| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
 Posted - 04/05/2010 : 14:33:22
|
Umm, Slozo, not to be picky, but the numbers you posted below are wrong in regard to the GF and GA.
Mike Green was on the ice for 156 GF. However, of those 156 goals, 60 were on the PP(also tops in the league) so his GF even strength is 96.
Compare that to Duncan Keith who's total GF is 121 and his goals for PP are 26 meaning he his GF even strength is 95.
The goals against numbers are also off.
Duncan Keith's GA is 98, but 20 are PK, meaning even strength GA is 78.
Green's GA is 80 with 19 on the PK for a total GA even strength of 61.
And Hugh, do you consider, even for a second, that Green gets nearly no time against the oppositions best players offensive?? He plays the 4th least amount on his own teams PK so he is playing against the 2nd PK at best. Also, he is playing 5+ minutes of PP time as well as even strength mostly against the oppositions 3rd lines focusing mostly on defense.
Green is called on for offense and not defense and I can't blame the coach for doing that. However, you can not say he is the best defensemen in the league when he is not even called upon by his own team to be their best defensively.
Can anyone tell me a Norris winner that has not been their teams best defensemen in the past 20 years??? I can think of Coffey and that is it. You might be able to stretch and say MacInnis and Leetch(to which I would disagree) but that sill means 85% of Norris winners of the past 20 years are their teams best defensive player as well as friggin solid offensively. Heck, with the exception of many Coffey, Leetch, and MacInnis, I would argue that every other Norris winner was their teams best defensive player.........
|
Edited by - Beans15 on 04/05/2010 14:38:50 |
 |
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 15:22:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
Hey Willus, you have used this stat machine a few times. Do you understand and can you explain the QUALCOMP and QUALTEAM stats?? If the number is a negative for QUALCOMP does it mean that they are considered lesser quality or vise versa???
http://www.behindthenet.ca/about_stats.html
It's important to understand how those stats work actually otherwise you may come to the wrong conclusions. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 16:22:15
|
That's why I asked the question.
This is what is recorded from the link provided.
In general, if a player matches up against the other team's first line, he'll face a high strength of competition.
So, comparatively speaking, Mike Green normally faces a lesser competition at his QUALCOMP is 0.001 compared to Duncan Keith 0.090.
Furthermore, Keith's QUALTEAM is 0.076 compared to Mike Green's 0.252.
So, using this crazy, steriod injected stat machine, Mike Green plays his time against lesser opponents, has better team mates, and his team is still more likely to get scored on with him on the ice compared to him being on the bench.
Or Prof. Willus, am I missing something??????? |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 16:22:42
|
SO Beans, here's a loaded question:
Who is the top defensive player on the Caps? You are saying it's Schultz, because of his +/- . . . or is it some other guy? Please illuminate us, as you must have seen enough games that you can name him off the top of your head and don't have to go through the reams of stats like pk time, pp time, and TOI.
Thanks for those other stats Hugh, some there I didn't know. It's crazy because discussions like this make me seem like I am an avid Washington Caps fan with a man crush on Green, but I seriously think that people just have this preconception about him and are too stubborn to actually watch him objectively (first you'd have to see him play, actually) and perhaps, just maybe, let themselves form an opinion based on game footage as opposed to armchair pundits.
It's frustrating is what it is.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 16:41:17
|
To answer our question Slozo, I would say Tom Poti is the best defensive defenseman. He's big, strong, uses his stick incredibly well, doesn't make a ton of mistakes, swallow's up a ton of PK time, and generally faces the oppositions top line.
As far as forwards go, I was pretty impressed with David Steckel. He too seems to be a very large and ill tempered fellow who does a fine job in his own end and is not a guy who makes a ton of mistakes.
Did I get a passing grade????
Oh, and just so we are clear, my opinions are mostly 100% based on what I watch in games. I do listen to those 'arm chair pundits' to point me in a direction of what to watch. However, my opinions are mine and mine only.
Because a view is differing, does not make it incorrect. |
|
|
|
willus3
Moderator
Canada
1948 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 17:37:24
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
That's why I asked the question.
This is what is recorded from the link provided.
In general, if a player matches up against the other team's first line, he'll face a high strength of competition.
So, comparatively speaking, Mike Green normally faces a lesser competition at his QUALCOMP is 0.001 compared to Duncan Keith 0.090.
Furthermore, Keith's QUALTEAM is 0.076 compared to Mike Green's 0.252.
