Has Cale Makar already surpassed a prime Erik Karlsson in just his first 4 years?

[wetcoast]

I don’t care about adjusted point and I don’t care about points per minute. Neither does anyone else not from Colorado.

Did Makar finish first in scoring for blueliners? Did he finish top ten in scoring overall? Is he on a better or worse team than EK was?

He has not passed Karlsson. Not yet anyway.

Then why did you past that EK would have had around 100 adjusted points that season, you were the one that brought it up dude.

Everyone around here has heard (except maybe that Erik fellow) about how lousy the Sens were without their only real player in EK (the Sens seems to have a love/hate relationship with their players at times).

Who care is he finishes absolutely first this season for blue liners or overall in the coring it's his actual peak performance (for me this is over a consecutive 3 year period regular season and playoffs) and Makar has already reached EK heights in this regard.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

Thank you for making my point here, obviously lots of people are making the argument that EK did it on worse teams and Makar did it on better teams so we have to take EK as in your original point he did it in more offensive opportunities, ie TOI.

It seems that your arguments at times are as selective as to your reading other posts in this thread, tons of people are making the "team mates argument here as if it really means anything overall.

Now I understand, you just have a major lack of understanding about the game of hockey. Only in your mind does the twisted logic arise that playing 28-29 minutes a night as the only offensive weapon on your team (so the other team will have all their focus on you), somehow is an easier role to play in than playing 26-27 minutes a night playing with a stacked team that has several players that the opponent needs to focus on shutting down. I guess you know more about hockey than Crosby who in that video I linked said how hard it is to do the former.

Let me make it real simple for you. Karlsson played 28-29 minutes a night while carrying the load offensively. He had the entire game plan of the opponent focused on shutting him, and only him, down. Makar plays 26-27 minutes a night on a stacked team where he is a main, but not sole driver for the offense. Opponents will try to shut him down, but they also need to focus on MacKinnon as well. This means that Makar is playing in a much easier role than Karlsson. Despite the differences in roles, Karlsson still had the more impressive point finish. Even unadjusted raw total points without context, at 5v5 he STILL had more points than Makar did this year.

What's hilarious is you just keep attempting repeatedly to say peoples arguments are week, yet you've made absolutely no argument yourself. The only thing you have is that terrible point about San Jose which nobody thinks is a good point.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Then why did you past that EK would have had around 100 adjusted points that season, you were the one that brought it up dude.

What I've said throughout the thread is that if you're going to compare players, it makes far more sense to compare how they dominated against their peers. Raw totals aren't going to tell you anything.

As for adjusted stats, it's an imperfect science.

The argument was made that EK had easier competition... okay, then why is Josi lapping Makar this year? And it also doesn't wash because EK wasn't just the highest scoring blueliner on a terrible club, but was also top 5 in scoring and actually coming in pretty close to Crosby himself.

I haven't seen Makar do this yet. When he does, we can revisit.

Everyone around here has heard (except maybe that Erik fellow) about how lousy the Sens were without their only real player in EK (the Sens seems to have a love/hate relationship with their players at times).

Who care is he finishes absolutely first this season for blue liners or overall in the coring it's his actual peak performance (for me this is over a consecutive 3 year period regular season and playoffs) and Makar has already reached EK heights in this regard.

Who cares if he finishes first this season? Well... I don't.

Until of course some guy says that he's passed peak Karlsson. THEN it becomes relevant. When that happens I'm going to look at how he compares vs EK.

 

[wetcoast]

Now I understand, you just have a major lack of understanding about the game of hockey. Only in your mind does the twisted logic arise that playing 28-29 minutes a night as the only offensive weapon on your team (so the other team will have all their focus on you), somehow is an easier role to play in than playing 26-27 minutes a night playing with a stacked team that has several players that the opponent needs to focus on shutting down. I guess you know more about hockey than Crosby who in that video I linked said how hard it is to do the former.

