Prime Erik Karlsson vs Cale Makar

[Mrb1p]

Love Erik but Cale may just be the best player on the planet.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

To me, claiming that Karlsson is better simply because the team he was on with some other pretty decent players (Stone, Ryan, Hoffman, Zibby, Anderson) made the playoffs in a dogshit division is a terrible argument.

So is ignoring that Makar single handedly dragged a mediocre UMass team to the championship game in impressive fashion simply because it's college hockey.

So it claiming that everyone on the Avs roster playing worse without MacKinnon in the lineup is somehow proof that Makar isn't very good, instead of evidence of MacKinnon being amazing.

It's totally fair to ignore Makar's college accomplishments, because they don't matter when talking about NHL players lol.

I don't think you understand how rare it is for a player to be able to drag a team like how Karlsson did. It's not something you can just say "well he did it in college, so he can do it at the NHL". You have to prove you can do that. Mark Stone has said that Karlsson was the only reason those Sens teams went anywhere and that he was the best player in the world. Even Crosby said during Karlsson's prime that what Karlsson does for the Senators was extremely tough and he's an incredible player for it.

And nobody ever said Makar isn't very good, wtf are you even talking about dude? Like now you're just making stuff up completely lol. All over the place.

 

[Sky04]

The Werenski argument is funny considering if Makar were on the Jackets instead, they would actually make the playoffs this year.

Doubtful, Werenski didn't have a 116 point center to bounce off of and still only finished 12 points behind Makar.

 

[IWantSakicAsMyGM]

It's totally fair to ignore Makar's college accomplishments, because they don't matter when talking about NHL players lol.

I guess if you want to pump Karlsson's tires, you would want to ignore them, but when we're talking only about Makar's ability to carry a team, what he did in college seems pretty relevant to me. But, sure, let's pretend that Karlsson's team of pretty good players making the playoffs in a shitty division was definitely 100% him.

I don't think you understand how rare it is for a player to be able to drag a team like how Karlsson did. It's not something you can just say "well he did it in college, so he can do it at the NHL". You have to prove you can do that. Mark Stone has said that Karlsson was the only reason those Sens teams went anywhere and that he was the best player in the world. Even Crosby said during Karlsson's prime that what Karlsson does for the Senators was extremely tough and he's an incredible player for it.

When Makar carried his otherwise mediocre college team to the championship game, I think it's perfectly reasonable to think that he might be able to do in the NHL, if given the chance. As it is, he's 1.08 PPG over his NHL career, with a Cup and a Smythe to his name, along with being a Norris finalist for 4 straight seasons (1 win so far). If you want to doubt him, that's on you.

And I'm not saying that Karlsson wasn't the driving force on that team, and clearly their best player, but making the playoffs in the Atlantic during that time wasn't exactly a difficult thing to do. It also doesn't mean that he's better than Makar.

And nobody ever said Makar isn't very good, wtf are you even talking about dude? Like now you're just making stuff up completely lol. All over the place.

Seems pretty obvious to me that you're trying to use MacKinnon to discount what Makar has done, in an effort to make him seem like he's not as good as he really is. Claiming you didn't say what you were clearly implying doesn't change anything.

 

[Voight]

Karlsson finished 4th in league scoring and 1st in assists one season. He had more assists than any of his teammates had points. He was the engine of his team, while Makar has had much more offensive support.

Makar has 41 points in 34 games without MackInnon across his career.

Thats a 98 point pace.

 

[SharksFan1992]

Makar and it's not even close.

Karlsson has always been a defensive liability. I spent most of my life in Ottawa and watched many Sens games. He should have just played as a forward.

 

[bambamcam4ever]

The coincidence is that they all played on much much better teams.

Kyle freaking Turris was the #1C for Karlssons prime.

Coffey = Gretzky, Messier, Lemeiux, Yzerman, Federov


I'm not even going to go through the rest but they ALL played with hall of fame or multiple elite players players in their prime and ESPECIALLY when they won their cups.

You can tell the difference in how that could help right?

Spezza was the 1C..

 

[bambamcam4ever]

There have been a lot of great players in NHL history that never won the cup, but that’s not the point I was making. Bourque not winning the cup all those years in Boston is irrelevant. He’s still a top 5 or top 3 d-man of all time.

Also I don’t think Gonchar was the #1 D in Pittsburgh when they won the cup in 2009. They also had Letang there. My whole point is, if you’re a team trying to win the cup and don’t really have a deep blueline or a deep roster in general, you won’t win with Karlsson as your #1 d-man, you need that strong 2 way d-man that does everything for you and has an impact on both ends of the ice

Letang was the #5D in 2009

 

[ESH]

Makar has 41 points in 34 games without MackInnon across his career.

Thats a 98 point pace.

