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

[umma gumma]

No disrespect to Makar who is incredible, but people forget just how good Erik Karlsson was in his prime.

Indeed. They see EK in SJ and think that's the way he's always been.

The season he lead the league in assists, Karlsson would have been the leading scorer on 90% of the teams in the league (27/30). By comparison, this year Makar would have been the leading scorer on 59% (19/32), which is still impressive, but that is a large gap. Josi would be the top scorer on 75% of the them.

 

[wetcoast]

Oh now what matters is how many years a part they played, not the fact that they played in separate eras, that's not enough now. I guess we're moving the goalposts yet again, seems to be a bit of a habit with you.

Btw the difference of the league average scoring between 1981 (Kent Nilssons' 131 point season) to 2022 is 0.6. The difference between 2022 and 2016 is 0.43. Pretty close.


What is your point? You don't have a point...

My point was pretty clear, your choosing to ignore it is clear as well.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

My point was pretty clear, your choosing to ignore it is clear as well.

I'm ignoring you, because you have not made any sense in this thread at any point. Your last "point" didn't even make sense as a sentence, let alone a legitimate argument. Like I legitimately don't even know what you were trying to say.

If you want to take another crack at articulating yourself, then be my guest.

 

[wetcoast]

I'm ignoring you, because you have not made any sense in this thread at any point. Your last "point" didn't even make sense as a sentence, let alone a legitimate argument. Like I legitimately don't even know what you were trying to say.

If you want to take another crack at articulating yourself, then be my guest.

The point was extremely clear, EK and his 5 on 5 advantage in points in his best season simply isn't there when you look at context.

But I think you know that, thus the distraction.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

The point was extremely clear, EK and his 5 on 5 advantage in points in his best season simply isn't there when you look at context.

But I think you know that, thus the distraction.

Oh now we're looking at context? LMAO the irony is hilarious. This is coming from the guy who constantly spouts off garbage about "if Karlsson is so good, why isn't he that good in San Jose on a better team".

The whole point of bringing up 5v5 points was for the people who refuse to acknowledge the context in the first place and just want to look at raw points. Well I gave you your raw points, but now all of a sudden you want to talk about context. Absolute comedy here.

 

[Panthaz89]

Why? Because his team missed the playoffs, and the Canadian media decided Drew Doughty was going to win a Norris that year no matter what. But that wasn't your point, you said that they didn't recognize Karlsson. By that logic, if Makar is so great, why hasn't he been recognized by the Norris voters? Guy has 0 Norris trophies, obviously nobody thinks he's that great.

Funny how the goalposts continue to move with every post. Don't be like your King's fan buddy, strawman and ignoring the legitimate points when they get brought up. Don't do that man, I want to hear a rebuttal.

Doughty was a better player than Karlsson not only did he put up pretty good numbers on offense he was a complete wall on defense during his prime....

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

Doughty was a better player than Karlsson not only did he put up pretty good numbers on offense he was a complete wall on defense during his prime....

Cool story. Very convincing.

Doughty doesn't hold Karlsson's jock strap. Goodbye.

 

[Panthaz89]

Cool story. Very convincing.

Doughty doesn't hold Karlsson's jock strap. Goodbye.

one guy let the slowest of players consistently beat him while the other stopped the best of the best....

 

[wetcoast]

Oh now we're looking at context? LMAO the irony is hilarious. This is coming from the guy who constantly spouts off garbage about "if Karlsson is so good, why isn't he that good in San Jose on a better team".

The whole point of bringing up 5v5 points was for the people who refuse to acknowledge the context in the first place and just want to look at raw points. Well I gave you your raw points, but now all of a sudden you want to talk about context. Absolute comedy here.

Here once again is the context in reply to your claim that EK was the better 5 on 5 player (obviously only in terms of offense as your post didn't reefer to overall play)

You are right, I check EK had 56 ESP in 82 games in 15-16 while averaging 23:50 MPG while Makar had 52 ESP in 77 games while averaging 20:25 MPG at ES.

Clearly another example showing......absolutely zilch in your "argument."

EK had a grand total of 4 more 5 on 5 points in 5 more games played and in the games they played (EK with 82 and Makar with 77) EK's ES ice time was 23:25 MPG while Makar was at 20:25

You are once again avoiding the obvious as your claim has zero merit.

Thus all of your distraction away from the context.

