ESPN Top 10 Defenseman in the NHL

[Buck Naked]

Ty for not answering my question.

It sounds like you don't agree with Forsling at 5th, is that just your opinion or do you have a model to back that up?

I actually do believe Forsling is playing like a top D, especially 5v5, this season and I won't question his position. His numbers looks amazing!

Now you answer my last post.

 

[TheUnusedCrayon]

Interesting read here and not surprising really.

The 10 best defensemen in the NHL for 2023-24

Where do the high-scoring Cale Makar and Quinn Hughes land? What about "defensive defenseman" Jaccob Slavin? Here's how those in the NHL see it.

www.espn.com

Breakdown was

1. Makar
2. Hughes
3. Hesikanen
4. Fox
5. McAvoy
6. Hedman
7. Josi
8. Slavin
9. Morrisey
10. Doughty

I have Fox above Heiskanen but other than that pretty good list!

 

[wetcoast]

I actually do believe Forsling is playing like a top D, especially 5v5, this season and I won't question his position. His numbers looks amazing!

Being a top D and for the purposes of the ESPN survey it was top 20ish is a large difference than being top 5.

Now you answer my last post.

Your last question being this?

I mean, since it reflects Makar (and others) when he's awesome, shouldn't it also then reflect when he's not as good?

View attachment 820174

Models work by using specific numbers so if the numbers change then the model will spit out a different answer.

I'll put it another way currently since that's what was originally posted.

Does anyone really believe that the trio of Bouchard (2), Burns (4) and Forsling (5) is "better on the season" than Makar, Fox and McAvoy?

That's problematic and perhaps people are using the wrong numbers to come to certain conclusions here?

I mean 3 of those guys didn't even come up in the ESPN survey and 3 others came in really high, which one do you think is a more accurate reflection of the 2 sets of players?

I didn't have to think about it for more than a nanosecond and I'm guessing that most people can see why.

 

[norrisnick]

A couple very dubious additions to honorable mention.

It's amusing that you've got an inverted Ben White situation taking up rent free residence. Like an itch you can't help scratch.

 

[Buck Naked]

Does anyone really believe that the trio of Bouchard (2), Burns (4) and Forsling (5) is "better on the season" than Makar, Fox and McAvoy?

That's problematic and perhaps people are using the wrong numbers to come to certain conclusions here?

I mean 3 of those guys didn't even come up in the ESPN survey and 3 others came in really high, which one do you think is a more accurate reflection of the 2 sets of players?

I didn't have to think about it for more than a nanosecond and I'm guessing that most people can see why.

What you're talking about is reputation. I mean, of course I think Cale Makar is a better D than Forsling, but does that mean that he's by default having a better season? No, I think there could be a debate when actually using the numbers we have. Forsling is crushing Makar in basically every 5v5 on-ice metric and I think that when comparing these two the team is not as big of a factor than when comparing a D on a top team vs. a bottom feeder. Makar is obviously better point wise, much thanks to being a key player on one of the best PP lines out there. Makar is 91st in GA with 40 goals against among all D with over 700 minutes played. Forsling is 3rd with 22. And he's played 100 minutes more. He's obviously doing something right out there. And what's common with all of the players you're mentioning is that they all have, mostly, better xGF%, GF%, SCF%, HDCF%, among many other things, than Makar, Fox, and McAvoy. Are they therefore better Dmen? No. Could it be that they're having better results this season? Sure.

 

[wetcoast]

What you're talking about is reputation. I mean, of course I think Cale Makar is a better D than Forsling, but does that mean that he's by default having a better season? No, I think there could be a debate when actually using the numbers we have. Forsling is crushing Makar in basically every 5v5 on-ice metric and I think that when comparing these two the team is not as big of a factor than when comparing a D on a top team vs. a bottom feeder. Makar is obviously better point wise, much thanks to being a key player on one of the best PP lines out there. Makar is 91st in GA with 40 goals against among all D with over 700 minutes played. Forsling is 3rd with 22. And he's played 100 minutes more. He's obviously doing something right out there. And what's common with all of the players you're mentioning is that they all have, mostly, better xGF%, GF%, SCF%, HDCF%, among many other things, than Makar, Fox, and McAvoy. Are they therefore better Dmen? No. Could it be that they're having better results this season? Sure.

I think the problem is that you are talking about who is having the better season according to Dom's model, doesn't mean a ton outside of that.

