, but they're not elite wingers.
No, I interpret the writer pointing to those guys as the only ones being any good as a knock against the Blue Jackets. The "drafted by" correlation is frankly the only one I can find between his actions and the guys he's targeting, although it's been present in other "analyses" before (mostly during the early Scott Howson era, but what's a decade between friends?) so it wouldn't be unprecedented. It's not that they're not the best guys we have (or have had), 'cause they are. It's the insistence that everyone else is meaningless - that Atkinson/PLD/Anderson/Bjorkstrand/Nyquist et.al. are worse than the guys behind McDavid and Draisaitl in Edmonton, that Savard is barely a second-pairing guy and Nutivaara is bottom-pairing, that Merzlikins and Korpisalo being unproven works against them so badly as to put them dead last while Carter Hart's lack of experience doesn't matter at all, and so on and so forth. It's how, "in his opinion", nobody else even comes close, as though despite his assertion that "hockey can't be won with just one or two star players" (see: Edmonton overall ranking), he's nonetheless assuming that that's exactly what the Blue Jackets have been doing all along.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
No, I interpret the writer pointing to those guys as the only ones being any good as a knock against the Blue Jackets. .

Okay - well why do you care, if you acknowledge that it doesn't matter? At the end of the day you've got one of the best goalies and dmen in the league, the fact that you snagged them from someone else, in some ways, is even a little better!!!

The "drafted by" correlation is frankly the only one I can find between his actions and the guys he's targeting, although it's been present in other "analyses" before (mostly during the early Scott Howson era, but what's a decade between friends?) so it wouldn't be unprecedented. It's not that they're not the best guys we have (or have had), 'cause they are.

Well, I don't know, you COULD be reading things into it. If not, again, who cares?

that Atkinson/PLD/Anderson/Bjorkstrand/Nyquist et.al. are worse than the guys behind McDavid and Draisaitl in Edmonton

Well that would be just silly to suggest. RNH would fit in that group, that's about all.

that Savard is barely a second-pairing guy and Nutivaara is bottom-pairing, that Merzlikins and Korpisalo being unproven works against them so badly as to put them dead last while Carter Hart's lack of experience doesn't matter at all, and so on and so forth..

Well I don't really know enough about those guys to comment. Other than David Savard, who is passable, but not really gonna tip the needle towards being a good defense. He's not really a difference maker. Carter Hart is looking pretty damn good, I will say that. you never know with goalies though, he could crap out next year. GREAT goalie prospect though.

It's how, "in his opinion", nobody else even comes close, as though despite his assertion that "hockey can't be won with just one or two star players" (see: Edmonton overall ranking), he's nonetheless assuming that that's exactly what the Blue Jackets have been doing all along.

Columbus will be okay this year, probably fringe in my estimation. Probably outside the playoffs, but not a basement team.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
Okay - well why do you care, if you acknowledge that it doesn't matter? At the end of the day you've got one of the best goalies and dmen in the league, the fact that you snagged them from someone else, in some ways, is even a little better!!!
I don't. But the OP's analysis suggests it matters to him a great deal - subconsciously or otherwise.

Well, I don't know, you COULD be reading things into it. If not, again, who cares?
It's possible, but he hasn't denied it, and indeed keeps doubling down on and adding to comments that seem to support that conclusion.

Well that would be just silly to suggest. RNH would fit in that group, that's about all.
Indeed. Except that the OP has suggested just that. Hence my annoyance.

Well I don't really know enough about those guys to comment. Other than David Savard, who is passable, but not really gonna tip the needle towards being a good defense. He's not really a difference maker. Carter Hart is looking pretty damn good, I will say that. you never know with goalies though, he could crap out next year. GREAT goalie prospect though.
That's fair. The point was more that, with the Jackets in particular (and a few other teams), the OP is assuming worst case (or even nastier) scenarios, and assuming more favorable scenarios for others, and refusing to explain any justification for same.

Columbus will be okay this year, probably fringe in my estimation. Probably outside the playoffs, but not a basement team.
I'm not concerned about what the situation actually is (and I think you've hit the nail on the head otherwise). I'm just annoyed with the OP using his platform to continue to spread an old and previously thought dead line of thinking about the Blue Jackets.
 

