Zub vs Methot

[NyQuil]

It's a bit tricky because Methot was playing a very specialized and specific role for most of his tenure with Ottawa.

He has since freely admitted in one of the podcasts that Paul MacLean told him to fundamentally simplify his style of play and focus on being the "fireman" and to "put out fires".

One area where he did well was in the 2017 playoff run where he and Phaneuf made life miserable for opponents in front of our net. I doubt Zub will have that kind of sandpaper that can be required in the post-season depending on the opponent.

That being said, Zub has a cerebral and calming quality to his play that likely complements any type of defenceman - whether they are an offensive guy who needs support, a defensive guy who needs help with an outlet, or simply a bad defenceman who needs sheltering.

Zub has the more expansive toolbox IMO, but Methot was very good at what he was asked to do.

Interesting poll.

 

[Tuna99]

Zub has a better name, is better looking and didn’t cost us Foligno.

Zub all day

 

[Silky Johnson]

Right now I think Zub has the edge. Considering the number of NHL games Zub has played I think he will develop even further and be the clearly better player. I think his offensive could take a step forward and let him be a 30-40 point player.

I also REALLY like Methot.

 

[OmniSens]

Methot had Karlsson

Zub has had no consistent pairing


But both two completely different players. It's a tough choice but I'll give the slight edge to Methot. Or Zub... ugh..

 

[SensontheRush]

I would have said "easily Zub" earlier in the season; however, I feel his game has taken a step back, likely since he is a known quantity now. He should come back around.

Methot was underrated offensively. Had the knack to score more, but chose to elevate Karlsson to new heights. He scored a few goals in the playoffs rushing to the net, having his shackles loosened a bit I suppose.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

Methot was our best dman the year Karlsson went down.

Maybe our D core was just not very good all those years, but we never had a guy that ever even came close to threatening his slot as our 2nd most reliable dman.

 

[Pierre from Orleans]

Zub has 10 fingers whereas Methot has 9.5

Zub > Methot

 

[ReginKarlssonLehner]

Methot slightly ahead but Zub has higher ability without a doubt. Gotta lock him up ASAP.

 

[NyQuil]

Methot was our best dman the year Karlsson went down.

Maybe our D core was just not very good all those years, but we never had a guy that ever even came close to threatening his slot as our 2nd most reliable dman.

I think it was Gonchar, myself. I thought he made a case for MVP of the team during that stretch.

(aside from Hammond I guess)

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I think it was Gonchar, myself. I thought he made a case for MVP of the team during that stretch.

(aside from Hammond I guess)

I always forget about Gonchar, it's like him playing for this team has been wiped from my memory and I'm routinely reminded it happened. Agreed, he was incredible, as was Hammond.

 

[robsenz]

I refuse to vote on this poll, both are/were awesome players. Is rare to see players barely make mistakes that end up in the back of the net.

 

[Cosmix]

Good poll. I love both, but I'll go with Methot. His physical play outweighs Zub's puck-handling advantage.

That's my feeling too.

 

[Cosmix]

Both of them can get underrated. I think ability wise they are very close. Both are primarily defensive Dmen. I'll give Methot the nod for being able to add size and physicality which helps defensively. Mobility is similar .. Methot may be faster in a straight line. Hands ..Zub would have a slight edge. Playmaking .. Zub would have a slight edge. Shot ..similar. Smarts..similar.. Offensive zone..Zub would have a slight edge.

You forgot hip checks!

 

[slamigo]

Not sure. I haven't seen Zub's podcast yet.

 

[Xspyrit]

I think it was Gonchar, myself. I thought he made a case for MVP of the team during that stretch.

(aside from Hammond I guess)

I always forget about Gonchar, it's like him playing for this team has been wiped from my memory and I'm routinely reminded it happened. Agreed, he was incredible, as was Hammond.

I liked this post but Gonchar was 2012-13, Hammond was 2014-15, 2 different successful seasons

2012-13 is the shortened season we had to "TURTLE" because of injuries. Karlsson, Spezza and Michalek missed a good chunk so we played a tight defensive system under MacLean and it worked. Made the playoffs, beat the Habs in 5 games (20-9 overall score)

2014-15 took a while before we got going, we were 22-23-10 in February but then several players (Hammond, Stone, Turris, Karlsson, etc) turned on the jets to lead this team to a 99 pts season and a playoffs birth (lost against MTL in 6 games, remember Subban slash on Mark Stone wrist?)

NHL Stats

 

[armani]

It's Zub easily for me. Too bad Methot's career cut short by injuries, I love Methot and miss his hip checks on this team. But Zub's game has less wrinkles and he moves the puck better, with an underrated/sneaky shot that he doesn't get to use often. Zub's game is more durable, hope Dorion signs him to a long-term extension.

 

[BonHoonLayneCornell]

I liked this post but Gonchar was 2012-13, Hammond was 2014-15, 2 different successful seasons

2012-13 is the shortened season we had to "TURTLE" because of injuries. Karlsson, Spezza and Michalek missed a good chunk so we played a tight defensive system under MacLean and it worked. Made the playoffs, beat the Habs in 5 games (20-9 overall score)

2014-15 took a while before we got going, we were 22-23-10 in February but then several players (Hammond, Stone, Turris, Karlsson, etc) turned on the jets to lead this team to a 99 pts season and a playoffs birth (lost against MTL in 6 games, remember Subban slash on Mark Stone wrist?)

NHL Stats

Thanks for the clarification. It's definitely blending together in my head and getting harder to remember specifics as time moves along.

 

[NyQuil]

Thanks for the clarification. It's definitely blending together in my head and getting harder to remember specifics as time moves along.

Whoops, the injury years blend together.

I think I remember Anderson, Karlsson and Spezza all being out so I assume Hammond came in.

 

[DrEasy]

I liked this post but Gonchar was 2012-13, Hammond was 2014-15, 2 different successful seasons

2012-13 is the shortened season we had to "TURTLE" because of injuries. Karlsson, Spezza and Michalek missed a good chunk so we played a tight defensive system under MacLean and it worked. Made the playoffs, beat the Habs in 5 games (20-9 overall score)

2014-15 took a while before we got going, we were 22-23-10 in February but then several players (Hammond, Stone, Turris, Karlsson, etc) turned on the jets to lead this team to a 99 pts season and a playoffs birth (lost against MTL in 6 games, remember Subban slash on Mark Stone wrist?)

NHL Stats

Yeah, and in 2014-15 Craig Anderson got injured again, so we initially rode Lehner but he was ineffective. We got "lucky" when MacArthur (also ineffective at the time) ran into Lehner and we lost both for the rest of the season. Newly appointed Dave Cameron re-inserted Condra into the line-up (spelling the end of the infamous GSN line), Hammond was in net, and the rest is Sens history.

 

[bert]

Big fan of both players. Zub has more offensive upside, guys got ice in his veins. He seems more capable of carrying a pairing. Methot is more elite of an defender. I'll take Zub by a hair.

 

[jbeck5]

Zub has 10 fingers whereas Methot has 9.5

Zub > Methot

Wally? Lol

 

[Back in Black]

I like Zub, but I much prefer the Meth Man! Karlsson wasn't the same after Methot left.