So, using this crazy, steriod injected stat machine, Mike Green plays his time against lesser opponents, has better team mates, and his team is still more likely to get scored on with him on the ice compared to him being on the bench.
Or Prof. Willus, am I missing something???????
It's tricky. Green doesn't necessarily play against lesser competition. Defensive players(the 3rd line guys you say Green faces) do not have a very high rating in the quality of comp stat. They are very good at checking but not scoring. The role players don't have as high a rating even though they can be fantastic at what they do. So much like the plus/minus stat you have to take things in context.
Green could be facing the opposition teams best checkers every game. If that's the case it doesn't seem to affect his offensive ability. Conversely those same checking specialists are scoring against him as well. What does that say about his defensive ability? Well that's why we need to watch hockey games. However if he is playing 25 plus minutes a night he will definitely be out against top lines. There's no way around it.
|
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 17:59:39
|
As I showed previously, he does lead his team in ice time. Also, Tom Poti sucks compared to Green, sorry if you actually think he's better, that's borderline absurd. He plays almost 5 less minutes a game, and has a measley 4 goals/23 points on the best offensive team in the league. So now that we've established that he is the best defencemen on his team, now that huge obstacle to him winning the Norris is gone.
The Norris trophy normally favours defencemen who excel at the offensive side of the game. If his defence has progressed to the point where it is no longer a detriment (and this is controversial if he ever was) , then what's the problem? There seems to be pretty rampant Green-bias, that I feel is unfair. Let it be known that I am also not the biggest Caps or Green fan, I just think respect is deserved where it's due.
Beans, if you agree that Keith should win, do you disagree that Green should at least get second (if you could 'get' second) or do you actually believe he doesn't even deserve a nomination at all? Your recent posts seem to suggest the latter, I just want clarification. |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 18:18:06
|
lol i cant believe doughty is winning this thing; he can't pinch properly, he cant land a check, he cant make a poke. he does nothing better then Weber, Green, Phaneuf or Keith! Weber isn't having an amazing point year; but he is probably the best D-Man in the league!(so maybe Doughty can get it over him) Phaneuf has played well on Toronto and is faster then Doughty (maybe not this year Phaneuf) Keith is the Defenseman you want on your team, he can land a check, he can make a poke, he holds the blue line better then all, and has a shot while being defensive (though Keith shouldn't have as many points as he does Doughty doesn't match up one bit) Mike Green Cant land a check, Pokes are better then doughty, skates circles around him, has a hard shot, pinches at the proper times and is able to hustle back, and can hold the blue line. (Green smokes Doughty Like salmon). Doughty is the #3 at the highest! I feel its a joke when he gets a vote :D
I watch a lot of Washington games; Green makes less mistakes then most, to an extent of almost never! |
Edited by - Utemin on 04/05/2010 18:21:46 |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 18:42:50
|
One day I will have the power that Hugh has. That power that can convince one's self that their opinion is the only one that is correct. That ability to think that because you say it, it's true.
If you go back and read the question that Slozo asked. He never asked who was Washington's best defensemen, the question was who is Washington's best DEFENSIVE player. That is what I answered with Tom Poti. I don't think very many of even the biggest Mike Green fans will tell you that he is better defensively than Poti. Keep posting those offensive stats too. his 23 points really says a ton about his shut down abilities.
My point that I believe pulled that question from Slozo was that I said that a players has to be their teams best defensive player to be considered for the Norris and Green is NOT Washington's best defensive player. He is their best defenseman, based on his abilities and the style of play that Washington plays. Much Like Kevin Lowe was Edmonton's best defensive player in the 80's but Paul Coffey was their best defensemen. Much like Gary Suter was Calgary's best defensive players but Al MacInnis was their best defensemen. I could go on and on.
Secondly, do I think that Green should get a nomination?? No, but it's relatively close. I've already said that he is the best offensive defenseman in the game today. Was I embelishing how poor he is defensively, maybe I can concede that. I can say he is an average defender. However, a great offensive defensemen who is average defensively is not Norris worthy in my opinion.
When looking at players like Keith, Doughty, Pronger, Erhoff, even Lidstrom I have a hard time putting Mike Green ahead of any of them this season. Sure, he has more points. But he is quite easily a full step behind all( or at least most) of these guys on the defensive side of the puck. Further to that, I don't think Green is a full step ahead of all of these guys offensively. Sure, his production is there, but I would think that a guy like Keith or Doughty would and could put up similar numbers playing with 2 of the top 5 and 3 of the top 16 scoring forwards in the NHL.
