Pavel Datsyuk for the Selke

[eva unit zero 271]

Not exactly a strong field of Selke candidates, this year right? That's the point... The fact that Pavel can't be limited to a defensive role doesn't preclude him from being considered among the best at it. Only a fool would waste him in this way. Look at his plus/minus... second to lids at last check... Does this stat mean much? The answer is it depends. Why is Nik Lidstrom the plus minus leader every year?

He's way solid. Bobby Orr was a + 124 or something one year... Look at jason spezza though, that guy is known for being a defensive trainwreck; perhaps he's improved a bit or it's that he is playing on an offensive juggernaut of a line...

I think you are stressing the role aspect of the award too much... An offensive defenseman can win the Norris and a gifted forward that controls the play, establishes puck possession all over ice and busts his ass to get back and backcheck can win the Selke. You're saying it has to fit in a nice, neat box, I disagree...

To win the Selke, you don't have to be a defensive specialist. But if you think Dats having the best plus minus of any forward makes him the frontrunner for the Selke, you have failed to understand that plus-minus is an OFFENSIVE statistic. Only the very rare, truly elite defensive players post a high plus-minus based primarily on their defensive play. Plus-minus is best used as a gauge of how well a player's line is performing. It has very little value as an individual statistic until it gets to the extremes, and even then it has only marginal value.

Case in point, the 1992-93 season. Here's some statistics of some of the top players in +/- that year.

M.Lemieux, 69-91-160, +55

P.Bure, 60-50-110, +35

Yzerman, 58-79-137, +33

S.Fedorov, 34-53-87, +33

D.Gilmour 32-95-127, +32

If +/- is taken to be a representation of pure defensive ability, then Lemieux should have won the Selke right? And if it's taken as the best combination of a high plus minus without a lot of points, then Fedorov should have won it. Bure and Yzerman are both in the middle of those two depending on those categories. Yet Doug Gilmour, the guy with the worst plus-minus of that group, was the Selke winner.

Furthermore, the NHL has never seen a year where the Selke award winner also led the league in plus-minus. A forward has led the league in plus minus over 20 times, including Wayne Gretzky with four times on top of the plus-minus charts, and yet no forward who has led the league in plus-minus has won the Selke. Not even in a different year.

Plus-minus has much more bearing on which defensemen will be in the running for the Norris; if you look at the defensemen who have led the league in plus-minus, they are usually in the running for the Norris that season.

[GMRwings1983 8,804]

The Selke is all about reputation, and Datsyuk has a reputation for being a great puckhandler and passer before anything else. If he keeps this up year after year, eventually he'll win the Selke, but I don't see it happening this year.

Fedorov winning it was an anomaly, because he was mainly known for his offensive prowess rather than defensive play, but usually it isn't a guy who's known for being one of the league's top offensive players, which is what Pavel is.

[Kira 451]

To win the Selke, you don't have to be a defensive specialist. But if you think Dats having the best plus minus of any forward makes him the frontrunner for the Selke, you have failed to understand that plus-minus is an OFFENSIVE statistic. Only the very rare, truly elite defensive players post a high plus-minus based primarily on their defensive play. Plus-minus is best used as a gauge of how well a player's line is performing. It has very little value as an individual statistic until it gets to the extremes, and even then it has only marginal value.

Case in point, the 1992-93 season. Here's some statistics of some of the top players in +/- that year.

M.Lemieux, 69-91-160, +55

P.Bure, 60-50-110, +35

Yzerman, 58-79-137, +33

S.Fedorov, 34-53-87, +33

D.Gilmour 32-95-127, +32

If +/- is taken to be a representation of pure defensive ability, then Lemieux should have won the Selke right? And if it's taken as the best combination of a high plus minus without a lot of points, then Fedorov should have won it. Bure and Yzerman are both in the middle of those two depending on those categories. Yet Doug Gilmour, the guy with the worst plus-minus of that group, was the Selke winner.

Furthermore, the NHL has never seen a year where the Selke award winner also led the league in plus-minus. A forward has led the league in plus minus over 20 times, including Wayne Gretzky with four times on top of the plus-minus charts, and yet no forward who has led the league in plus-minus has won the Selke. Not even in a different year.

Plus-minus has much more bearing on which defensemen will be in the running for the Norris; if you look at the defensemen who have led the league in plus-minus, they are usually in the running for the Norris that season.

So let me get this straight. You're saying Pavel has no chance in hell of winning it because he's not Sergei Fedorov.

Okay.

[norrisnick 1]

Being Sergei Fedorov would certainly help his chances.

[dicksmack 33]

To win the Selke, you don't have to be a defensive specialist. But if you think Dats having the best plus minus of any forward makes him the frontrunner for the Selke, you have failed to understand that plus-minus is an OFFENSIVE statistic. Only the very rare, truly elite defensive players post a high plus-minus based primarily on their defensive play. Plus-minus is best used as a gauge of how well a player's line is performing. It has very little value as an individual statistic until it gets to the extremes, and even then it has only marginal value.

