Which traditional # is Jake Gardiner?

What is Jake Gardiner


  • Total voters
    155
  • Poll closed .

SHANNYPLAN

Registered User
Nov 24, 2016
5,209
2,592
Love him or hate him (usually switches shift-to-shift) he’s a #2 Dman or a 3 at worse.

He makes really dumb decisions at times but more than makes up for it IMO.

Some times ur jaw will drop because of an incredible play he makes, and others you will be left scratching your head for a while, and by a while I mean an entire off season ..
 
  • Like
Reactions: Digitalbooya

BM14

Registered User
Dec 7, 2012
5,903
3,881
GTA
3D and he'll never be anything more than that.
For as much as his skating gets him out of his own jams, his lack of hockey sense gets him into just as many or more.
 

WetcoastOrca

Registered User
Jun 3, 2011
38,142
21,937
Vancouver, BC
Ideally a #3. He’s good offensively but far too inconsistent defensively to be a top pairing guy IMO. Makes just so many bone head plays and then follows it up with some great ones. At this point in his career he is what he is. He’s not going to get rid of all of those defensive lapses and become consistent.
 

Martin Skoula

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
11,639
16,315
3D and he'll never be anything more than that.
For as much as his skating gets him out of his own jams, his lack of hockey sense gets him into just as many or more.

You'd think that would show up in 5+ years worth of stats, like the other team getting more goals or shots against him than our other defensemen.

On average Gardiner drives play in the right direction regardless of how glaring his mistakes are. I'd rather he gives the puck away in a bad spot once a game than a traditional defensive defenseman failing to clear the zone several times a shift.
 

Filthy Dangles

Registered User*
Oct 23, 2014
28,356
39,703
On a championship caliber team, he's probably a 4. On an average team a 2/3.

He's just not reliable enough for me. As a coach, I wouldn't be very comfortable playing him big minutes in too many situations. Situations such as defending a lead, tight game in the 3rd where you're getting worked by the other team, 1st PK unit, etc.

Great skill and offensive zone play but suspect in too many aspects for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wintersej

boredmale

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Jul 13, 2005
42,363
6,930
in a perfect world you would shelter him on the 3rd pairing 5 on 5(not saying he is a third pairing defenseman but just because somebody is your #1 and #2 defensemen doesn't mean they have to play together on the first pairing, much like your second pairing doesn't have to consist of your #3 and #4 guy) and you would get him out on the ice on the PP and against teams other bottom 6 forwards.
 

BM14

Registered User
Dec 7, 2012
5,903
3,881
GTA
You'd think that would show up in 5+ years worth of stats, like the other team getting more goals or shots against him than our other defensemen.

On average Gardiner drives play in the right direction regardless of how glaring his mistakes are. I'd rather he gives the puck away in a bad spot once a game than a traditional defensive defenseman failing to clear the zone several times a shift.
Stats do not supersede 5 years of eye tests.
 

GlitchMarner

Typical malevolent, devious & vile Maple Leafs fan
Jul 21, 2017
9,712
6,432
Brampton, ON
Stats do not supersede 5 years of eye tests.

The eye test is flawed because you tend to notice all the egregious mistakes he makes whole not noticing all the more subtle things he does well consistently.

Just in terms of where he ranks among defensemen in the NHL, he is probably in the top 62. In that sense, he's a top-pairing defenseman, but ideally, I wouldn't want him on the top-pairing on a true Cup contender.