The San Jose thing is the obvious response to posters like you , who always claimed how much better EK would look on a better team, which didn't happen partly to injuries but it's still out there.

We all get that you think higher of EK than most but your arguments and rational are simply really lacking at times.

The annoying part is the obvious distraction which probably indicates that you know that the argument is weak.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

one guy let the slowest of players consistently beat him while the other stopped the best of the best....

One guy won the most undeserving Norris since Rod Langway, the other has 2 of them and was the runner-up twice.

There's a reason the title is asking if Makar is better than prime Karlsson and not prime Doughty. Because Karlsson was the dman of his generation. Nobody cares about Doughty lol, and nobody cares about you trying to derail the thread to make it about him either.

Here once again is the context in reply to your claim that EK was the better 5 on 5 player (obviously only in terms of offense as your post didn't reefer to overall play)



EK had a grand total of 4 more 5 on 5 points in 5 more games played and in the games they played (EK with 82 and Makar with 77) EK's ES ice time was 23:25 MPG while Makar was at 20:25

You are once again avoiding the obvious as your claim has zero merit.

Thus all of your distraction away from the context.

So let me get this straight... the guy who is trusted to play less minutes at even strength, and who puts up less points (in a significantly higher scoring season, on a significantly higher scoring team)... is somehow better because you're trying to use per 60 stats? Beautiful mental gymnastics here. Your logic is truly baffling at this point.

 

[Panthaz89]

One guy won the most undeserving Norris since Rod Langway, the other has 2 of them and was the runner-up twice.

There's a reason the title is asking if Makar is better than prime Karlsson and not prime Doughty. Because Karlsson was the dman of his generation. Nobody cares about Doughty lol, and nobody cares about you trying to derail the thread to make it about him either.

really? undeserving how many people on this site were advocating him for the Norris during that year....cause he actually played consistently on both ends of the ice. No Karlsson isn't considered the best D-man of of his generation you don't get to decide that a lot of people thought Doughty was better with out without the cups. Why do you think people aren't just throwing Quinn Hughes in the top 5 because of his offense because his defense was bad before this season but at least I can say he improved at that unlike Karlsson who looked lost on D outside of ONE playoff run.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

really? undeserving how many people on this site were advocating him for the Norris during that year....cause he actually played consistently on both ends of the ice. No Karlsson isn't considered the best D-man of of his generation you don't get to decide that a lot of people thought Doughty was better with out without the cups.

Do you actually think you have the majority opinion about Karlsson vs Doughty? Because from your post here it kind of sounds like you think most people consider Doughty to be better than Karlsson.

The top 100 NHL players of the decade

Sid, Ovi and Connor headline our ranking of the best of the 2010s. Where did all of the top stars land?

www.espn.com

The 10 best NHL players of the decade

The reign of the elite two-way center is reflected in the players who dominated the past 10 years. We count down the best men's players of the era and yes, it's a controversial list.

thehockeynews.com

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time

Here it is: Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time (Part 2) Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time (The Third) The following is the final list of the top #101-200 hockey players of all-time as determined by 17 voting members of the History of Hockey community...

hfboards.mandatory.com

This isn't even about Doughty. Stop derailing the conversation, it's against the forums rules. Go make a poll if you're so curious.

 

[Panthaz89]

Do you actually think you have the majority opinion about Karlsson vs Doughty? Because from your post here it kind of sounds like you think most people consider Doughty to be better than Karlsson.

The top 100 NHL players of the decade

Sid, Ovi and Connor headline our ranking of the best of the 2010s. Where did all of the top stars land?

www.espn.com

The 10 best NHL players of the decade

The reign of the elite two-way center is reflected in the players who dominated the past 10 years. We count down the best men's players of the era and yes, it's a controversial list.

thehockeynews.com

Top-200 Hockey Players of All-Time

Here it is: Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time (Part 2) Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time (The Third) The following is the final list of the top #101-200 hockey players of all-time as determined by 17 voting members of the History of Hockey community...

hfboards.mandatory.com

This isn't even about Doughty. Stop derailing the conversation, it's against the forums rules. Go make a poll if you're so curious.