Rants Mulliniks

Registered User
Jun 22, 2008
22,958
6,028
It's never going to be an excuse for inability to defend.

the idea that "if you always have possession the other team can't score!!!!!" is so damn misguided in these parts it's unbelievable. The coaches like Tippet who so many have interpreted to mean that defending is not required if you can move the puck, increase possession, and score, would be embarrassed by some of the takes on this board. The top possession dmen in the NHL right now are under 60%. Every single one of them needs to know how to defend, and I mean TRULY defend, or it's a problem.

It's true that the ability to defend against the other team's attack won't be overly successful if you can't subsequently clear/advance the puck, it's also true that you won't get the ability to clear/advance the puck without the ability to defend. One isn't a reason to ignore the other, rather, the ability to do one without the other (either one) isn't good enough in today's game.

I don't think anyone has argued that you don't need to defend, just that there are different strategies about how you execute. You can employ systems like the Isles and be very effective defensively but if you can't score, you can't win. There's a balance to be had, obviously.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
I don't. But the OP's analysis suggests it matters to him a great deal - subconsciously or otherwise.


It's possible, but he hasn't denied it, and indeed keeps doubling down on and adding to comments that seem to support that conclusion.


Indeed. Except that the OP has suggested just that. Hence my annoyance.


That's fair. The point was more that, with the Jackets in particular (and a few other teams), the OP is assuming worst case (or even nastier) scenarios, and assuming more favorable scenarios for others, and refusing to explain any justification for same.


I'm not concerned about what the situation actually is (and I think you've hit the nail on the head otherwise). I'm just annoyed with the OP using his platform to continue to spread an old and previously thought dead line of thinking about the Blue Jackets.

I mean, he also rated Vegas pretty low across the board. And acknowledged that as individuals it's not an impressive lineup, but they play better as a whole. Maybe Columbus is similar? I don't know know, and don't think it really matters.

Columbus has slowly been improving as a club, and because of circumstance, tried to take a run (for the first time ever). They'll take a step back this year most likely, but at least they're doing some positive things, so don't stress it.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
I don't think anyone has argued that you don't need to defend, just that there are different strategies about how you execute. You can employ systems like the Isles and be very effective defensively but if you can't score, you can't win. There's a balance to be had, obviously.

I'm just sick of some posters looking at stats and saying "the best defense is a good offense", and pointing at players/teams that bleed goals, and fail miserably.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I mean, he also rated Vegas pretty low across the board. And acknowledged that as individuals it's not an impressive lineup, but they play better as a whole. Maybe Columbus is similar? I don't know know, and don't think it really matters.

Columbus has slowly been improving as a club, and because of circumstance, tried to take a run (for the first time ever). They'll take a step back this year most likely, but at least they're doing some positive things, so don't stress it.
I'm not worried about my team. Again, it's just the OP spreading nonsense that should have been dead during the Howson era. It's a tad insulting to have that nonsense still going on - kind of like Edmonton fans getting mocked over Chris Pronger, or Caps fans still getting the "you'll never win anything" routine, or Leafs fans getting browbeaten over the Ballard and/or JFJ years, or referring to Minnesota and/or New Jersey as "playing the trap". That sort of thing.
 

RustyCat

Registered homie
Dec 29, 2014
2,603
3,122
Winnipeg
Might be the worst list I have seen yet. I don't even know where to start.

No more clicking on your links for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EP40

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
I'm not worried about my team. Again, it's just the OP spreading nonsense that should have been dead during the Howson era. It's a tad insulting to have that nonsense still going on - kind of like Edmonton fans getting mocked over Chris Pronger, or Caps fans still getting the "you'll never win anything" routine, or Leafs fans getting browbeaten over the Ballard and/or JFJ years, or referring to Minnesota and/or New Jersey as "playing the trap". That sort of thing.

I've seen lots of shots taken about Tavares over the past year, and I could care less. We've got a top 5 NHL centre as a Leaf, because he stayed loyal to the Leafs, his childhood team. I could care less that the Isles drafted him, and couldn't keep him.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I've seen lots of shots taken about Tavares over the past year, and I could care less. We've got a top 5 NHL centre as a Leaf, because he stayed loyal to the Leafs, his childhood team. I could care less that the Isles drafted him, and couldn't keep him.
Yeah, but that's not something that unfoundedly speaks ill of the Leafs organization and/or its chances; thus my JFJ example.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
Yeah, but that's not something that unfoundedly speaks ill of the Leafs organization and/or its chances; thus my JFJ example.

