Why is the Norris focused more on offense than defense?

[StoneHands]

Leaves a lot of room for interpretation!
For example, A guy who blocks shots,clears the crease ,hits,doesn't get beat off the rush,kills penalties , makes an accurate exit pass but does not get PP time or spend much time in the O Zone ...meaning doesn't rack up the points will never be considered for the Norris.
Odd that a Selke award is given out though! Perhaps they should come up with a separate award for offensive Dman?

The problem is, do you really expect every voter to not only watch every player in the NHL but watch them close enough to notice which defenseman is best at the bolded? You think they watch hundreds of defenseman and determine who are the top 10 in clearing the crease, not getting beat off the rush, making accurate breakout passes, and then add up their zone time but only at ES? That's kind of a lot to ask and then expect them to have the same in depth analysis for the Selke, Vezina, and Hart.

It's a lot easier for these guys to just watch them play and see who stands out and then check the box scores to see who is putting up points, has a positive +/-, and plays tons of minutes with a bonus for playing in all situations.

It's not an exact science but can you honestly say you would take many if any defenseman over guys like Hedman, Doughty, Karlsson, Subban, and Jones who are up towards the top of the voting every year? Sure there are going to be some lower scoring guys that maybe deserve more votes but the guys in the top 3 are generally some of the best players in the NHL.

 

[Dicky113]

It’s sexier and sex sells

 

[pigpen65]

I've always had a problem with this too because usually the guy winning the award for best defenseman sucks at playing defense. Some of them i didnt see any distinction between a defenseman and a forward being played on defense, like Fedorov. Not as big of a deal since the league became so soft though. Now 95% of them are completely non physical and one dimensional.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

It is focused on who is best buds with the media.

See: Doughty, Due

 

[hector morrison]

The problem is, do you really expect every voter to not only watch every player in the NHL but watch them close enough to notice which defenseman is best at the bolded? You think they watch hundreds of defenseman and determine who are the top 10 in clearing the crease, not getting beat off the rush, making accurate breakout passes, and then add up their zone time but only at ES? That's kind of a lot to ask and then expect them to have the same in depth analysis for the Selke, Vezina, and Hart.

It's a lot easier for these guys to just watch them play and see who stands out and then check the box scores to see who is putting up points, has a positive +/-, and plays tons of minutes with a bonus for playing in all situations.

It's not an exact science but can you honestly say you would take many if any defenseman over guys like Hedman, Doughty, Karlsson, Subban, and Jones who are up towards the top of the voting every year? Sure there are going to be some lower scoring guys that maybe deserve more votes but the guys in the top 3 are generally some of the best players in the NHL.

Well, I did suggest having a separate trophy for Dman who gets the most points,since that's what seems to be the main aspect!

 

[BrokenFace]

The answer to the original question is simple. Whether you are using the eye test, traditional stats, or advanced stats, defense is always more difficult to measure than offense.

 

[maacoshark]

I'm sure this has been brought up before, I'm just wondering why is it that Karlsson or Burns get nominated for the Norris every year over more defensive focused guys like Ekholm? Is it because points are an easier way to determine who is better? Even if it is only offensively?

Ekholm is so underrated on the Predators. 3 other dmen on his team get more praise than him. He could be their best all around dman

 

[joe dirte]

It is focused on who is best buds with the media.

See: Doughty, Due

It's weird some of you choose doughty to complain about. Hes been the best dman in the league over the past decade, what on earth are you on about?

 

[SenzZen]

It's weird some of you choose doughty to complain about. Hes been the best dman in the league over the past decade, what on earth are you on about?

 

[traparatus]

Leaves a lot of room for interpretation!
For example, A guy who blocks shots,clears the crease ,hits,doesn't get beat off the rush,kills penalties , makes an accurate exit pass but does not get PP time or spend much time in the O Zone ...meaning doesn't rack up the points will never be considered for the Norris.
Odd that a Selke award is given out though! Perhaps they should come up with a separate award for offensive Dman?

It's just that great defensemen in the NHL spend very little time performing tasks that you have mentioned.

It's always better to play in the offensive zone. It's always better to defend and break up an attack before opposition crosses your blue line. It's always better to successfully make a difficult break out pass than to waste energy clearing the crease and blocking shots.

Also, it is not as if leading scorer among defensemen automatically wins the Norris. Not even close.

The award is fine. It rewards maximum contribution toward winning while being a defenseman.

 

[kingsholygrail]

It's a trophy that's based on who the media think is the best at the time of their vote. Some journalists may spend a long time going over the numbers, reviewing tape, etc to make their judgement. Others just make sure they play for the team they cover. Others still just pick the "he's due." Reputation is a big factor also. Where you play matters too because if you're not seen you don't exist no matter how good your stats might look on paper.

 

[joe dirte]

What?

I mean no player has been the best every year. Duncan keith and brent burns were up there too some years. But I mean when you look at their whole collective body of work.

 

[Hasa92]

Because offensive skill is easier to judge by looking at stats and by watching the games while defensive play is harder to break down with stats and just as hard to judge by watching the games.

I mean offense is good if goals are scored, if not it might still be good if there were a lot of "almost goals" so many bounces in the game of hockey you know.

Defensive side has so much variables that you simply cannot judge it as easily as that.

 

[Tage2Tuch]

It isn't.

Ekholm doesn't get nominated because he isn't better than Karlsson or Burns.

Ekholm isn’t even better then Ellis.

This could change and it’s very close but I really like Ellis.

 

[613Leafer]

Best defenceman includes both offence and defence. It's the overall impact the player has on the game. Most of the people voting have probably only actually watched some of these guys a handful of times over the course of the whole season, so really aren't in a position to judge them defensively.