Case in point, the 1992-93 season. Here's some statistics of some of the top players in +/- that year.

M.Lemieux, 69-91-160, +55

P.Bure, 60-50-110, +35

Yzerman, 58-79-137, +33

S.Fedorov, 34-53-87, +33

D.Gilmour 32-95-127, +32

If +/- is taken to be a representation of pure defensive ability, then Lemieux should have won the Selke right? And if it's taken as the best combination of a high plus minus without a lot of points, then Fedorov should have won it. Bure and Yzerman are both in the middle of those two depending on those categories. Yet Doug Gilmour, the guy with the worst plus-minus of that group, was the Selke winner.

Furthermore, the NHL has never seen a year where the Selke award winner also led the league in plus-minus. A forward has led the league in plus minus over 20 times, including Wayne Gretzky with four times on top of the plus-minus charts, and yet no forward who has led the league in plus-minus has won the Selke. Not even in a different year.

Plus-minus has much more bearing on which defensemen will be in the running for the Norris; if you look at the defensemen who have led the league in plus-minus, they are usually in the running for the Norris that season.

My comments about Spezza should have clued you in about how I realize +/- can sometimes be misleading. I think you have to guage each case individually... And it's not primarily offensive or defensive, it's both. Why then do so many high scorers have low +/-? Usually 'cause they suck on D or don't backcheck. Datsyuk doesn't play on a powerhouse line, he plays with Homer a lot and he's put in all situations. Babcock will put him on the ice at will. Nobody would've said Mario should have won a Selke ... ever... that's ridiculous. Bob Gainey was always called the best two-way player in the game, and was sort of the first player of that ilk... Perhaps a player who plays an outstanding two-way game the way Pavel does, which accounts for his particular +/-, can eclipse a shallow field of defensive specialist candidates. And the emphasis is on "two way game" not on comparing Datsyuk to Gainey per se...

Edited March 13, 2008 by dicksmack

[SouthernWingsFan 854]

So let me get this straight. You're saying Pavel has no chance in hell of winning it because he's not Sergei Fedorov.

Okay.

Nobody is saying that. I just think it is a case for some hardcore Datsyuk fans to accept that not everybody treats him similar to a demi-god.

And yes, I like Datsyuk.

[eva unit zero 271]

So let me get this straight. You're saying Pavel has no chance in hell of winning it because he's not Sergei Fedorov.

Okay.

No. I'm saying Pavel has a slim chance of winning it because there are several better defensive forwards in the NHL who are probably more deserving of a trophy given to the best defensive forward. In the post you quoted, I was saying that Pavel's plus-minus was far from an indicator he was deserving of the Selke.

[GiantRobot 0]

No. I'm saying Pavel has a slim chance of winning it because there are several better defensive forwards in the NHL who are probably more deserving of a trophy given to the best defensive forward. In the post you quoted, I was saying that Pavel's plus-minus was far from an indicator he was deserving of the Selke.

If any Wing gets a nomination for Selke, it will most likely be Zetterberg IMO, and thats hardly a knock on Datsyuk. A guy like Madden could be the one to beat this year though.

On the bright side, we should have a few other nominations:

Byng- Dats

Norris- Lidstrom (Possibly Rafalski. I know its a stretch, but its not insane to think him deserving.)

Jennings- Hasek/Osgood

[Doggy 130]

Nobody would've said Mario should have won a Selke ... ever... that's ridiculous.

Well my memory isn't the best but I remember Mario PKing more than Pavel does.

Not saying Lemieux should have just thought I'd mention it.

Anyway, more to the point - better def. forwards than Datsyuk include but not limited to:

Fisher, Madden, Lehtinen, Kesler, Brind'Amour, Pahlsson, Sharp and Conroy.

[norrisnick 1]

My comments about Spezza should have clued you in about how I realize +/- can sometimes be misleading. I think you have to guage each case individually... And it's not primarily offensive or defensive, it's both. Why then do so many high scorers have low +/-? Usually 'cause they suck on D or don't backcheck. Datsyuk doesn't play on a powerhouse line, he plays with Homer a lot and he's put in all situations. Babcock will put him on the ice at will. Nobody would've said Mario should have won a Selke ... ever... that's ridiculous. Bob Gainey was always called the best two-way player in the game, and was sort of the first player of that ilk... Perhaps a player who plays an outstanding two-way game the way Pavel does, which accounts for his particular +/-, can eclipse a shallow field of defensive specialist candidates. And the emphasis is on "two way game" not on comparing Datsyuk to Gainey per se...

Gainey was very one-dimensional. Just not the dimension you think of first for a forward. He was routinely outscored by Habs defensemen.