The Norris needs to go to a stand out guy on both side of the puck or one side of the puck that is so substantially better than anyone else it removes all competition. That's not Green.
If I am picking 3 nominees for the Norris, it's Keith, Pronger, and Erhoff and the voting in that order. |
|
|
|
Guest9165
( )
|
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 18:46:14
|
Hugh, I don't think Beans ever said anything about Poti being better than Green, just better defensively. He was asked who was the Caps best defensive player, or defensive defenseman rather.
With all the stats thrown around, I think there is no real way to evaluate them fairly, you can always skew them to prove your opinion, as we've seen in all these posts. I am also a stats guy, but in this case, to me, it would have to go to watching games and general play of the players.
I haven't seen these guys play more than 10 games (each), but from what I have seen, Green did make some bad plays defensively, obvious ones, Keith made some as well, but far less. Green does have offensive ability, but I have seen him score quite a few easy ones, amazing passing plays that gave him open nets or straight on 1 on 1 shots on net in good positions. That being said, he scores, goals, not just assists, which Keith has more of (relying on assists, not literally more :p ) because he is more of a quarterback on the PP. Green is more of a co-QB with Ovechkin, and I don't see Toews or Kane with numbers at Ovechkins level, another advantage for Green (or disadvantage in this case).
They are 2 different players, who we can't really compare, just like the Ovie-Datsyuk debate and many others alike. Who played better? To me it's Keith, he has better defensive play from what I have seen, stats aside, but Green is not far behind. If Green would win I wouldn't be screaming bloody murder, it would just show that offense comes first in this years voting for the Norris.
I accept if you guys disagree, I just feel like we've been turning is circles for a bit and frankly we can chase the stats all day, and in the end, when we watch the game we love, there are no stats to be found in our brain when Brett Hull scores on Hasek in overtime for the Stanley Cup, or when Uwe Krupp breaks a scoreless game in triple overtime to win it in 96, after playing only 6 games that season (16 pts in 22 playoff games).... ok I had to throw a few stats in there. :P
|
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 22:19:01
|
"One day I will have the power that Hugh has. That power that can convince one's self that their opinion is the only one that is correct. That ability to think that because you say it, it's true. "
Keep the personal slams and mindless drivel to yourself Beans, no one cares about your pathetic attempts at sarcasm or humour. I always keep an open mind, but you haven't demonstrated why my opinion is false at all.
If you want to agree to disagree, that's fine by me, but in my opinion it's ludicrious to actually think Green doesn't even deserve a nomination. If half the game is offense, and half is defense, and Green is by far the best on offense (he is) and is at least competitive on defence, then why shouldn't he be nominated?
Green's goal totals have actually dropped, because in an earlier interview this season, he is now thinking defence-first and offense second. The stats bear this out as well. He has far fewer turnovers, coupled with the other stuff I mentioned earlier (hits, blocked shots, etc.). When you factor in all the rest, he beats Poti at nearly every statistical category (offense or defence).
None of this matters anyways, there is no law that you can't win the Norris if you aren't the best defensive player on your team (even though he is). Keep in mind earlier in this thread I thought Keith would probably win the trophy, but I feel like I need to defend Green against this ridiculous stigma he seems to carry with him that he's a liability defensively.
Stats are difficult to lean on, as we have all alluded to, when analyzing defensive abilities. Watch more caps games though, and during crunch-time situations, it is always Green out there.
|
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 22:40:26
|
With so much controversy over Mike Green in this thread, it will be fun to see who wins.
But, Green definitely deserves a nod for his efforts, and at least a nomination for the Norris.
@Beans: you said "but I would think that a guy like Keith or Doughty would and could put up similar numbers playing with 2 of the top 5 and 3 of the top 16 scoring forwards in the NHL"
I like to think that your statement is true, but, sadly, it isn't. The truth is, it's just conjecture. Green's numbers are definitely helped by his teammates, but the fact is, he did get those points himself. There is no certainty that Keith or Doughty would put up the same numbers in the same situation.
Green did the work.
Ovechkin wasn't physically pushing him to be in the right spots for the assists and goals.
Backstrom didn't use telepathy to tell Green where to be.
Semin wasn't holding Green's stick when Green scored.
Boudreau didn't dress up in a Mike Green costume (although it would be funny!)
