Confirmed with Link: (NAS/MTL) Shea Weber for P.K. Subban

[glenngineer]

One of the reasons I'd say Chicago is so good because their defensemen are so good with the puck. Having a top 4 like we now do, we should control a lot of the action. While it'll suck to lose some of the physicality and intimidation that Weber brought, I think being able to move the puck up ice with either good passing or the ability to skate up ice will transform the attack greatly. That's just me though.

 

[triggrman]

One of the reasons I'd say Chicago is so good because their defensemen are so good with the puck. Having a top 4 like we now do, we should control a lot of the action. While it'll suck to lose some of the physicality and intimidation that Weber brought, I think being able to move the puck up ice with either good passing or the ability to skate up ice will transform the attack greatly. That's just me though.

Agreed and I think DRW gave us the blueprint on that for years with Lidstrom.

But there's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[nomorekids]

Circling back to it one more time, this sums up what I've been saying, but from a legit "hockey guy:"

 

[Pred303]

"defense isn't about defending". this quote is ridiculous. makes me cringe as a hockey guy. typical of the always trying to copy the last team to be successful and adopt any new thought coming along. if this is the standard. marek zidlicky was one of the best defensemen of the last decade and karlsson is the greatest player that ever lived... despite neither having any real positive impact on their team's overall success.

it's a blend of both of course, defense first with puck moving ability next for all DEFENSEMEN. that's why they are defensemen. to frigging defend.

 

[vipera1960]

"defense isn't about defending". this quote is ridiculous. makes me cringe as a hockey guy. typical of the always trying to copy the last team to be successful and adopt any new thought coming along. if this is the standard. marek zidlicky was one of the best defensemen of the last decade and karlsson is the greatest player that ever lived... despite neither having any real positive impact on their team's overall success.

it's a blend of both of course, defense first with puck moving ability next for all DEFENSEMEN. that's why they are defensemen. to frigging defend.

Yes and no. The job of a defenseman is threefold: stop the opposition from scoring, gain possession of the puck, and transition the play into the offensive zone. The problem is that there are no statistics that accurately measure all of these components together (in other words, a Total Defence Rating), which makes it hard to compare one player against another.

 

[bdub24]

Yes and no. The job of a defenseman is threefold: stop the opposition from scoring, gain possession of the puck, and transition the play into the offensive zone. The problem is that there are no statistics that accurately measure all of these components together (in other words, a Total Defence Rating), which makes it hard to compare one player against another.

aren't those three objectives everybody's job on the team when on the ice?

 

[KurtAngle]

I've said it many times and will say it again....I can't see how Weber goes from a top 3 defenseman to an "average" at best guy in a span of a month.

Just boggles my mind.

Let's put Mr. Analytics behind the bench as coach if his judgement is the end all be all.

Numbers and analytics DO count, but mainly as a tool along with what the coach feels and sees.

Preds are better long term with Subban but it's going to be much more of an adjustment than many think.

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

I've said it many times and will say it again....I can't see how Weber goes from a top 3 defenseman to an "average" at best guy in a span of a month.

Just boggles my mind.

Let's put Mr. Analytics behind the bench as coach if his judgement is the end all be all.

Numbers and analytics DO count, but mainly as a tool along with what the coach feels and sees.

Preds are better long term with Subban but it's going to be much more of an adjustment than many think.

And I've said it before...I don't see anyone calling Weber an "average at best" defenseman. You seem to be putting words in the mouth of the entire fan base, and I don't see anyone claiming this despite you repeating this often.

 

[nomorekids]

"defense isn't about defending". this quote is ridiculous. makes me cringe as a hockey guy. typical of the always trying to copy the last team to be successful and adopt any new thought coming along. if this is the standard. marek zidlicky was one of the best defensemen of the last decade and karlsson is the greatest player that ever lived... despite neither having any real positive impact on their team's overall success.

it's a blend of both of course, defense first with puck moving ability next for all DEFENSEMEN. that's why they are defensemen. to frigging defend.

I think you're focusing a little too strongly on the wording, when I think he was just trying to carry across an idea. Yes, obviously a defenseman should know what to do positionally, should be adept at reading and adjusting, good stick, all that...but his mindset should always be transition. If youre focused on jamming the puck on the boards and hoping to gain possession...if you have a corps of players with that mentality, you'll get killed.