You are the one who literally brought up Doughty not me but ok but one of your points on why he was so great was because he got the Norris "stolen" from him when the guy infact looked like a forward playing D for the majority of his career and when people exaggerate on a guy like Q.Hughes from 1-2 years ago playing bad D it was still considerably better than even what Karlsson did on D for most of his prime. Makar on top of playing excellent offense actually is consdirably good on D not the best in the game but one of the best. I got to see a lot of Ottawa games when Karlsson was playing he was the greatest example of a sellout D-man as you can find.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

You are the one who literally brought up Doughty not me but ok but one of your points on why he was so great was because he got the Norris "stolen" from him when the guy infact looked like a forward playing D for the majority of his career and when people exaggerate on a guy like Q.Hughes from 1-2 years ago playing bad D it was still considerably better than even what Karlsson did on D for most of his prime. Makar on top of playing excellent offense actually is consdirably good on D not the best in the game but one of the best. I got to see a lot of Ottawa games when Karlsson was playing he was the greatest example of a sellout D-man as you can find.

Ok you said your piece, and completely lost any credibility. Move on, not interested in debating with people who have no interest in a legitimate debate. Clear as day you did not watch Karlsson in his prime, so I really don't care what you have to say.

 

[wetcoast]

So let me get this straight... the guy who is trusted to play less minutes at even strength, and who puts up less points (in a significantly higher scoring season, on a significantly higher scoring team)... is somehow better because you're trying to use per 60 stats? Beautiful mental gymnastics here. Your logic is truly baffling at this point.

Trusted to play less minutes are you kidding or what?

This is the usual 2 sided bs you bring up, EK played more MPG not because he was more trusted than Makar but because he was on a crappy team but sure try to have it both ways.

There is zero evidence that Makar couldn't be trusted to play more, in fact when the games are tougher, ie in the playoffs he has been playing more and is the leading scorer on a much better team so that's the problem with the logic box you have out yourself in.

We already brought up the adjusted part as well

EK adjusted has a line of 82-18-74-92 and Makar has one of 77-26-57-83 and then there is that extra TOI so its statistically insignificant.

You are also incorrect Makar put up more points than EK in lesser games but I understand context so it's not that simple as saying that 86 is better than 82.

The only thing that is baffling here is your distortion and distraction.

 

[Panda Bear]

Lidstrom sure played on a lot of crappy teams what with the minutes he got.

 

[Taishici]

Karlsson is both overrated and underrated. He's extremely overrated by Senator fans and some others. But recently has become underrated by a large group of fans on these boards.

A lot of people don't realize what kind impact on the game he had on outside his offensive numbers.

He's behind only Doughty in my mind for best Dman of his generation.

So for me, and as for now, I still rate Karlsson higher than Makar.

But at the rate Makar is going he will be in a group of legendary players one day. I wonder how high his ceiling is? I still see some areas he can improve on the defensive side of things, but surely he can't continue to improve offensively can he?

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

Trusted to play less minutes are you kidding or what?

This is the usual 2 sided bs you bring up, EK played more MPG not because he was more trusted than Makar but because he was on a crappy team but sure try to have it both ways.

Is that why Devon Toews played more minutes at 5v5 than Makar this year? Because Makar plays on too good of a team? Why don't you try to explain that one to me. Lets see these gymnastics at work.

There is zero evidence that Makar couldn't be trusted to play more, in fact when the games are tougher, ie in the playoffs he has been playing more and is the leading scorer on a much better team so that's the problem with the logic box you have out yourself in.

Devon Toews led Colorado on 5v5 toi/gp (and he's doing it in the playoffs too), so there's some problem with this hypothetical. Not that a hypothetical is very convincing in the first place.

It doesn't even matter what the reasoning is behind Makar playing less at 5v5 than Karlsson, the fact of the matter is that playing more minutes is a positive. Only in your twisted mental gymnastics is it more impressive to play less minutes.

 

[wetcoast]

Is that why Devon Toews played more minutes at 5v5 than Makar this year? Because Makar plays on too good of a team? Why don't you try to explain that one to me. Lets see these gymnastics at work.

Seriously 27 more seconds a game and he played in 66 games to Makar's 77 it's not a difference even worth discussing.

but again a distraction from the 3 MPG difference in ES time between EK and Makar right?

Devon Toews led Colorado on 5v5 toi/gp (and he's doing it in the playoffs too), so there's some problem with this hypothetical. Not that a hypothetical is very convincing in the first place.

A big nothing burger as usual.