Sorry for the exaggerations, Green is the one that has the most points as a d-man in the NHL, not Keith, not Doughty, not Ovechkin, not Kane etc.
Green should get credit for it by getting at least a nomination. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 22:50:49
|
Gonna be real interesting to see the three nominees. My three would be Keith (winner), Doughty and probably Green. I see Doughty more (west coast) than some prob and i think he's surprised many with how quick he's gotten this good, and i'm not just talking about the Olympics. Others deserving from what i've seen are Weber, Ehrhoff and even Tyler Myers, though i've only seen Myers a handful of times.
Still can't see Keith not winning this thing!
|
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/05/2010 : 23:13:04
|
quote:
Originally posted by polishexpress
@Beans: you said "but I would think that a guy like Keith or Doughty would and could put up similar numbers playing with 2 of the top 5 and 3 of the top 16 scoring forwards in the NHL"
I like to think that your statement is true, but, sadly, it isn't. The truth is, it's just conjecture.
polishexpress..... Just curious, i have an opinion which is much like Beans' on this. I too think Keith or Doughty could/would put up similar numbers to Green playing on that Washington team in that system and in the same situations as Green is. Am i "wrong" to? I mean, it is just an opinion? Don't really think you can say it's outright WRONG? |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 08:18:46
|
Ya, Alex, you are right. I concede that I cannot say that an opinion is wrong.
When I wrote the post, I was contemplating that it is quite an accomplishment to score that many points in the NHL, and wasn't really paying attention to the "But I would think" part of the quote.
I humbly retract my opinion bashing, but stand by my own opinion that Green should be nominated, though I don't think he should win.
Never thought about Ehrhoff, though, until you and Beans mentioned him. I know he is putting some significant points up, but how is his d? |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 09:13:07
|
Hugh, I have done exact what you think I have not. You say this and that about all the offensive numbers you want and it really doesn't put an argument to anything that I have said. I can only assume you will not go back and read all the posts again to see exactly what I have said time and time again, and I really don't want to waste my time or anyone else's time having to read it again.
For the record, I never ONCE disagreed with anyone's nod for Mike Green. I have simply said he would not be my pick, gave who my picks would be, and cited the rationale behind it using Mike Green as my 'control' if you will. Basically saying that if 'most' or 'many' people feel Mike Green is a worthy candidate, my picks are better comparated to Mike Green because X or Y or what ever else I said.
And of course my opinions are subjective. The entire award is subjective. I am not a moron and don't need to have it explained that Mike Green did the work. However, it is painfully obvious that my point was missed.
What do you think would happen if Drew Doughty was traded straight up for Mike Green?? Would Doughty's production increase by playing with a team that averages a goal a game more than the Kings?? Absolutely. Conversely, would Green's production drop if he played for say, Minnesota or Edmonton??? Definately.
Does that mean that Mike Green is no longer the best offensive defenseman in the game??? Maybe in your eyes, but not in mine.
I don't have to agree to disagree. I simply believe that the Norris should go to a stand out defensemen on both sides of the puck and in the past, with the exception of Coffey, and maybe Leetch and MacInnis,the award has always gone to a standout on both sides of the puck.
Could I be wrong this year. Absolutely. Would I be in utter shock and dismay if and when Green wins the award. Not really. One thing I did agree with Hugh on is that offensive players normally get preference in NHL awards. |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 10:32:46
|
polishexpress.....Erhoff has been a stud for the Canucks. I don't expect him to get a nomination for the Norris as i think others are more deserving but he's been great! To give you an example, and i know it's only 1 game, he was +2 in an 8-3 loss tot he Kings last week. Now, i know the +/- thing is overblown often but i'm still impressed with that. Regardless of that game, he's played a ton of minutes, has put up good numbers and has a really nice first pass (breakout pass). Overall, he's been a huge aquisition for the Canucks and it's a massive concern around this city right now as he tweaked his knee the other night. Looks to be out till the playoffs and who knows how healthy he'll be by then even? With depth on D and an injured Willie Mitchell not looking anywhere nearer to a return, the playoff picture for the Canucks doesn't look as good as it did not long ago. Factor in that Salo's fragile body will most certainly get hurt to some degree either before or during the playoffs and it's easy to see the concern around here!