Nope, I think it's great that he wanted to come home, and awesome for the Leafs.
 

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
There's a massive difference between "very solid defensively" and "a stud defensively". When you start describing a defenseman like the latter, IMO, you're essentially labeling him as one of the top shutdown D in hockey. Otherwise, every defenseman who is simply solid or dependable would be a "stud defensively".

For instance, Kris Letang for the Pens is someone I'd describe as very solid defensively, capable of matching up against the other team's best night after night and doing a capable job of it. But I wouldn't call him a stud defensively. And IMO, Rielly's a notch below Letang defensively (presently).

I disagree. I would rank Rielly quite a bit higher than Letang for defensive acumen or at least on par.
 

VinikToWinIt

Number 1 Bull****
Jun 15, 2014
6,901
5,939
South Florida
You're acting as though Nutivaara is a #6 and Savard is a #4-5, with no basis I can see beyond ATOI. How does one explain to someone "no, Evgeni Malkin is not a #2C on most teams"?
That's a huge strawman fallacy.

Plus, he had them at 11, not 30... Most rankings have a +/- of around 5 spots vs. others. He's a little lower on Columbus's defense than you are. So what?

I think more people would consider Columbus to be in the 6-10 range. I'm not going to fault anyone for putting them at 5 or 11.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Larry Fisher

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
I don't. But the OP's analysis suggests it matters to him a great deal - subconsciously or otherwise.


It's possible, but he hasn't denied it, and indeed keeps doubling down on and adding to comments that seem to support that conclusion.


Indeed. Except that the OP has suggested just that. Hence my annoyance.


That's fair. The point was more that, with the Jackets in particular (and a few other teams), the OP is assuming worst case (or even nastier) scenarios, and assuming more favorable scenarios for others, and refusing to explain any justification for same.


I'm not concerned about what the situation actually is (and I think you've hit the nail on the head otherwise). I'm just annoyed with the OP using his platform to continue to spread an old and previously thought dead line of thinking about the Blue Jackets.

I think you are hung up on some "old and previously thought dead line of thinking about the Blue Jackets." I have continuously stayed true to my analysis on Columbus. You haven't changed my mind on anything. It is what it is, we agree to disagree and we'll see how the season plays out. You are absolutely reading into this and putting all sorts of words into my mouth. Go back and read all my analysis on Columbus for the four-part series and then read every response to you here (probably 50+ by now). You'll see that most of what you are "reading into" is your own opinions that haven't been validated by any stretch of the imagination. You are butt hurt that analysts outside of Columbus don't see an above-average roster or playoff team there anymore.
 

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
I'm not worried about my team. Again, it's just the OP spreading nonsense that should have been dead during the Howson era. It's a tad insulting to have that nonsense still going on - kind of like Edmonton fans getting mocked over Chris Pronger, or Caps fans still getting the "you'll never win anything" routine, or Leafs fans getting browbeaten over the Ballard and/or JFJ years, or referring to Minnesota and/or New Jersey as "playing the trap". That sort of thing.

These are ideas stuck in your head. I haven't spread anything but facts.
 

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
That's a huge strawman fallacy.

Plus, he had them at 11, not 30... Most rankings have a +/- of around 5 spots vs. others. He's a little lower on Columbus's defense than you are. So what?

I think more people would consider Columbus to be in the 6-10 range. I'm not going to fault anyone for putting them at 5 or 11.

Exactly. Thank you. There are tiers and Columbus is very much in that tier.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VinikToWinIt

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,516
46,231
I disagree. I would rank Rielly quite a bit higher than Letang for defensive acumen or at least on par.

Really going out on a limb there, eh? ;)

So which is it? Is Rielly "quite a bit higher" or "at least on par"? Those are kind of two extreme points of view. That's like saying "I think McDavid is quite a bit better than Duchene ... well, or at least on par with him".

In any case, I don't know how you can believe Rielly is better than Letang defensively when there's no metric that I've seen that backs that up. Unless we're going strictly by the eye test, in which my "eye test" disagrees with yours.
 