Stats are cool but they come from baseball and are more applicable there as batters face pitchers and one can isolate players, hockey is much more fluid and there are 12 players on the ice (most of the time) and advanced stats can't account for this as accurately as in baseball.

Forsling isn't having a better year than Makar in the real world even if Dom's model thinks so.

 

[Raistlin]

I think the Avs broke Makar again, riding him 25+ minutes a night in Jan/feb is not prioritizing when he will be the most impactful, logging those heavy minutes in playoffs.

His reputation will land him top 3 for Norris for sure, but it'll be interesting what his final stats will be relative to Hughes, then we can gauge how much the award goes to rep and how much is based on actual play this season.

 

[HockeyWooot]

Not a bad list, especially for ESPN.

Top 10 lists aren't an exact science. In terms of top 10 ranking a single position, defence may be the hardest.

I usually don't get too fussed about the list- the biggest statement is usually on No. 1, the top 5 group, followed by the rest.

 

[Spilot23]

Makar isn't having a great year and shouldn't be #1 if we're basing this in 2024. Alot of his mistakes are him fighting with the puck and bad coverage. Very similar to his rookie year. Still alot of games left to get back to his "standards" though.

 

[wetcoast]

Makar isn't having a great year and shouldn't be #1 if we're basing this in 2024. Alot of his mistakes are him fighting with the puck and bad coverage. Very similar to his rookie year. Still alot of games left to get back to his "standards" though.

It's telling on how great Makar is when people say that he is having a down year and has a line of 49-13-47-60 (+10) on a team that has had huge injury problems and inconsistent lineups all year as well as overusing their starting goalie to some bad starts.

If the Avs are close to healthy they will be a force come playoff time, especially if they can upgrade their second line center situation.

 

[kilowatt]

As a life-long Kings fan and one of the most ardent Doughty supporters throughout his career, I don’t think he belongs on a top ten list anymore. He’s probably still a top 30 defenseman in the league but I don’t think we’ll be seeing him on any more top ten lists.

 

[Buck Naked]

I think the problem is that you are talking about who is having the better season according to Dom's model, doesn't mean a ton outside of that.

Stats are cool but they come from baseball and are more applicable there as batters face pitchers and one can isolate players, hockey is much more fluid and there are 12 players on the ice (most of the time) and advanced stats can't account for this as accurately as in baseball.

Forsling isn't having a better year than Makar in the real world even if Dom's model thinks so.

Goals for and against are not Dom's model. Those are stats that's been used since the dawn of man and when a player has been in the ice for as many GA in a little bit over half a season as in a whole season two years ago when he won the Norris, I think something is different from that year. Dom is basing his model on some of those stats though, but what I mentioned in my last post was just plain percentages from Naturalstattrick. And what you're saying then is that they should never be relied upon, even when adding some context to it? Just look at the point totals and go by reputation?

 

[Regal]

I'd imagine because some of those model designers also have preconceived biases in favor of the players we deem "elite."

When someone designs a model and it says Heiskanen isn't top 10 while Makar and Fox are barely top 10, most model designers will think their model is flawed instead of recognizing that potentially those players aren't as good as previously thought. This may cause a lot of models to be thrown out before we see them, which furthers the notion that those players are good.

It's sort of like that famous picture of the plane with all the bullet holes which explains survivorship bias, we only see the models that say what we want them to because people will be overly critical of models that say the opposite.

A model that says Makar is the 9th best defensemen in the league this year is much more likely to be discarded than one that says he's top 2, especially when the narrative is that Hughes, the other top 2, is weak defensively and only contributes offensively. If the model that says he's 9th says that Makar is the worst defensively among the top 8, the community will ignore it because of their own preconceived biases that Makar is the stronger player defensively.

That’s probably true, though at the same time “does this make sense” is one of the ways we often test analysis. I don’t know much about Dom’s model so I can’t really comment on his methodology, but at the same time that we should dismiss it because it doesn’t fit preconceived notions, I don’t think we should take it at face value either simply because it’s a popular analyst

 

[Regal]

As a life-long Kings fan and one of the most ardent Doughty supporters throughout his career, I don’t think he belongs on a top ten list anymore. He’s probably still a top 30 defenseman in the league but I don’t think we’ll be seeing him on any more top ten lists.

He seemed to start the year really strong but has fallen off in the calendar year. I don’t know if dmen in their mid 30s can play those huge minutes consistently when the league is as fast and offensively oriented as it is these days.