Let me make it real simple for you. Karlsson played 28-29 minutes a night while carrying the load offensively. He had the entire game plan of the opponent focused on shutting him, and only him, down. Makar plays 26-27 minutes a night on a stacked team where he is a main, but not sole driver for the offense. Opponents will try to shut him down, but they also need to focus on MacKinnon as well. This means that Makar is playing in a much easier role than Karlsson. Despite the differences in roles, Karlsson still had the more impressive point finish. Even unadjusted raw total points without context, at 5v5 he STILL had more points than Makar did this year.

What's hilarious is you just keep attempting repeatedly to say peoples arguments are week, yet you've made absolutely no argument yourself. The only thing you have is that terrible point about San Jose which nobody thinks is a good point.

So let's see if I have this right, when EK plays more than Makar it's because he is just that much better and it ahs nothing to do with team deployment or the team situation?

But when Burns plays more than EK we should just look over it?

Also like I said before Some Sens fans really love to downplay their players when pumping up the guy they have in an argument.

It was already pointed out up thread that Makar scored at a much higher rate without Mack this season than with him but then the small sample argument gets thrown out, so much for any objectivity there eh?

Like I stated already best 3 year consecutive peak regular season and playoffs for individual performance, all the team noise excluded, Makar has already reached the level of play that EK did.

And there will be more to come.

I'll also add that Makar is playing more TOI in the playoffs and leading the Avs (and all those awesome team mates in scoring) in the playoffs as well so your assertion that EK played 28:58 and somehow Makar couldn't do that is absurd.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

So let's see if I have this right, when EK plays more than Makar it's because he is just that much better and it ahs nothing to do with team deployment or the team situation?

How many times do I have to say this: it doesn't matter why he plays more, he simply does. Holy crap, get that through your skull dude.

But when Burns plays more than EK we should just look over it?

Do you know what injuries are man? Somebody who is this caught up on a point must be a troll, or at the very least has no interest in an honest debate. Like are you just looking for attention? Do you like having the same things repeated to you over and over again? Karlsson on the Sharks is not the same player that dragged Ottawa to the ECF. He's had a major ankle surgery, and multiple groin injuries since. Do you not know how severe those types of injuries are. And I will say again, he was with Ottawa in 2017-18 where you could already see his production and minutes drop.

Also like I said before Some Sens fans really love to downplay their players when pumping up the guy they have in an argument.

Yes, it's totally downplaying to say that Kyle Turris =/= Nathan MacKinnon.

It was already pointed out up thread that Makar scored at a much higher rate without Mack this season than with him but then the small sample argument gets thrown out, so much for any objectivity there eh?

This literally is irrelevant. First of all, I have no idea what scoring at a higher rate away from MacKinnon has anything to do with Makar being better than Karlsson. Secondly, if you think this somehow diminishes the argument that Makar has the benefit from playing with other elite players, it also doesn't accomplish that either, unless you don't understand hockey beyond a surface level. It really doesn't have anything to do with small sample size (although that's a completely valid argument), it has more to do with the attention players get on the ice. You see, teams talk in the dressing room before games, and they figure out a plan on how to minimize the other team's scoring chances, and how to create offense for themselves. This differs depending on what team they're playing. When a team was facing Ottawa, it was pretty simple: "shut down Erik Karlsson". When a team is playing Colorado, it's much harder. They can say "shut down Makar", but then they're not focusing on MacKinnon. They can say to shut down MacKinnon, but then they're not focusing on Makar. A game plan against Colorado requires balancing the amount of coverage on these players to manage all of the weapons on Colorado effectively.

Like I stated already best 3 year consecutive peak regular season and playoffs for individual performance, all the team noise excluded, Makar has already reached the level of play that EK did.

And there will be more to come.

Yes I know you've stated it, you've yet to make any argument, let alone a convincing one, to back up that statement.

I'll also add that Makar is playing more TOI in the playoffs and leading the Avs (and all those awesome team mates in scoring) in the playoffs as well so your assertion that EK played 28:58 and somehow Makar couldn't do that is absurd.