Again, still think he's on the outside looking in as far as the Norris when you consider the other names out there (Keith, Green, Doughty, Pronger, Lidstrom, Weber, etc....) |
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 12:48:54
|
quote:
I don't have to agree to disagree. I simply believe that the Norris should go to a stand out defensemen on both sides of the puck and in the past, with the exception of Coffey, and maybe Leetch and MacInnis,the award has always gone to a standout on both sides of the puck.
Actually, by disagreeing with my opinion and offering your counter opinion, you are de facto agreeing to disagree, fyi. I have my opinion, you have yours. So your ultimate point is that your opinion on a subjective award is beyond reproach? Good for you, except you yourself admitted this wasn't the case up to 15% of the time (a number you admittedly made up on the spot).
Also, citing Ehrhoff as a potential candidate is fairly puzzling as well. He basically has 50% less points than Green, and there is no reason to suggest he's twice as good defensively (impossible to prove anyways) in order to make up the difference.
You admit you wouldn't be shocked if Green won, yet still would nominate Ehrhoff instead? For the same reason you argue Green's numbers are inflated, Ehrhoff's should be too because of the dominance of the Sedins this season, except Green still has twice the output. Also, playing in front of a top-flight goalie has to improve your numbers on your own side of the ice, no?
Playing in front of Theodore/Varlamov/Neuvirth on the other hand.... |
|
|
|
Guest9947
( )
|
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 20:01:31
|
Vs playing in front of Huet/ Theodore? I'd call that a wash (I realize you were comparing Ehrhoff at the time)
I'd also mention that Washington plays in the worst division in the league...
That being said, if I were a betting man (and I am), I would put my money on Keith winning the Norris and Green coming second in votes. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:12:03
|
ok, couple of things.
Quick math Lesson.
In the past 20 years, Coffey, Leetch, and MacInnis are a logical argument for players who won the Norris Trophy based largely on offensive abilities and not on what one would consider standout defensive abilites.
Last time I checked, 3 out of 20 works out to be 15%.
Call me a liar if I am wrong.
Let me pose a question which might(just might) have some people understand my perspective.
Based on this year's play alone, you can choose any NHL defensemen in the league to be on the ice for your team in the NHL finals playing against the team with both the best offense and best defense in the playoffs. You will encouter 2 situations in those finals with the series and Cup on the line. One situation you will be down one goal with 45 seconds left. The other situations you will be up one goal with 45 seconds left.
You can choose one, and only one defensemen that would be your go to guy in both of those situations.
Who do you pick???? |
|
|
|
MrBoogedy
Rookie
Canada
195 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:19:26
|
| ... |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:20:30
|
CHRIS PRONGER.
(maybe not the norris winner this year, but I will never forget the 2006 playoffs, where he was instrumental, and his Cup win with Anaheim the next year.)
Also, I will never forget the regular season game in which Chris Pronger scored a goal less than 5 seconds left to tie the game, with rocket slap shot. It was an Edm-Phx game in 2006. |
|
|
|
polishexpress
PickupHockey Pro
525 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:25:22
|
I found the game!!!!
Here is the ESPN NHL article. http://espn.go.com/nhl/recap?gameId=260129024
Funny thing is, I thought it was seconds, but Pronger scored with 0.3 seconds left, the article mentioned..... |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:47:27
|
Me, me, me Beans! Pick me!  Okay, i'll answer for you. "Based on this years play alone", i'd have to select Norris favorite, Duncan Keith!
BTW, while MacInnes wasn't necessarily the best defensive defenseman on his team many years, he wasn't ever fully appreciated for his defense either (imo of course ). He was much better defensively than he often got credit for! Leetch as well. Coffey, well, like Green, he as mostly about the offense, but as you've pointed out, he was so far and away ahead of his peers offensively, he couldn't be ignored for the Norris!
Not saying Green couldn't get there one day, but he's not there at this point. |
|
|
|
Hugh G. Rection
Rookie
165 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:57:27
|
quote:
Based on this year's play alone, you can choose any NHL defensemen in the league to be on the ice for your team in the NHL finals playing against the team with both the best offense and best defense in the playoffs. You will encouter 2 situations in those finals with the series and Cup on the line. One situation you will be down one goal with 45 seconds left. The other situations you will be up one goal with 45 seconds left.
You can choose one, and only one defensemen that would be your go to guy in both of those situations.
Who do you pick????