Rants Mulliniks

Registered User
Jun 22, 2008
22,958
6,028
I'm just sick of some posters looking at sisats and saying "the best defense is a good offense", and pointing at players/teams that bleed goals, and fail miserably.
I suppose that depends on how you define "fail miserably" and how you measure where something is in its completeness.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
I think you are hung up on some "old and previously thought dead line of thinking about the Blue Jackets." I have continuously stayed true to my analysis on Columbus. You haven't changed my mind on anything. It is what it is, we agree to disagree and we'll see how the season plays out. You are absolutely reading into this and putting all sorts of words into my mouth. Go back and read all my analysis on Columbus for the four-part series and then read every response to you here (probably 50+ by now). You'll see that most of what you are "reading into" is your own opinions that haven't been validated by any stretch of the imagination. You are butt hurt that analysts outside of Columbus don't see an above-average roster or playoff team there anymore.
Let's keep this simple, then. Plain and honest: if Seth Jones abruptly ceased to exist, where would you rank Columbus's blueline?

I'm placing my bets at "below 25th", like you did for the forwards, because you've consistently demonstrated a lack of any respect for any Blue Jacket that didn't come here from another organization, and that's all we'd have left on the blueline save Scott Harrington.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
That's a huge strawman fallacy.

Plus, he had them at 11, not 30... Most rankings have a +/- of around 5 spots vs. others. He's a little lower on Columbus's defense than you are. So what?

I think more people would consider Columbus to be in the 6-10 range. I'm not going to fault anyone for putting them at 5 or 11.
In isolation? No. When they're at the same time completely dismissing the goaltending as utterly hopeless AND massively underrating the forwards? Under those circumstances, exception can be taken. Especially when no explanation is offered beyond "that's just my opinion" and so one is obliged to speculate based on the established pattern of behavior just so happening to precisely match that of lazy biased nonsense writers from a decade ago.

Seriously, if someone kept making hints about the Lightning's success not being tenable, about possible internal problems that "may have been to blame" for the sweep, makes idle comments about the Lightning's location and makes references to "horror movie producers" running the show as though it's a current thing, I imagine you'd see that as pretty egregious too.
 

joe dirte

Registered User
Sep 28, 2017
9,430
3,559
Let's keep this simple, then. Plain and honest: if Seth Jones abruptly ceased to exist, where would you rank Columbus's blueline?

I'm placing my bets at "below 25th", like you did for the forwards, because you've consistently demonstrated a lack of any respect for any Blue Jacket that didn't come here from another organization, and that's all we'd have left on the blueline save Scott Harrington.
Well, in fairness, if you were to remove seth jones, what would it look like? One good dman in werenski, a couple of average ones, and some unknowns. That would be a well below average roster. Not Ottawa bad but how many teams would you say are worse?

If you take a dman of seth jones caliber off any defense in the league it will take a hit.

Post the lineup.
 

Viqsi

"that chick from Ohio"
Oct 5, 2007
53,660
30,951
40N 83W (approx)
Well, in fairness, if you were to remove seth jones, what would it look like? One good dman in werenski, a couple of average ones, and some unknowns. That would be a well below average roster. Not Ottawa bad but how many teams would you say are worse?

If you take a dman of seth jones caliber off any defense in the league it will take a hit.

Post the lineup.
Well, the guy managed to insist that taking Panarin off our offense made it Ottawa-level bad...

Also...
Murray or Werenski-Savard
Werenski or Murray-Nutivaaara
Gavrikov-Kukan
Harrington

Only one top-end talent, but with the possible (if unlikely) exception of Gavrikov, every one of those guys, including the spare, is at worst an established quality NHL-level guy, which is more than can be said for a lot of bluelines out there. The only player playing above his head is Savard, and he's good enough that it's not all that far above his head to begin with. The blueline becomes "solid but unspectacular", basically.
 

Larry Fisher

Registered User
Sep 19, 2002
4,034
1,194
Kelowna, B.C.
Really going out on a limb there, eh? ;)

So which is it? Is Rielly "quite a bit higher" or "at least on par"? Those are kind of two extreme points of view. That's like saying "I think McDavid is quite a bit better than Duchene ... well, or at least on par with him".

In any case, I don't know how you can believe Rielly is better than Letang defensively when there's no metric that I've seen that backs that up. Unless we're going strictly by the eye test, in which my "eye test" disagrees with yours.

I have always liked Letang, but I honestly think Rielly has surpassed him. You are right, the metrics might not agree (yet), but my eye test suggests that will be the case and already is.

I took a lot of flack here for placing Ceci on Toronto's top pairing with Rielly in my depth chart. Guess where Babcock has Ceci pencilled in today? It sure sounds like that will be a thing, at least to start training camp.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->