What makes a good defense pairing?

[Bounces R Way]

Is it as simple as having one good offensive guy and pair him with a defensive defender?
Is it putting a younger player with a vet?
What about a shutdown pair, is it always as easy as putting the two most defensive minded guys together?

There's some great pairings in the league, Toews-Makar probably the gold standard. Bouchard-Ekholm is an interesting one as individually they're obviously skilled but they fill in the gaps to each other's games so well. Hughes-Hronek definitely up there and McAvoy-Lindholm have had some dominant stretches.

what are some other good pairings and why do they work?
what are some bad pairings and why do they not work?

Click to read more...

 

[hurdemz]

Yes

 

[NyQuil]

Love.

 

[CanadienShark]

Defence.

 

[miscs75]

They limit the opposition to nothing offensively and drive players crazy.

 

[kingsholygrail]

Least PIM - Most PIM

 

[Our Lady Peace]

One player more offensively inclined; one more player more defensively inclined. Both players with at least very good transition and skating ability

 

[Bjornar Moxnes]

Love.

Yes exactly. The most effective pairings are Yaoi pairings for sure.

Yes

No. Maybe. I don't know. Can you repeat the question?

 

[94 Oil Drops]

2 good defensemen.

 

[PaulD]

Skill and Size combo

 

[DearDiary]

It's a combination of love, passion and time to bond with your D partner over a year.

 

[Hall of Faber]

A little shake and a little bake.

 

[boredmale]

Don't forget a good coach and teammates who work a system that tries to limit mistakes, because the second any players makes a mistake, that opens up opporunties that even the best possible defense pairing might have troubles with

 

[Three On Zero]

It's a combination of love, passion and time to bond with your D partner over a year.

Didn’t read the entire OP, read this post and now I refuse to read it.

 

[hirawl]

Those who can make the most important pass in the game all day everyday with ease and effectiveness. Always buying time and space and playing the percentages no matter how you need to execute the said pass. I'm of course talking about the D-to-D pass.

 

[wintersej]

They both have to be able to move the puck and lead a breakout. At least one needs to be able to play fourth forward in the o-zone. At least one needs to be able to do core defensemen duties like win battles and clear the net. A pairing that can check every box doesn’t exist outside of international play.

 

[MNRube]

Has there been a better one in recent years than Suter-Weber in Nashville? They were dominant

 

[AnInjuredJasonZucker]

Mattias Ekholm.

 

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Just watch videos of Rafalski and Lidstrom.

 

[Erik Alfredsson]

Complimenting playing styles and chemistry. You want to have the players make up for each other's weakness, and know how to use their strengths to make their partner's job easier.

 

[biturbo19]

I think the Hughes-Hronek thing is an exhibition in why this isn't exactly a straightforward question to answer. There are certain things that pretty reliably work, at least "on paper". But there are also certain instances of two defencemen who should work well together on paper and complement each other perfectly...and then it just doesn't work at all. There are also things like Hughes-Hronek that doesn't make a whole lot of sense on paper...but just put together an absolutely massive season as one of the most ice-tilting pairs in the league in tons of tough minutes.

Chemistry is a funny thing, and it can account for a huge amount of how good a pairing is, or can be. Whether it's "more than the sum of it's parts" or "oil and water". And it's not always immediately evident until you actually try it.


That ability to process the game on the same "wavelength" or take that similar approach to the game, can really make for pairings that elevate both partners. Ideally, you've got a decent mix of more offensive and defensively oriented inclinations...but that "on the same page" element overshadows a lot of things.

It doesn't even have to be two really "smart" players like Hughes-Hronek. Sometimes just putting two lunkheads together works remarkably well too. Counterintuitively so. Where they just wanna play rolling forward, step up and pinch aggressively, and rattle the boards and obliterate guys whenever possible...and somehow that translates to a telepathic ability to read one another's one-track mind, and adjust to exactly what their partner is going to do. Because it's exactly what they'd do.



So yes. Sometimes opposites are complementary. Sometimes the same is complementary. Sometimes things that seem like a terrible idea end up complementary. Sometimes things that make all the sense in the world on paper, are just an absolute trainwreck.

 

[Khrox]

No. Maybe. I don't know. Can you repeat the question?

Thanks, that song is in my head now

 

[12ozPapa]

Ozolinsch and whoever his partner was.

 

[HockeyWooot]

The second player on the pair has to compliment the main dman’s skill set.

If the dman skates and make plays, ideally you have a partner that can keep up with them to make the most of their offensive potential.

If the dman has supreme offensive ability but defensive warts probably want a steady defensive demand to compliment.

If you have a good top 4 physical defensive dman maybe pair with a more mobile complement.

I don’t think size is something that is looked for in a defensive partner these days.

 

[PettersonHughes]

Recipe:
1) take a blender
2) add enough biomass for 2 players
3) add skating ability, hockey IQ, physicality, chemistry, and some offense and defense (amounts vary but should yield 2 complementary skillsets)
4) blend, not until fully mixed or smooth, that would be too cheap
5) take cookie cutter and shape biomass into 2 players, add sticks, skates and equipment
6) Yield may vary (Stanley Cup/ Norris Trophies/ team success possible)

It's the "right" mix of #3, in whatever ratio that yields results on the ice, and I don't think in this NHL there's one archetype that always leads to success (e.g. smallish but mobile and positionally sound D can be dominant, like Quinn Hughes; add some physicality and a shot like Makar and you've got a beast, but even their partners aren't always the same; Quinn's done well with mobile defensive D like Tanev, physical, stay-at-home D like Schenn and even another offensively inclined but defensively reliable D like Hronek). The common factor is probably that at least one is good at most things or elite, at worst they carry the pairing, at best the elite and a very strong partner would be very hard to beat. Whether they're suppressing shots or containing attackers to the outside so their forwards can get the puck, transitioning the puck with outlet passes or rushing the puck up ice themselves, as long as they're not negatively punished on the scoreboard but being a net positive then they can definitely be "good". As long as their names aren't Oliver Ekman-Larsson and Tyler Myers, circa 2022-23, they should at least have some possibility of belonging in the conversation.