He's averaging 27 minutes a night. That isn't 28 or 29 minutes. I didn't say Makar couldn't, I said he doesn't.

 

[yababy]

I think he has. Kid is unreal. And if he gets a cup this year, I think it's no question that Makar has exceeded a prime Karlsson in much less time. Makar has already had more playoff success in his first 4 years than Karlsson has had over his entire playoff career. Mind you, surprisingly Karlsson has only played in the post season 6 times in his 13 year career. But also Karlsson has played on some stacked Ottawa rosters too.

I think Karlsson is still ahead by 3 Norris trophies

 

[Tralfamadore]

I think Karlsson is still ahead by 3 Norris trophies

I must have missed that 3rd one.

We'll see how these finals go but a Conn Smythe > 2 Norris wins. So that can change things.

 

[Buck Naked]

I must have missed that 3rd one.

We'll see how these finals go but a Conn Smythe > 2 Norris wins. So that can change things.

Lol no. Justin Williams is in no way better than most players he played with and against during his era, yet he's one of extremely few with a Smythe. The playoffs are a short competition and you can get hot, streaky or whatever and go on a crazy run. Hell, Tampa wins and Palat might win the Conn Smythe. Doesn't make him any better of a player than Draisaitl for example, who won Harts, Art Ross but not Conn Smythe.

 

[Tralfamadore]

Lol no. Justin Williams is in no way better than most players he played with and against during his era, yet he's one of extremely few with a Smythe. The playoffs are a short competition and you can get hot, streaky or whatever and go on a crazy run. Hell, Tampa wins and Palat might win the Conn Smythe. Doesn't make him any better of a player than Draisaitl for example, who won Harts, Art Ross but not Conn Smythe.

Well ya obviously Williams and Draisaitl aren't at all close lmao

EK and Makar are absolutely close and so a Conn Smythe win on an absolutely stacked team like Colorado could push Makar ahead. I'll tell you this EK would trade his 2 Norris trophies for a Conn Smythe and a Cup in a freakin heartbeat.

 

[wetcoast]

How many times do I have to say this: it doesn't matter why he plays more, he simply does. Holy crap, get that through your skull dude.

The thing is that it does matter that one guy played way more MPG, it's called context.

We aren't talking about a 3rd line guy who scores at a higher ES per minute rate we are comparing apples with apples the 2 elite offensive Dmen over 3 year peaks here and more opportunity is part of the context.

Do you know what injuries are man? Somebody who is this caught up on a point must be a troll, or at the very least has no interest in an honest debate. Like are you just looking for attention? Do you like having the same things repeated to you over and over again? Karlsson on the Sharks is not the same player that dragged Ottawa to the ECF. He's had a major ankle surgery, and multiple groin injuries since. Do you not know how severe those types of injuries are. And I will say again, he was with Ottawa in 2017-18 where you could already see his production and minutes drop.

Injuries don't cover the entire equation here that's why I used PPG not raw totals but perhaps you might use the same logic back to the first part of this post, you know the one about TOI and opportunities?

In 17-18 his MPG didn't drop they were actually in line with his top 6 seasons with the Sens so I'm not even sure what point you are trying to make their he simply was pretty crappy that last year with the Sens as an overall Dman.

I'm also very well aware of what injuries are to Karlsson and his followers funny that you railed against that point when I brought it up but yet here it is again.

Yes, it's totally downplaying to say that Kyle Turris =/= Nathan MacKinnon.

Because that's exactly what I said?....well I never actually said that and in EK's absolutely best season Turris only played in 57 games and other forwards played way more than he did with Karlsson, maybe get some facts straight here?

