Why is the Norris focused more on offense than defense?
- Thread starter SSJ3 Lunar
- Start date
It's easier to look and judge points when you don't watch them play than defense.
PatriceBergeronFan
Registered User
DL44
Status quo
Because playing in the offensive zone more than the defensive zone is actually a very underrated defensive attribute on HF.
NyQuil
Big F$&*in Q
What an original thread. 
Anyway, my standard answer is, the basic skillset is to play defence, so those who are capable of also performing offensively are contributing more than their average colleagues.
And while people are fond of saying that offensive defencemen are liabilities defensively, the sheer number of minutes that true #1 d-men put up puts that kind of assessment into question IMO.
Not to mention, the best form of defence is in the other team's zone.
There are defencemen with offensive skillsets whose minutes need to be managed. These defencemen do not win the Norris trophy.
Anyway, my standard answer is, the basic skillset is to play defence, so those who are capable of also performing offensively are contributing more than their average colleagues.
And while people are fond of saying that offensive defencemen are liabilities defensively, the sheer number of minutes that true #1 d-men put up puts that kind of assessment into question IMO.
Not to mention, the best form of defence is in the other team's zone.
There are defencemen with offensive skillsets whose minutes need to be managed. These defencemen do not win the Norris trophy.
oXo Cube
Power Play Merchant
It isn't.
Ekholm doesn't get nominated because he isn't better than Karlsson or Burns.
Ekholm doesn't get nominated because he isn't better than Karlsson or Burns.
TheGoldenGod
5 Star Man
- Nov 8, 2017
- 3,864
- 6,683
The game is evolving. The puck moving/offense-oriented defenseman are the true game-changers.
bigbuffalo313
Registered User
https://hfboards.mandatory.com/thre...lain-about-the-norris.1916001/#post-104126243
Here's a thread I made about a few years back
Here's a thread I made about a few years back
POVERTY
Leafs and Marchand fan
- Sep 27, 2017
- 1,461
- 4,287
I still find it silly that there is a separate award for the best defensive forward, yet no award for the best offensive D-man.
...Though I guess that would just result in the Norris winner winning two awards instead of one.
...Though I guess that would just result in the Norris winner winning two awards instead of one.
gretskidoo
Registered User
- Nov 26, 2011
- 4,794
- 395
Anglesmith
Setting up the play?
The best defenceman is the player who plays the position of defenceman and best contributes to his team's success. There is no set formula for what this looks like, but offensive contributions are, and should be, very important to this. You aren't helping your team win if no goals go in while you're on the ice, you're just helping them not lose.
Because as much as we've come along way, measuring one's defensive prowess is still fairly subjective. A major part of gauging offense is simply looking at points. There is no subjectivity with the number of goals and assists one scored. Historically, defensive prowess had as little as +/-. Now we can measure a lot more, but there are so many stats, it's still very subjective in how you interpret them all.
And quite frankly, some of the stats are still fairly new to the NHL, and phenomenally inconsistent. Things like takeaways/giveaways/hits, etc, are so inconsistently measured, that using them to compare players between teams is rather fruitless. They're so bad, they become near meaningless. You can maybe use them to see what a player does in relation to his own team, but beyond that, they're really not very good.
The Flying Octopus
Registered User
Liver King
Registered User
- Jan 23, 2016
- 7,430
- 5,266
because offense is a major role of a defenseman, just as defense is a major role of a forward.
the best d-man is the d-man who makes the greatest impact in the game - producing offense is necessary to accomplish that
the best d-man is the d-man who makes the greatest impact in the game - producing offense is necessary to accomplish that
Help
Can I help you?
ManofSteel55
Registered User
Because it is harder to become elite offensively than defensively, even as a d-man. Ekholm may be a poor example, you have to convince voters not only that he should get votes as a shut down d-man, and that he should get votes over PK and Josi. Regardless, voters tend to look for the guy who makes the biggest impact on the ice. Karlsson in the past couple of years made a bigger impact on the ice than nearly anyone in the NHL. Ekholm often did as well, but where he is steady and consistent defensively, guys like Karlsson have the ability to take over games on their own. Basically, and Ekholm type isn't going to win you a game with a single play or shift, but a Karlsson or Burns might.
completely untrue. a player's play without the puck is equally important as their play with the puck.
The difference in defensive ability of NHL defensemen is much closer than the difference of offensive ability of NHL defensemen. Some defensemen are amazing offensively and others are horrible so the good ones stand out in a big way and on the contrary nearly all NHL defensemen are pretty decent defensively.
Another way to look at it is a great offensive defensemen can get 50 more points than an average defensemen (offensively) but weak defensemen isnt going to directly give 50 more goals than an average defensemen over a season.
Similar situation to why centers are more valuable than wingers. There are a ton of really good wingers out there and it is very hard to find really good centers. The gap between really good center and average center is much greater than the gap between really good winger and average winger.
Also, puck moving defensemen that are skilled at breaking out and creating chances are hugely valuable to team success.
Another way to look at it is a great offensive defensemen can get 50 more points than an average defensemen (offensively) but weak defensemen isnt going to directly give 50 more goals than an average defensemen over a season.
Similar situation to why centers are more valuable than wingers. There are a ton of really good wingers out there and it is very hard to find really good centers. The gap between really good center and average center is much greater than the gap between really good winger and average winger.
Also, puck moving defensemen that are skilled at breaking out and creating chances are hugely valuable to team success.
MrGold
Mark Scheifele is a piece of ****
- Jan 7, 2012
- 483
- 306
Because there's no defensive stats that are both easy to understand and valuable.
oXo Cube
Power Play Merchant
Actually there is.
The traditionalists just don't like them because they also say that Karlsson is the best defender on earth.
InglewoodJack
Registered User
Because it's a lot more impressive to put up 70 pts as a D than it is to be an offensive black hole? It's not like Karlsson or Burns are defensive liabilities- they're very good defenceman who put up offense in ways that no one else really can.
IceNeophyte
Registered User
- Nov 14, 2017
- 10,000
- 7,310
ManofSteel55
Registered User
They actually aren't easy to understand well. What's apparent to me is that most people here who think they understand advanced statistics don't, at least not well. The interpretation of these advanced stats are often problematic.
Dr Pepper
Registered User
And yet, a grinder like Claude Lemieux can win the Conn Smythe.
If anyone can step up and be of ultimate value in the playoffs, it's probably safe to say the same could theoretically happen in the regular season.
ManofSteel55
Registered User
+/- is the most useless stat in sports. You shouldn't be basing votes off of reading a stat page anyway. If you need to do that, you probably shouldn't be voting.
