norrisnick
The best...
- Apr 14, 2005
- 28,861
- 18,000
How will Erik Karlsson be remembered?
- Thread starter Matsun
- Start date
Yozhik v tumane
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2019
- 1,875
- 2,490
That’s right Bonvie, you heard me! And that part was directed at you especially.
You no good, highfalutin’ eye test monkey.
overpass
Registered User
- Jun 7, 2007
- 5,287
- 4,432
From Hockey Draft Central’s Phil Housley page:
84-85 sounds like the season with really significant time at forward, but as you say the stat line doesn’t really look any different.
frisco
Some people claim that there's a woman to blame...
Housley himself said he played 50 GP at center according The Hockey News. That's seems close to what everyone was thinking. It's actually a bit a tribute to his skill. I can't imagine Al MacInnis or Larry Murphy or someone being able to take shifts at center. Not, that they weren't tremendous players, but Housley was pretty unequaled as a skater. Actually, if I were to name a currently player who reminds of Housley, it wouldn't be a d-man. It might be Jack Hughes.
My Best-Carey
My Best-Carey
Michael Farkas
Celebrate 68
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 16,154
- 7,387
Barring that insane game from MacKinnon, Karlsson would have led the league in ES scoring...what could have been!
ChiTownPhilly
Not Too Soft
I went looking for his Even-Strength Goals Against this year- couldn't readily find it... but I DID find his Total Opponent Goals On Ice For this year- and it was Chart-Topping.
Yeah, I know he was the Time-On-Ice leader on a wretched team- but Goals Against One's Own Team is a Hit Parade where you really don't want to be in Position One.
I'm sure he's going to be bye-d into the Norris- and it's like yelling at a cloud to try to stand in the way of that-- and good for him for having a bounce-back year where he went from being someone who was on the short-list of NHL negative-value contracts to someone who might actually be worth assets to acquire.
Two Number Ones as an asking price was silly talk, though. Whatever Front-Office genius decided to float that out there didn't do anything quite so much as alienate and insult the intelligence of potential suitors. I can't image Karlsson himself could have been too happy about it, either.
Yeah, I know he was the Time-On-Ice leader on a wretched team- but Goals Against One's Own Team is a Hit Parade where you really don't want to be in Position One.
I'm sure he's going to be bye-d into the Norris- and it's like yelling at a cloud to try to stand in the way of that-- and good for him for having a bounce-back year where he went from being someone who was on the short-list of NHL negative-value contracts to someone who might actually be worth assets to acquire.
Two Number Ones as an asking price was silly talk, though. Whatever Front-Office genius decided to float that out there didn't do anything quite so much as alienate and insult the intelligence of potential suitors. I can't image Karlsson himself could have been too happy about it, either.
NHL Stats
The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.
www.nhl.com
by far the most ESGA. then again, he's second in ESGF. NHL Stats
pretty clear what this year was for karlsson. low-stakes, high-event, individualist hockey. norris by default because makar was injured and there was no narrative around anybody else (by the numbers quinn hughes looks very good for instance but he doesn't have the reputation yet).
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 16,154
- 7,387
How do the numbers look when you factor in empty-net goals for/against? I believe he's been on the ice for nearly 20 ESGA this season...NHL Stats
The official source for NHL Stats including skaters, goalies, teams stats and more.
by far the most ESGA. then again, he's second in ESGF. NHL Stats
pretty clear what this year was for karlsson. low-stakes, high-event, individualist hockey. norris by default because makar was injured and there was no narrative around anybody else (by the numbers quinn hughes looks very good for instance but he doesn't have the reputation yet).
Yozhik v tumane
Registered User
- Jan 2, 2019
- 1,875
- 2,490
What to make of that though?
The leaders of the category are usually good players on bad teams, such as McDavid finishing 2nd behind Chabot in 2019. Even so, Duncan Keith led the category in 2010 and 2011.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,266
- 17,431
What kills Karlsson's plus/minus is EN goal situations. He played more than 50 minutes without a goalie (#6 in the league). That doesn't surprise me - the Sharks were a bad team (so they were in a position to pull their goalie a lot), and Karlsson was their best scorer (so he got most of the ice time in that situation). His GAA in those situations was bad, but not terrible.