He is a very good second-pairing defenseman, more of a number three than a number four. But you have to hope he doesn't pick the wrong night to have a terrible game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loyaltotheend

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,556
59,149
his defensive consistency stops him from being a top pairing guy, but his offensive and transition ability are fantastic. he is good on the 2nd pairing. and considering how terrible Zaitsev was last year, he's good enough to be the best guy on the 2nd pairing
 
  • Like
Reactions: 29GoalHoglund

Regal

Registered User
Mar 12, 2010
24,545
13,840
Vancouver
He's best suited for the 2nd pairing getting easier matchups while your 1st pairing takes the tough competition. Could still mean he's the 2nd best defenseman on the team though, even on a good team, just like on the Leafs, and based on an even distribution of talent I would say he's a number 2, as he's easily a top 62 defenseman. He's probably ideally your number 3 or you at least have another guy roughly on the same level as 2A/2B though
 
  • Like
Reactions: blueberrie

wintersej

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Nov 26, 2011
21,969
16,663
North Andover, MA
Leader of 2nd pairing but needs a better partner than he has. If he was leading my 2nd pairing, I would be hoping to upgrade on him, though.
 

Maukkis

EZ4ENCE
Mar 16, 2016
10,538
7,218
#2 is probably just a little too generous, so went with #3.

Just outside of the top 30 defensemen in terms of GAR this year, 1.1 ES points P/60 in the last two seasons, mainly good possession numbers relative to his teammates over the years (this year being the exception)... I see a very good defenseman there. Actually, the #2 vote would probably have been right too.

As an aside, Gardiner is an excellent litmus test for player evaluation.
 

Martin Skoula

Registered User
Oct 18, 2017
11,639
16,315
#2 is probably just a little too generous, so went with #3.

Just outside of the top 30 defensemen in terms of GAR this year, 1.1 ES points P/60 in the last two seasons, mainly good possession numbers relative to his teammates over the years (this year being the exception)... I see a very good defenseman there. Actually, the #2 vote would probably have been right too.

As an aside, Gardiner is an excellent litmus test for player evaluation.

I feel like a reductio ad absurdum is needed with the Gardiner question to get the point across to some people.

If there was a defenseman who actively shot the puck at his own goalie every time he was on the ice in the defensive zone, but despite this had 100 GF and 0 GA while he's on the ice over a statistically significant sample size, would you consider him a good defensive player despite how egregiously he violates your eye test?
 

Maukkis

EZ4ENCE
Mar 16, 2016
10,538
7,218
I feel like a reductio ad absurdum is needed with the Gardiner question to get the point across to some people.

If there was a defenseman who actively shot the puck at his own goalie every time he was on the ice in the defensive zone, but despite this had 100 GF and 0 GA while he's on the ice over a statistically significant sample size, would you consider him a good defensive player despite how egregiously he violates your eye test?
He wouldn't be, because if all he ever tried to do was to score own goals when he had the puck, he would end up being a negative contributor for his team, and it would be the other skaters on the ice who caused that positive goal differential. Try an example which is within the slightest realms of reality.

A player like Gardiner constantly produces points at a good rate and tilts the ice to the right direction, but people completely disregard all of that due to his occasional mishaps in the defensive zone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kamiccolo

Sidney the Kidney

One last time
Jun 29, 2009
55,519
46,242
Low end #2 or high end #3. I voted #2 simply because he's got the physical tools to be a consistent top pairing guy. It's just a question of whether he's got the IQ to put it all together consistently.
 

PunkRockLocke

Registered User
Jun 15, 2017
1,248
764
Pender Harbour
No team with him higher than #4 on the depth chart will be winning anything.
Yes overrated because if the Leafs had a defense corps, they'd be a good team. So, Leafs fans overrate him (along with Reilly) to try and convince themselves that their team is good. They've had 51 years of practice.
 

895

Registered User
Jun 15, 2007
8,380
6,998
If talent was distributed equally in the NHL, he'd be a number 2.

On a good team that means he's a no.3
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanadianSharks

CantLoseWithMatthews

Registered User
Sep 28, 2015
49,556
59,149
No team with him higher than #4 on the depth chart will be winning anything.
Yes overrated because if the Leafs had a defense corps, they'd be a good team. So, Leafs fans overrate him (along with Reilly) to try and convince themselves that their team is good. They've had 51 years of practice.
how many teams in the league have a #3 defenseman better than Gardiner?
also the Leafs quite clearly are a good team
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->