This literally is irrelevant. First of all, I have no idea what scoring at a higher rate away from MacKinnon has anything to do with Makar being better than Karlsson. Secondly, if you think this somehow diminishes the argument that Makar has the benefit from playing with other elite players, it also doesn't accomplish that either, unless you don't understand hockey beyond a surface level. It really doesn't have anything to do with small sample size (although that's a completely valid argument), it has more to do with the attention players get on the ice. You see, teams talk in the dressing room before games, and they figure out a plan on how to minimize the other team's scoring chances, and how to create offense for themselves. This differs depending on what team they're playing. When a team was facing Ottawa, it was pretty simple: "shut down Erik Karlsson". When a team is playing Colorado, it's much harder. They can say "shut down Makar", but then they're not focusing on MacKinnon. They can say to shut down MacKinnon, but then they're not focusing on Makar. A game plan against Colorado requires balancing the amount of coverage on these players to manage all of the weapons on Colorado effectively.

I guess the first point is that it disproves the notion that Makar being offensively elite somehow is easier because he plays with Mack, then the evidence is that he scored at a higher rate in games played without Mack but why look at context?

The whole one guy is better because he does more with less player wise is offset in part due to role and TOI anyways and both things are part of context, it's intellectually dishonest and makes for a weak argument to only look at partial context, if one looks at total context the argument and conclusions, even subjective ones, are usually better ones.

Teams also usually game plan more for opposition forwards not Dmen as zero prove has been provided that other teams game planned more for EK than say other opposition teams elite players.

It also doesn't take into account PP TOI and home games so the overall "impact" of teams focusing on a single player, never mind a Dman hasn't exactly been examined never mind given any credence to it's simply been stated.

Yes I know you've stated it, you've yet to make any argument, let alone a convincing one, to back up that statement.

The 3 year regular season record and playoff one is there for everyone to see.

Makar is the leading PPG producer among Dmen over those 3 years at 1.01 PPG and he actually increases his production in the post season to 1.21 PPG

He's averaging 27 minutes a night. That isn't 28 or 29 minutes. I didn't say Makar couldn't, I said he doesn't.

Go back up post to my earlier point more TOI at ES and on the PP isn't exactly a negative when it comes to scoring points.

 

[majormajor]

When a team is playing Colorado, it's much harder. They can say "shut down Makar", but then they're not focusing on MacKinnon. They can say to shut down MacKinnon, but then they're not focusing on Makar. A game plan against Colorado requires balancing the amount of coverage on these players to manage all of the weapons on Colorado effectively.

I know what the scoring for a D by on-ice linemate typically looks like. Hedman and Fox both have elite forwards that they share the ice with, and like EK and just about everyone else they score less when their best teammates are on the bench, maybe a little bit less, maybe a lot. That's the norm. Nobody looks like Makar who scores even more on his own. That's unprecedented.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Well ya obviously Williams and Draisaitl aren't at all close lmao

EK and Makar are absolutely close and so a Conn Smythe win on an absolutely stacked team like Colorado could push Makar ahead. I'll tell you this EK would trade his 2 Norris trophies for a Conn Smythe and a Cup in a freakin heartbeat.

It doesn't push him ahead. EK never had the opportunity to do it on those teams.

It would be awesome and it would absolutely add to his legacy. But it doesn't put him ahead of Karlsson. Not yet. Other blueliners have won the Smythe. It didn't automatically make them the best blueliner of all time.

Again, I never really liked Karlsson. But you're talking about the best blueliner of his generation. Makar is going to need more than a couple of seasons and a Smythe to eclipse him. He's off to an amazing start but you're getting ahead of yourself.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

It was already pointed out up thread that Makar scored at a much higher rate without Mack this season than with him

Where did you find that?

I looked at a similar statement for another thread, and I’m pretty sure that Makar certainly didn’t. I’ve seen other statements saying that he’s scoring more with third liners than his elite teammates… what is that, relatively or something?

Here are the players with a goal or an assist on Makar’s 86 RS points:

Mackinnon 35

Rantanen 25

Kadri 24

Landeskog 16

Toews 16

Burakovsky 9

Nichushkin 9

Compher 8

Byram 6

Girard 6

Aube-Kubel 3

Helm 3

Annunen 2

Lehkonen 2

Newhook 1

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

Where did you find that?