That's one of the design flaws in plus/minus - someone like Karlsson (who's entrusted by his coach in these situations) gets heavily penalized. (He was on the ice for 21 goals against with his goalie pulled - compared to just 4 goals for).
At 5-on-5, Karlsson was even (96 GF, 96 GA) on a team that was horrific without him (72 GF, 124 GA). The Sharks, when Karlsson was on the ice, had 5-on-5 results comparable to Minnessota and Pittsburgh. Without Karlsson, they had the worst results in the league (behind even Columbus, Chicago and Anaheim).
I agree Karlsson played loose, high-event hockey. He created a ton of chances both for and against his team. He was poor defensively if we're talking about defense in isolation. But he was still a huge plus for the Sharks.
That's one of the design flaws in plus/minus - someone like Karlsson (who's entrusted by his coach in these situations) gets heavily penalized. (He was on the ice for 21 goals against with his goalie pulled - compared to just 4 goals for).
At 5-on-5, Karlsson was even (96 GF, 96 GA) on a team that was horrific without him (72 GF, 124 GA). The Sharks, when Karlsson was on the ice, had 5-on-5 results comparable to Minnessota and Pittsburgh. Without Karlsson, they had the worst results in the league (behind even Columbus, Chicago and Anaheim).
I agree Karlsson played loose, high-event hockey. He created a ton of chances both for and against his team. He was poor defensively if we're talking about defense in isolation. But he was still a huge plus for the Sharks.
Last edited:
also worth pointing out that his +/- only really tanked after the trade deadline. up to that point it looks comparable to (but better than) a year like his 15-16 where he also bled goals against but more than made up for it offensively.
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,770
- 7,184
Karlsson lead the league by 100 minutes over anyone else in EV time on ice on a bad team and being a high event player
Would be extraordinary not to find him at the top of the goals against (Keith was playing 100+ minutes more than anyone else)
Looking at the 60 minutes would make more sense, looking at raw goal against would hurt the people being good enough to play more than others and we would find Gretzky-Bourque really high I would imagine.
No one would look at raw goal against a goaltender during a season and finding strange how many goals against Brodeur had versus his number 2 among his career.
Among Sharks Ds, with 600 minute of 5v5, Karlsson was among the worstt:
But with a GF neutral-positive his pair was by far the best overall. That said coaches deployed it in a optimal fashion (really high offensive zone start)
Would be extraordinary not to find him at the top of the goals against (Keith was playing 100+ minutes more than anyone else)
Looking at the 60 minutes would make more sense, looking at raw goal against would hurt the people being good enough to play more than others and we would find Gretzky-Bourque really high I would imagine.
No one would look at raw goal against a goaltender during a season and finding strange how many goals against Brodeur had versus his number 2 among his career.
Among Sharks Ds, with 600 minute of 5v5, Karlsson was among the worstt:
But with a GF neutral-positive his pair was by far the best overall. That said coaches deployed it in a optimal fashion (really high offensive zone start)
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 1,768
- 2,353
I looked into this in another thread (also possibly this thread, lol)
defensemen who log a ton of minutes show up in this stat a lot. I can’t say for certain who LEAD the league before, but I remember that some of the names who were top ten in this stat before were - Bourque, Lidstrom, Coffey, Harvey, Kelly, Pilote, i think Niedermayer… etc.
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 1,768
- 2,353
I think Karlsson this year ihas done something, strictly offensively, far beyond anything Housley did.
Housley’s 97 point season, for instance, was in the total spike year of 92-93. He had one exceptional teammate and other solid ones. He had 50 assists on the powerplay. This is where dmen typically rack up points.
Im not sure if I am seeing it wrong, or others are, but, from my perspective it seems like not everyone can see just how rare it is for a dman to lead/nearly lead the NHL at even strength production, while doing it alone.
Nearly every dman who has ever had a big year has done so on the PP, on a strong to dynastic team, and has been one of many important cogs in the machine.