 

[ItWasJustified]

As a life-long Kings fan and one of the most ardent Doughty supporters throughout his career, I don’t think he belongs on a top ten list anymore. He’s probably still a top 30 defenseman in the league but I don’t think we’ll be seeing him on any more top ten lists.

You're the only one in this thread who doesn't work for ESPN it seems.

 

[Slimmy]

It's telling on how great Makar is when people say that he is having a down year and has a line of 49-13-47-60 (+10) on a team that has had huge injury problems and inconsistent lineups all year as well as overusing their starting goalie to some bad starts.

If the Avs are close to healthy they will be a force come playoff time, especially if they can upgrade their second line center situation.

Funny how quality of teammates matter all of a sudden for you. But when it's Karlsson playing on one of the worst teams in recent memory and he pots over 100 points, that's somehow a knock on Karlsson? Disingenuous and hypocritical.

 

[wetcoast]

Goals for and against are not Dom's model. Those are stats that's been used since the dawn of man and when a player has been in the ice for as many GA in a little bit over half a season as in a whole season two years ago when he won the Norris, I think something is different from that year. Dom is basing his model on some of those stats though, but what I mentioned in my last post was just plain percentages from Naturalstattrick.

Statisctics are great at telling what they tell but they aren't predictive and they don't absolutely isolate players from their team mates as well as say in baseball.

And what you're saying then is that they should never be relied upon, even when adding some context to it? Just look at the point totals and go by reputation?

Why are you making it an all or nothing situation nothing I said suggested this?

Neither is going to absolutely correct as both come with limitations as Dom's model even though some think it's some kind of non biased magic is still a model created by a human and has the same limitations of just looking at point totals and "reputation".

That being said reputation in this case for Makar has been earned.

Forsling is a pretty good Dman but the notion that he , Burns and Bouchard are all having "better years" than Makar, Fox and McAvoy should make us question if we are deriving the wrong conclusion form Dom's model.

Like I stated up thread these models don't really isolate each player like stats do in baseball.

 

[wetcoast]

Funny how quality of teammates matter all of a sudden for you. But when it's Karlsson playing on one of the worst teams in recent memory and he pots over 100 points, that's somehow a knock on Karlsson? Disingenuous and hypocritical.

Why are you even bringing this up as I was pretty clear that EK65 would have way lesser points on a better team this year because of 3 main reasons.

1. He would have less opportunity in terms of ice time.

2. He wouldn't have a green light as the Pens are playing for the playoffs, San Jose was rent free do as he wished score many goals allow many goalks didn't matter.

3. Better players means the maximum of 3 points on any play means that EK is going to have to share.

But again I ask, how is your assertion even relevant in this thread?

 

[Buck Naked]

Statisctics are great at telling what they tell but they aren't predictive and they don't absolutely isolate players from their team mates as well as say in baseball.



Why are you making it an all or nothing situation nothing I said suggested this?

Neither is going to absolutely correct as both come with limitations as Dom's model even though some think it's some kind of non biased magic is still a model created by a human and has the same limitations of just looking at point totals and "reputation".

That being said reputation in this case for Makar has been earned.

Forsling is a pretty good Dman but the notion that he , Burns and Bouchard are all having "better years" than Makar, Fox and McAvoy should make us question if we are deriving the wrong conclusion form Dom's model.

Like I stated up thread these models don't really isolate each player like stats do in baseball.

You keep bringing up Dom's model even though plenty of stats been posted that are not Dom's model. One list was based Dom's model, that's it. You keep referring back to it yet I've moved on since long to just plain numbers without any bias.

Like I wrote before. Makar has been on the ice for almost as many goals against so far this season as during his entire Norris season. When he's playing with MacKinnon and the first line, he's got a 54% goal share. Remove MacKinnon and he goes down to 40% while MacKinnon without Makar goes up to 62%. Same things happens when looking at xGF and scoring chances. Something clearly isn't stacking up this season 5v5 for the guy.

Reputation should not dictate how well a player is currently performing. If we were to compile a list of the best D in the league, then sure, reputation and other seasons would be considered and Makar would most likely top that list. Answering the question who is currently performing better is something completely different though and reputation should not matter whatsoever.

Why are you making it an all or nothing situation nothing I said suggested this?

Because every single number that's been posted you overlook and basically just say that it doesn't matter or give it an excuse. Reputation makes Makar better right now, rather than actually trying to interpret the numbers available.