Bob was a defensive forward in the true sense of the word.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

To win the Selke, you don't have to be a defensive specialist. But if you think Dats having the best plus minus of any forward makes him the frontrunner for the Selke, you have failed to understand that plus-minus is an OFFENSIVE statistic. Only the very rare, truly elite defensive players post a high plus-minus based primarily on their defensive play. Plus-minus is best used as a gauge of how well a player's line is performing. It has very little value as an individual statistic until it gets to the extremes, and even then it has only marginal value.

Case in point, the 1992-93 season. Here's some statistics of some of the top players in +/- that year.

M.Lemieux, 69-91-160, +55

P.Bure, 60-50-110, +35

Yzerman, 58-79-137, +33

S.Fedorov, 34-53-87, +33

D.Gilmour 32-95-127, +32

If +/- is taken to be a representation of pure defensive ability, then Lemieux should have won the Selke right? And if it's taken as the best combination of a high plus minus without a lot of points, then Fedorov should have won it. Bure and Yzerman are both in the middle of those two depending on those categories. Yet Doug Gilmour, the guy with the worst plus-minus of that group, was the Selke winner.

Furthermore, the NHL has never seen a year where the Selke award winner also led the league in plus-minus. A forward has led the league in plus minus over 20 times, including Wayne Gretzky with four times on top of the plus-minus charts, and yet no forward who has led the league in plus-minus has won the Selke. Not even in a different year.

Plus-minus has much more bearing on which defensemen will be in the running for the Norris; if you look at the defensemen who have led the league in plus-minus, they are usually in the running for the Norris that season.

Just out of curiosity, why do you personally, along with some others here bag on Matthew Schneider all the time for his defensive play yet he continues to post strong plus/minus numbers year after year. He hasn't been a minus player forever.

And if you look, he does do a fair amount of scoring on the PP, which doesn't help your +/- and therefore would only further the point that he's doing and has done quite well defensively throughout the past 6-7 years or so.

Why is his defensive play just bagged on here constantly yet we have all this love for Kronwall who made one of the biggest gaffs i've seen in my life last game giving the puck away right in the slot.

Dats +/- surely is an indicator that he is a good defensive player. Where does it say that +/- is an "offensive statistic". Is this another one of Eva's make believe facts?

If its an offensive indicator then why do coaches and commentators look at +/- when they're talking about defensive abilities or liabilities?

I've never heard anybody say that Brad Richards -25 is a poor indicator of his offensive ability.

So no, I don't agree with that blanket statement of yours that +/- is an "offensive statistic".

Whatever, I don't know that Dats has any chance of winning it even though I think he's a fantastic defensive player given his role is not to be Kris Draper. We all watch the games and see just how good he is at defending, taking the puck, controlling the puck, making great decisions on where and how to get the puck out of the defensive zone. Can anyone recall the last time Dats did not get a puck cleared out of the zone when he had the chance?

I don't think Dats gets nearly enough credit.

[toby91_ca 620]

Dats +/- surely is an indicator that he is a good defensive player. Where does it say that +/- is an "offensive statistic". Is this another one of Eva's make believe facts?

If its an offensive indicator then why do coaches and commentators look at +/- when they're talking about defensive abilities or liabilities?

I've never heard anybody say that Brad Richards -25 is a poor indicator of his offensive ability.

So no, I don't agree with that blanket statement of yours that +/- is an "offensive statistic".

I've always been of the belief that the +/- stat is the most missinterpreted stat out there. You really do have to take it with a grain of salt. Someone with a strong +/- stat is not necessarily a strong defensive player. Personally, I think it is more of a team stat than anything else. If you play on a good team, that scores far more goals than it allows and you are a guy that gets top minutes on that team, your +/- stat should be pretty good.

I can see where someone might even argue that a strong +/- stat is a better indicator of a strong offensive player rather than defensive. I think it is a bit of both, but maybe I'd lean more to the offensive side. You can have 5 guys out there that are the best defensive players in the world and never allow a goal to be scored when they are on, but if they never generate any offense, they'll be stuck with a +/- of zero.

Datsyuk is an offensive player who is responsible defensively + plays on a great team. That is a recipe for an incredible +/- stat which would be unfair to compare to a defensively minded player on a weaker team.

Gretzky lead the league in +/- 4 times in his career and I believe has the 3rd highest single season +/- stat (+98) in history. I don't think many would argue that he was a great defensive player.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I've always been of the belief that the +/- stat is the most missinterpreted stat out there. You really do have to take it with a grain of salt. Someone with a strong +/- stat is not necessarily a strong defensive player. Personally, I think it is more of a team stat than anything else. If you play on a good team, that scores far more goals than it allows and you are a guy that gets top minutes on that team, your +/- stat should be pretty good.