Hockey Outsider
Registered User
- Jan 16, 2005
- 9,266
- 17,431
Defensemen who have led their team in scoring by 10+ points
I'm not certain that I've captured everyone, but I'll present this as a starting point - let me know if I'm missing anyone.
| Season | Team | Player | Points | 2nd | Difference |
2023 | SJS | KARLSSON, ERIK | 101 | 67 | 34 |
1987 | BOS | BOURQUE, RAY | 95 | 72 | 23 |
1970 | BOS | ORR, BOBBY | 120 | 99 | 21 |
1992 | WIN | HOUSLEY, PHIL | 86 | 65 | 21 |
2016 | OTT | KARLSSON, ERIK | 82 | 61 | 21 |
2009 | NYI | STREIT, MARK | 56 | 39 | 17 |
2020 | NSH | JOSI, ROMAN | 65 | 48 | 17 |
1991 | NYR | LEETCH, BRIAN | 88 | 73 | 15 |
1993 | OTT | MACIVER, NORM | 63 | 48 | 15 |
1975 | NYI | POTVIN, DENIS | 76 | 62 | 14 |
1985 | BOS | BOURQUE, RAY | 86 | 76 | 10 |
2017 | OTT | KARLSSON, ERIK | 71 | 61 | 10 |
2022 | NSH | JOSI, ROMAN | 96 | 86 | 10 |
I'm not certain that I've captured everyone, but I'll present this as a starting point - let me know if I'm missing anyone.
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 1,768
- 2,353
One thing that jumps out to me, although it’s small sample size and I am definitely suffering from seeing what I want to see (there is a better term for this that I am not digging out of the old brain right now) is that both Housley and Leetch had great season leading a weak team, much like what Karlsson has done this year - seasons of 86 and 88 points respectively. Both went to immediately post their best ever raw point seasons the year after - 97 and 102. Both did not lead the team in scoring that year, as one picked up Selanne and one picked up Messier.
I say this after participating in these threads about Karlsson’s year this last two months, in regards to those claiming that it’s easier for (a dman!) him to produce when he is the only good option. Previously I had mentioned that the incredible Ray Bourque had never eclipsed 100pts, while playing in the 80s, very healthy the whole time, and that of all the great dmen, he had had the weakest supporting cast. Between that, the immediate jump to the 100 pt level for these two, and the 10 point drop in production Vs pace that Karlsson himself experienced upon losing Meier…. Well, I have reinforced my bias… Confirmation BiasM that’s the term, haha
TheGoldenJet
Registered User
I wonder whether Karlsson has a good shot at the dubious title of having the worst +/- of any Hall of famer by the time he retires?
MadLuke
Registered User
- Jan 18, 2011
- 9,770
- 7,184
-213 is high of a low bar.
Would need to keep the impressive -.26 a game as a Sharks pace for an others 426 games which would be 6-7 seasons for him, he his 32 so possible, but could be hard to maintain, you need to play a lot (outside really atrocious scenario) and be on the first power play unit to rack minus like that.
Karlsson gained a nice -11 from playing on the power play this year a new career high.
Last edited:
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 1,768
- 2,353
Well, I had to look up and find Leo Boivin and his -212. Karlsson at -103.
unlikely, but definitely possible if he stays healthy and on a bad team. Could potentially also scratch back to zero if he plays 5 healthy years on a good team.
Beat me, also…. Those Sharks, man. I dunno. I am a fair weather fan and try not to watch terrible hockey, so they probably aren’t as bad as I think they are, as in - there are probably usually a handful of teams each year where it hurts to watch them. But damn, are they ever terrible. I guess I tuned in 10 times down this stretch, and it never even seems like they MIGHT win. It’s in their end all the time, they can’t pass or receive passes. Doesnt seem like anyone can shoot very well. Lose most of their battles…. Barf.
Edit - Btw, can anybody explain why Leo Boivin made the Hall??? No production, never a good year for plus minus, one fifth place finish in Norris voting, one tenth. Nothing special in playoffs and no Cups?? Huh? Has essentially zero accolades, team or personal.
Last edited:
TheGoldenJet
Registered User
I do think this will be the case. The Sharks are never going to get a haul for Karlsson like they would have this year, and they still couldn’t make it work, money wise. His contract will keep him there and his play will likely regress soon, which will also keep him in SJ while on his current deal.
Dingo
Registered User
- Jul 13, 2018
- 1,768
- 2,353
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
Roster Building Trade/FA thread: Part XXII (Yes, the playoffs are still going on...) (53 Viewers)- Latest: Mac n Gs
-
-
-
-
HF Habs: Trade Proposal Thread #93: Y'all got any more of those 2nd line centers out there? (89 Viewers)- Latest: Adam Michaels