 

[wetcoast]

You keep bringing up Dom's model even though plenty of stats been posted that are not Dom's model. One list was based Dom's model, that's it. You keep referring back to it yet I've moved on since long to just plain numbers without any bias.

When I'm talking about Dom's model it was specific in the results with those players, my comments generally were about advanced stats in hockey versus baseball that was pretty clear I thought.

Like I wrote before. Makar has been on the ice for almost as many goals against so far this season as during his entire Norris season. When he's playing with MacKinnon and the first line, he's got a 54% goal share. Remove MacKinnon and he goes down to 40% while MacKinnon without Makar goes up to 62%. Same things happens when looking at xGF and scoring chances. Something clearly isn't stacking up this season 5v5 for the guy.

Sure and I addressed this in my earlier post with the injuries, lineup situation and their 31 goalie wearing down and their goalies in general having a poor year.

That is also part of waht I'm talking about with using advanced stats with hockey they attmept to islaote something that's ahrd to isolate.

the number one reason a goal goes in or doesn't is on a goalie not one of the other 5 position players out there.

Reputation should not dictate how well a player is currently performing. If we were to compile a list of the best D in the league, then sure, reputation and other seasons would be considered and Makar would most likely top that list. Answering the question who is currently performing better is something completely different though and reputation should not matter whatsoever.

Reputation isn't the reason Makar is having a good year he has a line of 50-13-47-60 which translates to a 77-20-72-92 season and he isn't some secondary point guy who just happens to get assists.

Because every single number that's been posted you overlook and basically just say that it doesn't matter or give it an excuse.

That's BS and you seem to be living in this all or nothing world and I'm beginning to think that's the problem here not anyone evaluating the players.

I'll ask you again do you think that the trio of Burns, Forsling and Bouchard are having a better season as a group than the trio of Makar, Fox and McAvoy?

Reputation makes Makar better right now, rather than actually trying to interpret the numbers available.

The numbers are just that the problem is that you seem hell-bent on looking at advanced stats and then coming to the conclusion that one trio is better than the other trio based on some advanced stats.

Like I said up thread neither model is absolutely correct all of the time but it's pretty clear which trio I would take and which trio the "experts" would take and also which trio would win in a poll here among HF Board users.

In fact such a poll would be shut down extremely quickly for a lopsided result and rightly so.

let me put this another way, I could take the second trio of Makar, Fox, McAvoy and basically put them on any team in the NHL and be pretty confident that they would still be very close to where Dom's model (since that's the only one with rankings that has been presented here so I'm using it specifically) would rank them.

i would be less confident with doing the same with the trio of burns, Bouchard and Forsling as most people would be.

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

It's telling on how great Makar is when people say that he is having a down year and has a line of 49-13-47-60 (+10) on a team that has had huge injury problems and inconsistent lineups all year as well as overusing their starting goalie to some bad starts.

If the Avs are close to healthy they will be a force come playoff time, especially if they can upgrade their second line center situation.

lol maybe it helps having a forward with 89 points in 55 games and the 2nd best forward "only" having 70 points in 55 games?

 

[wetcoast]

lol maybe it helps having a forward with 89 points in 55 games and the 2nd best forward "only" having 70 points in 55 games?

Are you implying that Makar needs their help?

 

[Agent Zuuuub]

Are you implying that Makar needs their help?

no just that it helps a lot to being norris caliber or even good tbh, if Makar was on an actual bad team it would hurt him much worse.

and if somehow he was carrying those teams to playoffs it would be pretty damn impressive.

 

[wetcoast]

no just that it helps a lot to being norris caliber or even good tbh, if Makar was on an actual bad team it would hurt him.

Man I resisted last post but using that line of thinking EK65 should have more than 37 points right now right?

Makar is elite offensively you need to move on.

 

[nbwingsfan]

Interesting read here and not surprising really.

The 10 best defensemen in the NHL for 2023-24

Where do the high-scoring Cale Makar and Quinn Hughes land? What about "defensive defenseman" Jaccob Slavin? Here's how those in the NHL see it.

www.espn.com

Breakdown was

1. Makar
2. Hughes
3. Hesikanen
4. Fox
5. McAvoy
6. Hedman
7. Josi
8. Slavin
9. Morrisey
10. Doughty

For an ESPN list it’s not bad. Doughty sticks out as clearly still not a top 10D, but can’t argue the other 9 or even their placement really