The way it relates to Weber is that if you have a top 6 full of Weber-esque players, stylistically, your thought may be, "man, what a punishing unit to play against, they will give no quarter whatsoever," but the end result is going to be more time spent in the defensive zone and less quick transition attacking.

For what it's worth, Erik Karlsson is, IMO, not the best pure "defenseman" in the league, but he is the most valuable. Purists get frustrated and see it as a reduction of the game, but it's just looking at the types of plays that lead to success -- in the form of more goals for, less against, and by translation more wins.

 

[nomorekids]

I've said it many times and will say it again....I can't see how Weber goes from a top 3 defenseman to an "average" at best guy in a span of a month.

Just boggles my mind.

Let's put Mr. Analytics behind the bench as coach if his judgement is the end all be all.

Numbers and analytics DO count, but mainly as a tool along with what the coach feels and sees.

Preds are better long term with Subban but it's going to be much more of an adjustment than many think.

You're describing both Darryl Sutter and Joel Quenneville...both of which have been quoted as subscribing to this belief of defenseman...and it's why high end puck-movers like Keith, Seabrook, Doughty all have so much of the play channel through them. And it's why the Kings and Blackhawks are not only perennial contenders and the closest thing to a dynasty we have in the last 20 years, but why they're also routinely top 3-5 in possession. These are basically the teams that analytics guys point to and say, "see?"

 

[AtlantaWhaler]

I don't disagree with your comment. But they are calling him slow, poor passer, not a good transition player, inaccurate with his shot, "over the hill" or on the downside of his career and all sorts of other negative things in an all out effort to justify the Subban trade.
It WAS a good trade for the Preds because of how Subban's style fits Laviolette's style and his age. That's all that needs to be said. It's not necessary to criticize one of the best defense men in the NHL over most of his career. Weber has a great record with the Preds and P.K has 0 goals and 0 assists. I expect him to break out of that really quick but that's the current status. Everything is based on potential at this point.
If you really want to see negative comments go to the Montreal boards and listen to the Canadien media.
I'm really sorry a great player like Weber is being treated this way for no reason. His record stands for itself.

In all, I just see the advanced stats folks backing up the possession stuff. Coupled with a roller-coaster year and poor playoffs for Webs. Comparing that to calling him an average defender at best is miles apart and a massive over reaction.

 

[triggrman]

I think you're focusing a little too strongly on the wording, when I think he was just trying to carry across an idea. Yes, obviously a defenseman should know what to do positionally, should be adept at reading and adjusting, good stick, all that...but his mindset should always be transition. If youre focused on jamming the puck on the boards and hoping to gain possession...if you have a corps of players with that mentality, you'll get killed.

The way it relates to Weber is that if you have a top 6 full of Weber-esque players, stylistically, your thought may be, "man, what a punishing unit to play against, they will give no quarter whatsoever," but the end result is going to be more time spent in the defensive zone and less quick transition attacking.

For what it's worth, Erik Karlsson is, IMO, not the best pure "defenseman" in the league, but he is the most valuable. Purists get frustrated and see it as a reduction of the game, but it's just looking at the types of plays that lead to success -- in the form of more goals for, less against, and by translation more wins.

But does he get more goals for? Karlsson is on the ice for more goals at even or better than anyone else in the NHL and it's not close.

 

[triggrman]

Who is on with him when those goals are scored?

Since no one else has that many, I'll say no one in particular. There's seems to only be one common denominator.

Karlsson was on the ice for 101 even or better goals against, the next highest on Ottawa was Stone with 65.

In the league, Reilly comes in behind Karlsson at 87.

The closest Predators player to him is Josi with 75

He was on the ice for 99 goals for at even or short, which is funny since he scored so much. Pretty much if they scored with him on the ice, he was involved in it...

 

[nine_inch_fang]

I'm with Trig and 303. Karlsson is not a good defensemen because he can't defend. His positioning is horrible, his 1 on 1 tracking is horrible, and he lacks any physical presence.

LA and Chic are good because they have good defensemen that move the puck effectively and some elite level forwards that do the scoring after the puck comes to them.

 

[glenngineer]

Just got a text from my brother in Atlanta saying he spotted someone with a Subban jersey at the airport.

 

[nomorekids]

I'm with Trig and 303. Karlsson is not a good defensemen because he can't defend. His positioning is horrible, his 1 on 1 tracking is horrible, and he lacks any physical presence.