I'd pick 'Irrelevant nonsense for $1000, Alex. (Trebek, btw, not the poster). I didn't realize they awarded regular-season awards for extreme hypothetical playoffs situations Beans. We all get your opinion, stop overly dramatizing things to illustrate rather simple points. The Norris goes to the best regular season by a defencemen. Nothing more, nothing less. Your claim is at least 3 other D-men are having a better season, my claim is that 'maybe' 1 is (Keith). We are both entitled to our opinions. Now we can end this stupid thread. |
|
|
|
redneck76ca
Rookie
186 Posts |
Posted - 04/06/2010 : 22:59:12
|
quote:
Originally posted by Beans15
ok, couple of things.
Quick math Lesson.
In the past 20 years, Coffey, Leetch, and MacInnis are a logical argument for players who won the Norris Trophy based largely on offensive abilities and not on what one would consider standout defensive abilites.
Last time I checked, 3 out of 20 works out to be 15%.
Call me a liar if I am wrong.
Let me pose a question which might(just might) have some people understand my perspective.
Based on this year's play alone, you can choose any NHL defensemen in the league to be on the ice for your team in the NHL finals playing against the team with both the best offense and best defense in the playoffs. You will encouter 2 situations in those finals with the series and Cup on the line. One situation you will be down one goal with 45 seconds left. The other situations you will be up one goal with 45 seconds left.
You can choose one, and only one defensemen that would be your go to guy in both of those situations.
Who do you pick????
Markov. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 05:49:39
|
Well Hugh, what one finds completely irrelevant, others can understand the reason why.
Ultimately, I was not expecting a single answer. My point was to put things into persepective which I believe I have done. I never said that the award was based on extreme hypotheticals but it's also not awarded for goals, assist, or +/-.
If you want to end the topic, feel free to leave at any time. No one is keeping you here. It's quite unfortunate that I do have to over dramatize simple points when they are not understood when the are simply stated. Let's take a quick look back at the thread.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Beans - The Norris should be the best 2 way defensemen
Others- Look at Mike Greens stats.
Should I continue?????
*Please don't assume that you are automatically part of the 'others' catagory. Some did talk about his play and what they watched. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 06:49:00
|
The problem with your hypothetical, Beans, is that you have two defencemen on the ice, not just one . . . and, I have no idea who the forwards are.
But I'll play anyways.
So, the most important situation, obviously, is the 45 seconds left and down a goal . . . without scoring a goal, it's over, done - so we 100% absolutely must get that goal. The other situation, needing to keep the lead, is not quite as dire - the onus is on the other team to score, and you presumably have a goalie in net.
So, with that in mind, I absolutely must choose the A1 best offensive threat as a defenceman, and I choose MIKE GREEN. Not even a doubt in my mind, as he is well above average defensively but most importantly is the best passer and goalscorer as a d-man.
My second and third choices would be Streit and Markov.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 08:32:40
|
Well, that is clearly a difference between us. To me, playing defense in the down one goal situation is as important as the scoring a goal situation and there is not a hope in hell that I have Green or Streit on the ice in that situation. Above average or not(which is very debatable among many circles outside the the pickuphockey world), I want elite. I want Pronger or Keith or Markov(good pick I completely agree with) or Lidstrom or Erhoff*(I begrudgenlly agree his offensive upside is not enough to add him to the Norris list. That was permature of me. However, he has had an awesome season.)
Simple difference is some weigh offense significantly higher than defense. As my pals from the 80's Oilers will attest, it was only once they learned how to play a little defense than that started winning Cup.
I would also agree who heartedly that Green is the best scoring defensemen, but I still have not watched a defensemen in the NHL who can pass better than Chris Pronger. Passing is more than just in the offensive zone, which Pronger does very well. It is also the breakout pass, to which Pronger still does not have a peer. Green is pretty slick in the offensive zone and makes some magic passes on the PP. Also, he does seem to have some vision to be able to make a scoring chance out of something that most other defensemen would just dump into the corner.
Slozo, I appreciate and understand your logic, even if I disagree. Truly, I am happy that a response from the Green corner can come without citing his offensive stats. |
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 10:19:56
|
How can you disagree with my logic?!? Nothing to do with me personally, it is LOGIC, period!
If there is only 45 seconds before my team loses, I 100% need a goal to be able to win the Cup. Conversely, if I have 45 seconds to hold a lead, I could technically score (win), hold the lead (win), or blow the lead (still have a chance to win it in regulation if time allows or O/T). See what I'm saying?
Maybe you don't. Here's a few scenarios with Green and with other defencemen who are supposedly better at D.
