SuppliedHedman is better
When trying to pick between the players that are likely to go down as two of the top three Swedish defenceman of all time (sorry, but they’re not going to unseat Niklas Lidstrom anytime soon), it’s really not a hard choice. Victor Hedman is more physically gifted and defensively responsible than Erik Karlsson, and if you pick one on your fantasy squad, it should be Hedman.
First of all, Hedman can stand independently on the ice. Though Anton Stralman is an excellent player in his own right, Hedman is dominant regardless of who else plays the back end with him. Karlsson’s run-and-gun offensive style that is prone to turnaround rushes requires a stay-at-home talent to play the opposite side. Marc Methot and Karlsson make a great pairing, no question, but Karlsson needs his partner to be responsible for an exorbitantly large part of the defensive burden.
Hedman, on the other hand, is probably the most well-rounded defenceman in the NHL today. For a 6’6” 235-pound monster of a man, his smooth skating is a rare gift for a player of his size. He has a great first pass, solid shot, and is a defensive wall on the back end. Hedman averaged nearly four times as much shorthanded TOI than Karlsson. Karlsson may play more minutes, but Hedman sees more time in pressure situations.
Also, Hedman was +13 at home and -1 on the road last season. Karlsson was +11 and -4 in the same situations. Probably most importantly, Hedman is now a seasoned playoff veteran at 25, having made deep runs in more than one season with the Lightning.
Though Karlsson is one of the most offensively dazzling defenceman we’ve seen in a long time, Hedman does what is required of him, on both ends, night in and night out. That being said, the world had better look out when Team Sweden is on the ice, as the left shot of Hedman and the right of Karlsson could link up to make the most dynamic pairings in international hockey. — Mitch Sorensen
Karlsson is Better
A criticism surrounding Erik Karlsson, two-time Norris Trophy winner for league’s top defenceman, is that he’s poor defensively and he’s too soft to be truly considered elite. As a result, many would suggest Victor Hedman is the superior player between the two, which is completely false. Offensive defencemen, while risky, are much more valuable to a team because when they’re on the ice, their team is generating scoring chances, and by osmosis, the other team isn’t.
Before I get into my point, we have some objectively false notions about Hedman floating around that I think we need to address.
First off all, suggesting Hedman can stand alone on the ice is wrong. His possession numbers massively improve when on the ice with Anton Stralman than when he’s on with anybody else, while Stralman’s remain similar regardless of teammate. Also, Hedman has the luxury of playing with Steven Stamkos, Ryan Callahan, and Valtteri Filppula, who are three of Tampa Bay’s best players, as his most common forward linemates. None of Karlsson’s common linemates have a Corsi For percentage above 50 per cent, unless, of course, they’re on the ice with him, in which case we see each of their individual possession numbers massively spike from where they are when they play without him.
Also, the idea that Marc Methot is somehow doing anything other than dragging Karlsson down like a bag of rocks is ludicrous. When Methot plays with Karlsson, he has a Goals For percentage of 62.5 and a Corsi For percentage of 53.8. When apart, Methot’s numbers crumble all the way down to 47.5 and 47.9 respectively, while Karlsson remains productive.
I’m also not sure where the notion that Hedman is used in more high pressure situations comes from. Hedman made 59.6 per cent of his shift starts in the offensive zone last season in comparison to Karlsson’s 53.3 per cent. Also, Karlsson, on average, faced opposing team’s top forward on a much more regular basis than Hedman did, probably because he was averaging more than 27 minutes of ice time per game while Hedman was averaging under 23.
Then finally, we get to plus/minus, which is a big red flag. A player’s plus/minus is an ugly way to judge their performance, as it accounts goals scored against that could be completely the fault of another player, poor goaltending, or any other circumstance. All in all, Karlsson plays more, produces much more, plays against more difficult competition in less favourable situations, and is easily the more valuable player.
This, more than anything, represents a flawed misunderstanding of how the position of defence in hockey is supposed to be played. It’s commonly understood that the best offence is a good defence. The goal of hockey is to out score your opponent. That’s simple enough. As statistics would suggest, the best way to outscore your opponent is by getting more shot attempts and controlling the puck more than they do. As a result, the best way to view the game is that the best defence is actually a good offence.
Old-school hockey types glorify the rugged, stay-at-home defenceman because they think, “hey, defenceman, that means defence, right?” Not necessarily. When a guy is at the top of the league in statistics like hits and blocked shots, it generally means his team doesn’t have the puck. That can either mean he’s always playing with poor teammates, or he himself lacks the skill to give his teammates meaningful possession and scoring opportunities. As a result, even though they appear rugged and tough like a stay-at-home defenceman apparently should, his team is actually in a less favourable position to out chance their opponents because of it. What Karlsson’s possession numbers suggest is that when he’s on the ice, Ottawa is generating scoring chances at an astronomically higher rate than they are when he isn’t. Sure, he’ll make turnovers and gaffes just like anybody else does — and I remember Hedman making multiple in the Stanley Cup Finals against Chicago — but he offsets it driving his team’s offence to a higher point whenever he’s on the ice.
Give me Karlsson any day of the week. — Cam Lewis