I looked at a similar statement for another thread, and I’m pretty sure that Makar certainly didn’t. I’ve seen other statements saying that he’s scoring more with third liners than his elite teammates… what is that, relatively or something?

Here are the players with a goal or an assist on Makar’s 86 RS points:

Mackinnon 35

Rantanen 25

Kadri 24

Landeskog 16

Toews 16

Burakovsky 9

Nichushkin 9

Compher 8

Byram 6

Girard 6

Aube-Kubel 3

Helm 3

Annunen 2

Lehkonen 2

Newhook 1

I see now. They took Mackinnon’s points and put it vs the entire field. Nice.

Then they said he does better without Mackinnon than otherwise… what a joke.

 

[wetcoast]

Where did you find that?

I looked at a similar statement for another thread, and I’m pretty sure that Makar certainly didn’t. I’ve seen other statements saying that he’s scoring more with third liners than his elite teammates… what is that, relatively or something?

Here are the players with a goal or an assist on Makar’s 86 RS points:

Mackinnon 35

Rantanen 25

Kadri 24

Landeskog 16

Toews 16

Burakovsky 9

Nichushkin 9

Compher 8

Byram 6

Girard 6

Aube-Kubel 3

Helm 3

Annunen 2

Lehkonen 2

Newhook 1

The poster I referred too was major major and it was about rate not raw totals.

He plays more MPG with Mack than the other guys and I've been drinking today so maybe the
way I posted it made that point a bit unclear.

It's a bit like if 2 equally elite offensive Dman play in the NHL and one guy averages 3 MPG more more then he will likely score more points but that is different than rate....right?

He also had 32 points in the 22 games that Mack didn't play in as posted in post # 506 of this thread, that is a higher rate right?

 

[wetcoast]

I see now. They took Mackinnon’s points and put it vs the entire field. Nice.

Then they said he does better without Mackinnon than otherwise… what a joke.

You need to go back to post #506 by Girardspinorama (sorry I don't know how to highlight the user thing and I'm really drunk) where he stated that Makar had 32 points in the 22 games Mack missed if he is wrong then prove it, I took him at his word as he is a good poster.

 

[MaKarter]

So to sum it up, Makar isn't as good yet because he hasn't won the awards.

And also Makar shouldn't win the awards because he is on a stacked team.

 

[Lafleurs Guy]

You need to go back to post #506 by Girardspinorama (sorry I don't know how to highlight the user thing and I'm really drunk) where he stated that Makar had 32 points in the 22 games Mack missed if he is wrong then prove it, I took him at his word as he is a good poster.

I remember it was another poster. I took him at his word too.

And in his defense, he probably didn't realize the implications of what he was saying.

So to sum it up, Makar isn't as good yet because he hasn't won the awards.

And also Makar shouldn't win the awards because he is on a stacked team.

I love it when people start a post with "to sum up" and then proceed to lay out strawamn stuff like this.

 

[Adam da bomb]

Hmm good debate. I imagine EK would rather a cup than some of those individual achievements though. Also, we are comparing it to two years in EK’s career vs now for Makar which is the OP but I wonder if Makar has a better peak than this.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

The poster I referred too was major major and it was about rate not raw totals.

He plays more MPG with Mack than the other guys and I've been drinking today so maybe the
way I posted it made that point a bit unclear.

It's a bit like if 2 equally elite offensive Dman play in the NHL and one guy averages 3 MPG more more then he will likely score more points but that is different than rate....right?

He also had 32 points in the 22 games that Mack didn't play in as posted in post # 506 of this thread, that is a higher rate right?

That’s a higher rate than his ppg per season yeah, but there seems to be some idea floating around about Makar not having been on the ice with MacKinnon/the other top forwards too much, or rather that his stats aren’t benefiting from them, which would have been super odd if true, and doesn’t seem to hold water when you examine his season.