It doesn't even matter what the reasoning is behind Makar playing less at 5v5 than Karlsson, the fact of the matter is that playing more minutes is a positive. Only in your twisted mental gymnastics is it more impressive to play less minutes.

It has nothing to do with being a positive or negative as these are team choices based on many factors.

The context of that TOI was in response to your claim that EK was a better ES (5 on 5) producer than Makar which simply doesn't hold up when a little context is added.

the problem, as usual, is that you only want to look at partial context and when it doesn't favor your weak argument all of this distortion arises.

People can see how elite Makar is both ways right now.

Analyzing what makes Cale Makar different from other great defencemen

Cale Makar is averaging 1.57 points per game in the playoffs, a time of year when it's supposed to be harder to create. What makes him different? Justin Bourne looks into Makar's wide array of talents.

www.sportsnet.ca

 

[x Tame Impala]

If you had any credibility left, it's gone. Are you even interested in having a legitimate debate, or are you just saying shocking stuff to get a laugh? It's pretty disrespectful to Lafleurs Guy who has been nothing but class in this thread and has respectfully provided excellent posts time and time again. You're just intent on saying ridiculous stuff that just makes your argument look silly.

If you think Karlsson had a better career than Kieth or Hedman you’re out of you’re freaking mind.

 

[umma gumma]

If you think Karlsson had a better career than Kieth or Hedman you’re out of you’re freaking mind.

This thread is about Karlsson's prime, not his career. Karlsson had already won a Norris at the same age that Keith made his NHL debut, and was on the verge of winning his 2nd.

 

[TheBeard]

If you think Karlsson had a better career than Kieth or Hedman you’re out of you’re freaking mind.

EK was better in his prime, but what makes the other two so good is that their primes lasted significantly longer.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

Seriously 27 more seconds a game and he played in 66 games to Makar's 77 it's not a difference even worth discussing.

but again a distraction from the 3 MPG difference in ES time between EK and Makar right?

Well actually in these playoffs Toews is averaging over a minute more at ES than Makar. Makar is also averaging less toi at ES in the playoffs than he did in the regular season. So again, there goes your claim that he's been relied upon more. So you just completely fabricated a claim that you based on absolutely nothing. Nice job, really doing wonders for the credibility of your arguments.

A big nothing burger as usual.



It has nothing to do with being a positive or negative as these are team choices based on many factors.

Yes it does have to do with that. No NHL player thinks "oh well he just puts up points because he plays a lot". Ask every one of them, the more minutes you play, the harder it is in general. Not a single NHL player would ever look at Karlsson's average of 23 minutes of even strength and think "oh so that's going to pad his stats".

The context of that TOI was in response to your claim that EK was a better ES (5 on 5) producer than Makar which simply doesn't hold up when a little context is added.

the problem, as usual, is that you only want to look at partial context and when it doesn't favor your weak argument all of this distortion arises.

The only "context" you've offered is that Makar produces at a higher per 60 rate than Karlsson did. That doesn't mean he produces more. You know who produces more? The guy who puts up more points.

And then you have the gall to claim I want to only look at "partial context" when you're the one stuck up on per 60 and that's the only context you've brought up and are hanging your entire argument on that (even though Josi would then be a better ES player than Makar if we follow your logic). It's literally the only thing you have, and it's worth nothing. You just continuously ignore the substantial difference in league scoring.

In fact if you adjust their ES totals, it becomes even more damning. Karlsson has 63 ES points, and Makar has 50 ES.
P/60 Karlsson: 2.01
P/60 Makar: 1.91

So you said you wanted context. Well there it is, when taking into account ice time, and the differences in league scoring, Karlsson outproduced Makar at ES. And that's not even considering how vastly different their two teams were in terms of offensive weapons at their disposal.

People can see how elite Makar is both ways right now.

Analyzing what makes Cale Makar different from other great defencemen

Cale Makar is averaging 1.57 points per game in the playoffs, a time of year when it's supposed to be harder to create. What makes him different? Justin Bourne looks into Makar's wide array of talents.

www.sportsnet.ca

Nobody here is saying Makar isn't elite.

 

[LosPollosHermanos]

Karlsson never knew how to actually defend, so i'd say yes...
Fox is better than both though.

 

[Eltuna]

He routinely didn't win it? He's won it two times more than Makar has lmao. Only 9 defensemen in NHL history won it more times than he has.

One more time