I’m sure Makar could be the focal point of an offense the way Karlsson showed he could be. The only point I was trying to make was that Karlsson had a really unique peak offensively that we haven’t seen from a defenseman in a long time.

I voted for Makar in the poll, it just sucks to see so many people acting like Karlsson wasn’t a special player

 

[Voight]

You can't really make that claim when every time MacKinnon is out of the lineup Makar's play dips considerably.

He has a 98 point pace without MackInnon. So no, his play does not dip.

 

[avsfan9]

He has a 98 point pace without MackInnon. So no, his play does not dip.

I don’t know where people get this perception, Makar just keeps playing his game and is still great no matter who’s in the lineup

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Doubtful, Werenski didn't have a 116 point center to bounce off of and still only finished 12 points behind Makar.

It's not that black and white.

Makar on the Blue Jackets would be the focal point of the team. Plays would run through him constantly, players would be looking for him at all times, coaches would probably encourage him to be more offensive etc. On a team with more cooks players have to share the puck.

There shouldn't be much of an argument who is the more dynamic offensive talent.

 

[Gil Gunderson]

There have been teams that have won the cup who didn’t really have a stacked, talented roster. Like the Blues in 2019, but they had a stud 2 way d-man like Pietrangelo

The Blues had a Conn Smythe and Selke winning centre, not Kyle Turris.

 

[COHawk]

I think EK's absolute offensive peak (albeit short-lived) surpasses Makar's (that said, has he reached his peak?). But overall it's Makar due to their defensive games.

Makar's offensive peak is definitely an interesting topic. EK's top season was 101 points at age 32. Makar has hit 90+ points twice and 85+ three times by age 26. It's possible we have not seen his best yet. Dude is an animal.

 

[Salva Mea]

Prime Erik with Kyle turris and Bobby Ryan with broken hands, vs Makar with Mackinnon and Rantanen

 

[HabsMD97]

I can't believe avs fans are bringing up college accomplishments I think i've officially heard it all lol. This is coming from a habs fan who hates the sens, it's close.

 

[TruePowerSlave]

Makar's offensive peak is definitely an interesting topic. EK's top season was 101 points at age 32. Makar has hit 90+ points twice and 85+ three times by age 26. It's possible we have not seen his best yet. Dude is an animal.

The 100 point season wasn't EK's peak though. Sure the most points, but not his peak or even best offensive season.

 

[zenator]

Karlsson is one of my all-time favourite players, but it's Makar easily.

Karlsson in his prime was average defensively, Makar has been much better defensively than Karlsson most of his career. Old Karlsson struggles to defend.

Karlsson was overall a little bit better offensively, but the gap is quite small.

 

[FrankSidebottom]

Current Karlsson is a shadow of what he once was, he was special. You can argue Makar is better but AINEC is definitely a false statement.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I was always a big supporter of Karlsson because I like offensive defensemen.. but Makar is close offensively and so much better defensively it is easily him.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Doesn’t matter , different players thrive in different situations. How do you go from 100 points playing with a bunch of scrubs to Crosby and Malkin and score 53 points in less than a year?

By completely ignoring defense and being the focal point of the teams offense, and then.. not.

 

[Filatov2Kovalev2Bonk]

Makar.
Karlsson's offense generation was insane but he was heinously bad at times in his own end, just not fighting or angling people on the puck, waiting for his partner to do the work.

Makar is a much more complete player, less gaffe-prone as well. Have to take him.

 

[Conspiracy Theorist]

I'd pick Karlsson for an average team.

 

[wetcoast]

I'd pick Karlsson for an average team.

For your fantasy pool and a lottery pick or actually making the team better?

 

[Xspyrit]

I think its a little hard to judge because prime Karlsson was such a short period of time that it's hard to say just how good he truly was, if that makes sense?

Erik Karlsson got his Achilles tendon cut by Matt Cooke's skate in 2013, he was still 22 y/o. He was never the same player after that, still elite but not the same. He was going to be generational, the way he was taking over games was crazy. Not the first time we see injuries diminish a career.

Prime Erik with Kyle turris and Bobby Ryan with broken hands, vs Makar with Mackinnon and Rantanen

This is a point that is often overlooked (or exaggerated). Karlsson played with a lot of great players* during his time in Ottawa BUT most them were wither too young (Zibanejad, Stone, Chabot, etc), too old (Alfredsson, Kovalev, Gonchar, Phillips, etc) or broken down due to injuries (Ryan, MacArthur, Phaneuf, Michalek, MacArthur, etc). The healthy ones in their primes (Spezza, Duchene, Turris, Hoffman, Fisher, Brassard, Methot, etc) either left early or arrived late in his time in Ottawa. He didn't have the greatest support because of all these reasons