45 seconds left and we must score
1)
Our team gets a faceoff in the opposition circle with 41 seconds left and the goalie is pulled and an extra attacker is on the ice. Faceoff win, puck goes back to Green after a couple of passes, and Green (with his superior shot and great eye) gets a goal on a blast from the point . . . or, the goalie has it bounce off his pads and one of our forewards taps it in for the tying goal.
(What you didn't mention in your scenario is that after TYING the game, we'd need to WIN the game with another goal in O/T - and Green would be instrumental in constantly pressuring the opposition on offence into making mistakes)
2)
Pronger is in the same position as Green, but when he gets the pass he can't pull off the slapper fast enough and the shot gets blocked. Because he's so slow now, the opposition scores and it's game over. Either that. or his slapper is wide, the zone is cleared, and it's game over after that as they can't enter the zone (Pronger doesn't have the speed to fascilitate the forwards breaking through).
45 seconds left and we have the lead
1)
Defensive zone faceoff, and Green moves forward to stick-check his man at the boards. Because of his aggressiveness and speed, he gets it loose, and with a quick wrister finds a hole to pass it up to his centreman for an empty net goal.
OR
After playing good positional defence, Green and his teammates hold on for the victory after a couple of shots and saves.
OR
The other team scores with the extra man (not necessarily Green's fault on the goal, usually it's a forward who misses an assignment, and anyways, it's 6 on 5) but in o/t Green helps or provides the offence for an o/t goal and the win.
2) Pronger helps with a strong physical presence and prevents the other team from scoring.
OR
Pronger, because it's late in the game and he's tired and not as fast as he once was, allows some guy to get a good blast from the point to tie it by screening his goalie without blocking the shot. Then in O/T, he become the goat as his slow legs can't keep up with some fresh youngster, and his penalty (holding) allows the pp o/t winner.
OR
Pronger plays good D and gets in a scramble along the boards for the puck while the opposition has 6 men with the goalie pulled. Pronger tries to ice the puuck into the empty net but it misses, and right off the ensuing faceoff in the defensive zone they are scored on. Same scenario as last in O/T.
 The defence rests!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 11:06:55
|
Your logic and my logic is not always the same thing, hence my ability to disagree. This is not A+B=C kind of logic that is irrefutable fact. It is an individual opinion based on a logical thought process.
I do like your anaglogies however I think the Olympics significantlly clouded your judgement on Pronger. Also, for evey good thing Green could do, Pronger could also do. For every bad think Pronger could do, Green could also do.
But I was entertained!!! |
|
|
|
Guest8353
( )
|
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 11:24:51
|
If Mike Green is so good why was he left off of the Olympic team.
Because he is a defensive liability.
A liberal is always confused with facts. |
|
|
|
Guest1757
( )
|
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 12:08:21
|
| Wow that last post from 8353 really puts things in perspective. I'm a huge Mike Green fan but unfortunately have to agree with him not deserving the award. The fact that he didn't make the olympic team shows that he is lacking something to be considered the best. Not sure if he was invited to orientation camp this year but either way he started off with an awsesome season and still didn't get asked to play. If Green really deserves the trophy for best defenseman, he should have clearly been on the Olympic team but Stevie Y obviously felt that Green was not well rounded enough to be one of Canada's top defenseman. |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 13:48:38
|
Here is what's wrong with the no Olympics means no Norris theory.
If Green really deserves the trophy for best defenseman, he should have clearly been on the Olympic team but Stevie Y obviously felt that Green was not well rounded enough to be one of Canada's top defenseman.
The Norris is a vote of sports writers. Arm chair guys like me and you who are more wordy, get better free seats, and watch a lot more hockey than us. Secondly, these fella's don't always think in terms of chemistry on a team and winning. They have the luxury of making a vote that will never matter on the ice.
Stevie Y' and Co's opinion is not the end all be all.
But it is Golden........
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/07/2010 : 20:47:18
|
Stevie Y also chose surprises Bergeron (dud), Doughty (golden), and Seabrook (very mediocre). It's easy to second guess and I wouldn't pretend to do any better - heck, anyone can pick a 'perfect' team and someone will not perform or play well - but just because he didn't choose Green doesn't mean anything more than him picking some of the guys we were all shocked/puzzled by.
A great hockey player doesn't make a great manager . . . and don't tell me that because he won the gold that it automatically makes him a genius - Cito Gaston was a crappy manager who won two world series, to make a baseball reference.