LA and Chic are good because they have good defensemen that move the puck effectively and some elite level forwards that do the scoring after the puck comes to them.

LA's scoring is actually typically pretty middle of the pack. Kopitar is who he is based on really good, but not elite offense...but packaged with an elite two-way game. The closest to an "elite" scorer they have is actually Jeff Carter. Also, Karlsson's defending is much, much better than you're giving it credit for. It's just become the de facto strawman for "Karlsson didn't deserve that Norris."

Here's some reading material on the topic...and while I already hear the "well, this is based on analytics, which I think are crap! I have WATCHED Karlsson!" coming...I guess that's your prerogative. At this point, virtually every team in the league is using them for player eval, and most have a fulltime position dedicated to it.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...ces--puck-daddy-power-rankings-183101463.html

The 20 coaches polled by Bob McKenzie this week to see who they thought should win the various awards really kicked a hornets' nest by saying Erik Karlsson was the clear Norris winner.

That's because people around the league are still like in 2012 and think he doesn't play defense or he's bad at defense or he doesn't care about defense. “Whatever, he's only good at offense, guys!”

Except that this isn't true and hasn't been for some time now. It turns out players get better as they age. And, wow, his minutes are getting more difficult, too? And he's still dominating the competition to a ludicrous extent. His corsi relative is 11th in the NHL among defensemen with at least 1,000 minutes at 5-on-5, and he's one of just five defensemen all year to play at least 1,500 minutes there (Drew Doughty, Ryan Suter, Roman Josi, and T.J. Brodie are the others). Of that group, his relative corsi is more than double the next-closest guy's.

a little later...

That tells a bit of a story, doesn't it? And sure, that's only offense, but it illustrates the extent to which Karlsson keeps play in his attacking end. If this was all he did — and the perception is that this is the case — then you'd have to at least say he's running the show when he's on the ice, which should really be all you want out of any player.

So let's consider his play in his own zone. Going back to the “all defensemen with at least 1,500 minutes this year” criteria, we can examine his play against the other four defensemen who get used the most in the league. And please keep in mind that you can't “hide” someone in your lineup from good competition when he's playing 1,500 minutes in 79 games.

Doughty is by far the best in terms of limiting opponent shooting attempts, allowing just 48.2 per 60 minutes. That's an insanely low number. Suter's a good ways back, at 53.3 per 60. And after that it's Karlsson at 54, which is worth about an extra two attempts every game or so.

Please remember that Suter is seen as a consummate defenseman, and Karlsson as a bum who couldn't find his way out of his own zone with a compass and a Boy Scout troop. And obviously if you're so opposed to Karlsson winning for whatever reason (you haven't watched a Senators game that closely since the most recent lockout, for instance), you'd argue well hey what about Doughty? And I'd argue, hey, what about how much better the Kings are than the Senators at possessing the puck in general? The Senators were awful for much of the year. Karlsson was one of the only things keeping them afloat.

 

[triggrman]

LA's scoring is actually typically pretty middle of the pack. Kopitar is who he is based on really good, but not elite offense...but packaged with an elite two-way game. The closest to an "elite" scorer they have is actually Jeff Carter. Also, Karlsson's defending is much, much better than you're giving it credit for. It's just become the de facto strawman for "Karlsson didn't deserve that Norris."

Here's some reading material on the topic...and while I already hear the "well, this is based on analytics, which I think are crap! I have WATCHED Karlsson!" coming...I guess that's your prerogative. At this point, virtually every team in the league is using them for player eval, and most have a fulltime position dedicated to it.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-p...ces--puck-daddy-power-rankings-183101463.html



a little later...

What you guys that love corsi fail to understand though is that if he's giving up prime scoring opportunities then they don't need as much scoring chances in the zone to score.

If he's so good at keeping the puck in the offensive end then why in gods name is he on the ice for more goals against than any other defenseman in the league? Isn't defense about defending your zone? I could care less if he only gives up 5 shots a game but they're all backdoor tap ins, then he wasn't good defensively.

Things I hate about corsi... All shots attempts are not scoring attempts, corsi doesn't know this. All shots are not equal, all scoring chances are not equal, corsi doesn't know this. Giving up goals is worse than giving low percentage shot attempts.

 

[nomorekids]

What you guys that love corsi fail to understand though is that if he's giving up prime scoring opportunities then they don't need as much scoring chances in the zone to score.