Most of the traditional media (i.e. the ones with votes) also aren't too familiar with looking up players usage (quality of competition, zone starts, etc), goals against relative to teammates, and other more advanced stats. I think some of them are starting to jump on corsi, but corsi by itself isn't very informative.

Looking at these stats aren't a replacement for watching players mind you, but they're a good supplement and better than nothing if you have barely watched them, but I think most of the voters barely watch them and don't really look up the advanced stats either. Leaving the vote largely to offensive numbers and maybe general reputation for defensive play, which is why offence generally dominates the voting.

 

[StoneHands]

Well, I did suggest having a separate trophy for Dman who gets the most points,since that's what seems to be the main aspect!

Not necessarily. The Norris winner is almost never a low scoring defenseman but not necessarily the highest either. The Norris winner in '18 finished 5th in scoring among defenseman. In '16 the winner finished 11th. I think there's a balance and some people just don't like offensive defenseman but that's the era we're in right now. The best, most dominant defenseman are guys that put up points while also being solid in their own zone (for the most part).

Even if they made an Art Ross for defenseman do you really think the voters are going to know enough about every team and player in the league to know who is the best at clearing the crease, not getting beat off the rush, making accurate breakout passes, and then add up their zone time to see who is most effective? It would turn into the Selke where guys like Hedman and Doughty would still be front runners. It would essentially just remove guys like Burns and Karlsson and anyone who is an average defender or better would still be in the running.

 

[hector morrison]

It's just that great defensemen in the NHL spend very little time performing tasks that you have mentioned.

It's always better to play in the offensive zone. It's always better to defend and break up an attack before opposition crosses your blue line. It's always better to successfully make a difficult break out pass than to waste energy clearing the crease and blocking shots.

Also, it is not as if leading scorer among defensemen automatically wins the Norris. Not even close.

The award is fine. It rewards maximum contribution toward winning while being a defenseman.

I still think points are the main factor when deciding on the Norris,although Carlson didn't win and maybe should have!.
If there were a Trophy for most points by a Dman, I would like to see who wins the Norris. Kinda like the Art Ross and the Rocket Trophies being separate from the Hart Trophy, I'm sure you are aware of the last Dman to win a Hart Trophy!
So,my suggestion remains ...How about a Trophy for the highest scoring Dman every year...call it the 'Orr Trophy maybe.

 

[Kimota]

It should be the D who is the most complete offensively and defensively like Ray Bourque.

 

[Mike Lowry]

Look who votes on the award. Not a pair of skates or a single game played within the entire bunch. So because they don't know the game, they don't understand what makes it work and simply look to what is easiest; offensive stats. It's no different than non-car guys simply thinking a lot of HP is what will make a car better than others. PK Subban had the 3rd most Norris votes last year in the entire league. He isn't even one of the 3 best Dmen on his team. The same type have long believed Erik Karlsson was one, if not the best Dmen in the league. Now he is on a new team and like Subban, is nowhere close to being the best when playing with guys who are far better. It's time to change who gets to vote on the Award, because it has turned into an absolute joke

 

[Quid Pro Clowe]

As great as Burns was in his Norris Season vs the Oilers in the playoffs...
Vlasic is the one who limited mcD to 4 points in 6 games (one being an empty netter).
He also did a considerable job limiting Crosby's effectiveness in the finals the year before.

Vlasic would have my vote for Defensive Defensive of the year most years. The dude is an absolute beast.

And maybe San Jose fans can correct me on this, but I find he's every bit as valuable to San Jose's success as Burns was.

Vlasic shut down Kopitar, Forsberg, Tarasenko, Crosby and McDavid between 16-17.

 

[joe dirte]

Not necessarily. The Norris winner is almost never a low scoring defenseman but not necessarily the highest either. The Norris winner in '18 finished 5th in scoring among defenseman. In '16 the winner finished 11th. I think there's a balance and some people just don't like offensive defenseman but that's the era we're in right now. The best, most dominant defenseman are guys that put up points while also being solid in their own zone (for the most part).

Even if they made an Art Ross for defenseman do you really think the voters are going to know enough about every team and player in the league to know who is the best at clearing the crease, not getting beat off the rush, making accurate breakout passes, and then add up their zone time to see who is most effective? It would turn into the Selke where guys like Hedman and Doughty would still be front runners. It would essentially just remove guys like Burns and Karlsson and anyone who is an average defender or better would still be in the running.

Who would end up getting the Dman Art Ross trophy instead.

 

[joe dirte]

Vlasic shut down Kopitar, Forsberg, Tarasenko, Crosby and McDavid between 16-17.

he did in 2015/16 and put up 39 points too.

Vlasic is a pretty sick dman.

 

[Thenameless]

I'm sure this has been brought up before, I'm just wondering why is it that Karlsson or Burns get nominated for the Norris every year over more defensive focused guys like Ekholm? Is it because points are an easier way to determine who is better? Even if it is only offensively?

I've always felt the same way as you, in that it doesn't seem to go to the best defensive stopper when it really should. I suppose points are easy to count as you say.

 

[MXD]

A guy that is weak defensively doesn't get the necessary ice time to win the Norris in the first place.

And if they do, they play for a bad team, which probably precludes them from winning the Norris.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

A guy that is weak defensively doesn't get the necessary overtime to win the Norris in the first place.

And if they do, they play for a bad team, which probably precludes them from winning the Norris.

If you're outstanding on a bad team as a dman it get you more attention.

People vote for the Norris based on points rather than actual defensive accum because it's easier to see on paper.

The reporters who actually follow your team more than likely write some far off, idiotic articles that make you wonder if they even follow your team let alone watch others.

Same with advanced stats metrics. Look at player A with all these advanced stats in the positive this is why they're doing so well.

Nice lazy journalism there, folks.