What you missed about my logic was the quantifiable part.
You need A situation (goal in remaining 45 seconds) to be successful, and you also need A(2) situation to be successful (goal in o/t afterward) otherwise B (45 seconds to hold lead) CANNOT HAPPEN.
Thus, even by switching the order of the situations, you absolutely need goals . . . but can actually still win by allowing great chances from bad D and even allowing a tying goal (means you go to o/t).
Because of this, logically, you need to get you absolute A1 offensively gifted D-man.
THAT'S the logic, Beans.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Alex116
PickupHockey Legend
6113 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 00:18:40
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Stevie Y also chose surprises Bergeron (dud), Doughty (golden), and Seabrook (very mediocre). It's easy to second guess and I wouldn't pretend to do any better - heck, anyone can pick a 'perfect' team and someone will not perform or play well - but just because he didn't choose Green doesn't mean anything more than him picking some of the guys we were all shocked/puzzled by.
A great hockey player doesn't make a great manager . . . and don't tell me that because he won the gold that it automatically makes him a genius - Cito Gaston was a crappy manager who won two world series, to make a baseball reference.
What you missed about my logic was the quantifiable part.
You need A situation (goal in remaining 45 seconds) to be successful, and you also need A(2) situation to be successful (goal in o/t afterward) otherwise B (45 seconds to hold lead) CANNOT HAPPEN.
Thus, even by switching the order of the situations, you absolutely need goals . . . but can actually still win by allowing great chances from bad D and even allowing a tying goal (means you go to o/t).
Because of this, logically, you need to get you absolute A1 offensively gifted D-man.
THAT'S the logic, Beans.
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Wow Slozo, i hope it's the beers in me this midweek night that is confusing my thinking, cuz i don't get your "logic" explanation !
As for the beginning of your post, i agree fully. I said from day 1, if Team Canada wins, Yzerman will be god. If they lose, he'll be the one blamed for picking the wrong players! Who knows, if he'd chosen Green and Penner and Carter and whoever else, maybe we go undefeated without so much as a scare? We'll never know!
I can tell you this much, i love and appreciate the fact that we won the gold, but i still don't understand the Bergeron pick!  |
|
|
|
Iceman778
Top Prospect
USA
25 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 01:39:23
|
| yes it good to know about that they played nice |
|
|
|
Beans15
Moderator
Canada
8286 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 08:18:01
|
Ah, but Slozo, one thing about Logic is that is it free from assumption. You assume that these situations both happen in the same game. In hindsight, this could have been better explained in my original question. Let me clarify.
Game 6, your team is down in the series 3-2 and are up in the game 1-0. 45 seconds left, up one goal.
Because of your standout defenseman pick, you team lives to fight on in Game 7.
Game7, you are tied 3-3 in the series and are down in the game 0-1. 45 seconds left, down one goal.
|
|
|
|
n/a
deleted
4809 Posts |
Posted - 04/08/2010 : 10:20:03
|
Ha ha Beans, you really want to gear it into a defensive defenceman, eh? lol . . . changing scenarios even.
Well, doesn't matter - I still choose Green. When providing great offence, the natural result is good defence, because a team can't go on the offensive when they are defending.
Plus, no matter what, we need that goal to tie it, and then we need a goal to win the Stanley Cup. That's two goals in the final game . . . I'd want my A-1 defenceman for that.
So, logically, there is one situation with good defence needed (although good offence would helkp seal it with an empty netter), and two situations with a goal needed (to tie it, then win it).
Ipso facto bingo bango, you need Green!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug |
|
|
|
Utemin
PickupHockey Pro
Canada
451 Posts |
Posted - 04/09/2010 : 15:04:48
|
quote:
Originally posted by slozo
Ha ha Beans, you really want to gear it into a defensive defenceman, eh? lol . . . changing scenarios even.
Well, doesn't matter - I still choose Green. When providing great offence, the natural result is good defence, because a team can't go on the offensive when they are defending.
Plus, no matter what, we need that goal to tie it, and then we need a goal to win the Stanley Cup. That's two goals in the final game . . . I'd want my A-1 defenceman for that.
So, logically, there is one situation with good defence needed (although good offence would help seal it with an empty netter), and two situations with a goal needed (to tie it, then win it).
Ipso facto bingo bango, you need Green!
"Take off, eh?" - Bob and Doug
Wow I can't defend Green better then that! |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Best D-man trophy (LOL) 
