Does Erik Karlsson really need to be more defensively responsible?

Thursday morning, Elliotte Friedman made some remarks on Toronto’s Sportsnet 590 about likely Norris candidate, Erik Karlsson, and how he needs to set an example defensively as captain of the Ottawa Senators. As transcribed by Chris Nichols, he says:

“I think what I would explain to Erik Karlsson is this – ‘Erik, we’ve got a team-wide problem here, that nobody likes to defend. We’re going to need you to give up a little bit.’”

As you can imagine, this set off a firestorm among hockey fans, and continued to fuel the debate around Karlsson’s defensive prowess.

However, among hockey analysts, this opinion particularly rankled, because it’s been proven that offense and defense – as measured by shot attempt for and shot attempts against – are actually independent of one another. Micah McCurdy’s article on the subject goes in-depth to make that conclusion.

Yet Friedman’s quote reiterates a long-held belief that makes it seem like the only way to get better defensively is to give up on being good offensively.

This is just not true.

And if you just look at how good teams perform, it becomes even more obvious.

For instance, the Los Angeles Kings, long regarded as one of the best defensive teams in the league, also consistently outperform most of the NHL in offense as well.

Take a look at their rolling averages on the year:

Since this is calculated as standard deviations from the NHL average, anything in the “blue” area is good, and anything in the “red” area is bad. The lines represent Scoring Chances For (blue) and Scoring Chances Against (red), which symbolize offensive and defensive results.

From this, it’s clear that until recently, the Kings were able to maintain both very good defense and very good offense – the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

This remains true on an individual level as well.

As you can see, Sidney Crosby’s offense improved at the same time as his defensive play improved.  Clearly, he wasn’t asked to “give up” anything to break out of his early season slump, even though he is just as important to the Pittsburgh Penguins as Karlsson is to the Senators.

But if that doesn’t convince you, here’s another top offensive defenseman:

While Brent Burns started the year a little low offensively, he quickly recovered, and has become one of the most efficient 5-on-5 point producers from the blue line. But that doesn’t mean his defense has dropped off. As you can see, about midway through the season, he got even better defensively, while maintaining ridiculously good offense.

Karlsson’s situation is a little bit different.

Like everyone else, Karlsson’s offense and defense have been independent of each other, however Friedman’s not exactly wrong in his analysis – Karlsson’s defensive play has taken a sharp turn for the worse.

In fact, it’s been trending down since the start of January, about exactly halfway through the season. But given what we know about Karlsson’s play previously, it’s unlikely he suddenly became a huge defensive liability.

So what could have happened?

Micah McCurdy’s Game-by-Game history gives us a clue. Up until right before game 40, Karlsson spent the bulk of his time paired with Marc Methot. However, it was reported on December 30, Methot was “banged up” and questionable to play.  While Methot did stick it out for a few games before succumbing to a lower-body injury on January 19, he clearly was unable to handle top-pair minutes, and Fredrik Claesson and Mark Borowiecki slotted in beside Karlsson.

Since then, Methot and Karlsson have been playing together less, with new Senator Dion Phaneuf often skating alongside the Swede.

There is an argument to be made that if Karlsson was truly the best defenseman, his partner wouldn’t be able to affect his game so significantly, however, that’s a gross oversimplification.

Defensemen, especially offensive-minded ones, require a lot of trust in their partners, as they will frequently skate high into the offensive zone like a forward, meaning there will be more area along the blue line for the other defender to cover. If the communication isn’t on point, then play can easily be turned against the attacking team.

With Claesson, a 23-year-old still playing mostly at the AHL level, it’s unlikely that he has the same kind of on-ice vision as Karlsson, and as such, it probably created gaps for opponents to exploit. Playing with Phaneuf seems to be producing much the same results, as he was never a particularly stout defenseman for the Maple Leafs, despite far more experience than the young Claesson.

There is clearly confusion on the Senator’s blue line, but it’s specious to blame that on Karlsson’s defensive skills. And let’s be crystal clear, no one else in Ottawa has even come close to being as important offensively as the captain.

In essence, what Friedman wants Karlsson to do is to perform three different roles all at once: play-making defenseman, perimeter patrol, and goal scorer.

No one is that good.

The post Does Erik Karlsson really need to be more defensively responsible? appeared first on Todays SlapShot.