If he's so good at keeping the puck in the offensive end then why in gods name is he on the ice for more goals against than any other defenseman in the league? Isn't defense about defending your zone? I could care less if he only gives up 5 shots a game but they're all backdoor tap ins, then he wasn't good defensively.

Things I hate about corsi... All shots attempts are not scoring attempts, corsi doesn't know this. All shots are not equal, all scoring chances are not equal, corsi doesn't know this. Giving up goals is worse than giving low percentage shot attempts.

That's where measuring the relative corsi of his linemates comes in, and it basically says that the Sens have a lot of absolute garbage in their lineup. A goaltending tandem of Anderson and Hammond doesn't help matters much there, either.

And the latest wave of analytical measure(this article is a couple of years old) leans away from using pure Corsi, and does factor in the quality of the shot...ie, shots generated off of faceoff, shots from the slot, etc get weighted over an unscreened shot from just inside the blue line).

I get what you're saying..I really do, but taking it back to what I was saying, the idea being presented is that as a defenseman, the best thing you can do for your team is drive the play forward. High shot generation plays\high shot suppression. It doesn't mean that players that look bad in those columns are "bad" or that you can't get any satisfaction out of watching them. They're typically great penalty killers, for example...it's just saying that if you're leaning on them too heavily, it's not going to turn out well for you in the long run.

 

[Adz]

I think this is still about Weber/Subban and I have a question. Has Weber been to Montreal yet?

Pretty sure he has. I saw a blurb somewhere that said Subban had a "gala" of some sort (it wasn't the comedy one--not sure what it was supporting) and introduced him there. But of course I can't find anything about it now.

 

[void]

Pretty sure he has. I saw a blurb somewhere that said Subban had a "gala" of some sort (it wasn't the comedy one--not sure what it was supporting) and introduced him there. But of course I can't find anything about it now.

This didn't happen. Weber still hasn't come to Montreal..

 

[Adz]

This didn't happen. Weber still hasn't come to Montreal..

To be honest, I'm not surprised. When I read that blurb it didn't really sound like something Shea would do--allowing himself to be introduced outside of a team event is really out of character for him.

 

[NSH615]

This is not a good thing. Canadiens media is non-forgiving. Look for Webs to be blasted for his every move.

When he was here, I don't believe he would come back to town until mid August each year so this doesn't surprise me at all. You didn't see any of our new FA signings here being introduced did you? What about Bickell and TT when they were traded to Carolina, did they show up? Brassard is another traded from NYR to the Senators. PK's was an exception because it doesn't bother him. Weber is training in B.C.

 

[NSH615]

Hey, glad you're back disagreeing again. I didn't say Nashville, Carolina, Ottawa or just any NHL city, I said Montreal and the Montreal media. You realize there is a big difference? Weber is already being set up to fail there.

First of all, I wasn't trying to disagree with you, just point out that he isn't the only one to have not shown up yet. Sorry to have offended you.

Secondly, the moment that Montreal made the trade that was bad for them he was considered a failure until he proves the fans otherwise. I do get with the media that nearly everyone is considered guilty in their eyes. Basically the media there is like the paparazzi is to other celebs.

Since this was about Montreal, have Radulov and Montoya shown up yet to be paraded around the city?

And honestly if I were a player and I just got traded or signed with a Canadian team, I would not show my face until day one of training camp simply because of the media.

 

[FossilFndr]

A Shea sighting in the area house hunting (actually visiting the places his realtor already showed him with pictures) will likely be in the near future. But Shea is the anti Subban, not going to be flashy, over the top personality etc. and too will be eaten alive by the media and fans. You got to think as a kid Shea 'was' on the Habs team scoring the SC GWG in his mind. Now I wonder if he wishes that this dream didn't come true.

 

[Viqsi]

I get what you're saying..I really do, but taking it back to what I was saying, the idea being presented is that as a defenseman, the best thing you can do for your team is drive the play forward. High shot generation plays\high shot suppression. It doesn't mean that players that look bad in those columns are "bad" or that you can't get any satisfaction out of watching them. They're typically great penalty killers, for example...it's just saying that if you're leaning on them too heavily, it's not going to turn out well for you in the long run.

YES! This. Exactly this. You get a cookie.

Pretending as though blueliners who have nice shot generation/suppression numbers are the only blueliners worth having is IMO just as fallacious as insisting that only forwards that score lots of goals (not assists, just goals) have any merit.