That’s why I looked at his point shares.

The poster I originally replied who’d posted the idea, in another thread, had this to say when he ran the numbers himself:

I had to check the stats because I had heard this before. But as it turns out, while Makar's percentages are as good with or without MacKinnon, he plays more high event and thus better outscoring hockey with Nate. So his offense seems to be tied to MacKinnon to an extent.
19-22:
Makar with MacKinnon 5vs5: 4.25 gf/60 2.55 ga/60
Makar without MacKinnon 5vs5 3.05/60 1.76 ga/60

So what I deduce: more high event hockey and more offense created playing with MacKinnon, but the GF/GA is fairly equal/positive without him considering that the GA drops as well.

The point share exercise I also did with Karlsson’s 2015-16 season, as they were the seasons compared in the thread and as there was the idea that Karlsson relied more on his teammates for his scoring. Karlsson had 21 individual teammates in on his 82 points, as compared to 15 for Makar. Karlsson’s most frequent collaborators were Ryan (28), Zibanejad (25), Stone (24), Hoffman (21), Turris (13) and Pageau (9). Makar’s were as mentioned before MacKinnon (35), Rantanen (25), Kadri (16), Landeskog (16) and Burakovsky/Nichushkin (9 each).

Both of course did more damage playing with their best teammates, but if there’s a case for one being able to produce regardless of his teammates, in my opinion based on the stats I’ve seen, Karlsson seemed to prove it more often in his peak season than Makar did this time.

 

[Yozhik v tumane]

The poster I referred too was major major and it was about rate not raw totals.

He plays more MPG with Mack than the other guys and I've been drinking today so maybe the
way I posted it made that point a bit unclear.

It's a bit like if 2 equally elite offensive Dman play in the NHL and one guy averages 3 MPG more more then he will likely score more points but that is different than rate....right?

I realize I neglected to address this part of the post directly. I’m not a statistical wizard, however if the GF/GA rates i quoted in the previous post are correct, I think perhaps that they would somewhat rebuke the notion that Makar (or his team when he was on the ice) had a higher scoring pace without MacKinnon… But maybe we’re having different discussions? I’m not drunk right now, I just haven’t slept.

 

[wetcoast]

I realize I neglected to address this part of the post directly. I’m not a statistical wizard, however if the GF/GA rates i quoted in the previous post are correct, I think perhaps that they would somewhat rebuke the notion that Makar (or his team when he was on the ice) had a higher scoring pace without MacKinnon… But maybe we’re having different discussions? I’m not drunk right now, I just haven’t slept.

I think the important thing to gleam from this is that both guys drove offense in their primes to try to say one was better than the other one because of team mates isn't anything that is going to be fruitful.

Either way I think that Makar has had a better 3 year prime than EK but if people think differently it's not something anyone can prove as they are close.

I think the distance will happen with their playoff resumes, it's already there and longevity after their primes in that Makar hit the ground running faster than EK did and could avoid the downturn in EK's career post Ottawa but one never knows with injuries.

 

[stator]

Offensively, no. Karlsson's highest points season happened on his 3rd year in the NHL. Makar is not close to this on his 3rd year.

I do agree with others here that stated that Makar is more rounded of a defenseman. Particularly if one compares current Maker with current Karlsson. Karlsson cannot play defense well at this point. His GPs numbers have been declining. To me, it's clear EK's past injuries have caught up to him and is what's keeping him from playing better.

My prediction is he will not be able to play to the end of his contract, but will be on LTIR to retirement near the end of it. But hey, even Jumbo played at 42 this year but only contributed name recognition and experience, not his playing ability. So there's hope for EK.

 

[PatrikBerglund]

Erik Karlsson took part in two best on best international tournaments during his prime (Olympics & World Cup). He was voted best defenceman in both of them.

Don't let the fact that he's been garbage for several years now, take away what he did when he was healthy and had his prime years.

 

[sprongshowhky]

Is Cale Makar a dynasty?