I can see where someone might even argue that a strong +/- stat is a better indicator of a strong offensive player rather than defensive. I think it is a bit of both, but maybe I'd lean more to the offensive side. You can have 5 guys out there that are the best defensive players in the world and never allow a goal to be scored when they are on, but if they never generate any offense, they'll be stuck with a +/- of zero.

Datsyuk is an offensive player who is responsible defensively + plays on a great team. That is a recipe for an incredible +/- stat which would be unfair to compare to a defensively minded player on a weaker team.

Gretzky lead the league in +/- 4 times in his career and I believe has the 3rd highest single season +/- stat (+98) in history. I don't think many would argue that he was a great defensive player.

You make some very good points. Again though, I go back to the fact that we all watch the games. We don't need +/- to tell us how good or bad or okay Dats is defensively. You either see it or you don't if you're watching the games.

I see a genius out there. IMO, Dats is, much like Lidstrom, light years ahead of just about everyone in the hockey sense department, which translates to why I think he's so good defensively as well as offensively.

[Opie 308]

You make some very good points. Again though, I go back to the fact that we all watch the games. We don't need +/- to tell us how good or bad or okay Dats is defensively. You either see it or you don't if you're watching the games.

I see a genius out there. IMO, Dats is, much like Lidstrom, light years ahead of just about everyone in the hockey sense department, which translates to why I think he's so good defensively as well as offensively.

I agree it is the fact that they seem to know how the game will unfold in front of them, neither ever seem to be that far from the puck, nor the action.

I am not saying Dats is the end all and be all of the team or the Selke award, but he is a very very good defensive forward.

I think the majority of the "issues" in this thread is that much like the Dom/Ozzie phenomenon where instead of rooting for the team people root for their guy. Z has his followers and D his. Then their are those of us that support the team and it's players. Neither is technically right or wrong just how we root. However it seems as though anytime some one mentions either D or Z without giving credit to the other, the other's following feels slighted or insulted.

Why Dats won't win the Selke is simple. He is a very very good defensive forward on a team with at least 4 very very good defensive forwards, and one of them happens to be on his line from time to time.

So he never stands out, then you factor into that equation the fact that the team as a whole is one of the best Defensive teams if not the best in the league. All of those things make him a less attractive vote, same with Z, same with Drapes, same with Cleary (when healthy).

Because the team as a whole does so well, guys don't have the chance to stand out and make people take notice, they just look like another Yzerman type guy who plays a great two way game, but is never really recognized unless they do something special. On another team being an Yzerman type guy may get you noticed, but in Detroit it is expected of you!

[Guest LivingtheDream]

I understand you are trying to justify Dats for the Selke.

But the reality is, as good as he is defensively, he's not even the top defensive forward on his team...so his chances of winning the Selke are pretty slim.

Actually, I am not. That is why I said "Selke or not." I was merely commenting on Datsyuk's unique use of his stick handling skills as a defensive asset. In effect, appreciate what he does without factoring in Selke potential.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

I agree it is the fact that they seem to know how the game will unfold in front of them, neither ever seem to be that far from the puck, nor the action.

I am not saying Dats is the end all and be all of the team or the Selke award, but he is a very very good defensive forward.

I think the majority of the "issues" in this thread is that much like the Dom/Ozzie phenomenon where instead of rooting for the team people root for their guy. Z has his followers and D his. Then their are those of us that support the team and it's players. Neither is technically right or wrong just how we root. However it seems as though anytime some one mentions either D or Z without giving credit to the other, the other's following feels slighted or insulted.

Why Dats won't win the Selke is simple. He is a very very good defensive forward on a team with at least 4 very very good defensive forwards, and one of them happens to be on his line from time to time.

So he never stands out, then you factor into that equation the fact that the team as a whole is one of the best Defensive teams if not the best in the league. All of those things make him a less attractive vote, same with Z, same with Drapes, same with Cleary (when healthy).

Because the team as a whole does so well, guys don't have the chance to stand out and make people take notice, they just look like another Yzerman type guy who plays a great two way game, but is never really recognized unless they do something special. On another team being an Yzerman type guy may get you noticed, but in Detroit it is expected of you!

well said.

[2probert4 8]

Just because Pavel's role transcends the defensive aspect doesn't mean he's not the best defensive forward as well. You don't need stats to realize this, just watch him play. Tell me, who's else is having a Selke type year?

Mike Fisher of Ottawa is one of the favorites. Heard it yesterday on XM.

[eva unit zero 271]

Just out of curiosity, why do you personally, along with some others here bag on Matthew Schneider all the time for his defensive play yet he continues to post strong plus/minus numbers year after year. He hasn't been a minus player forever.

And if you look, he does do a fair amount of scoring on the PP, which doesn't help your +/- and therefore would only further the point that he's doing and has done quite well defensively throughout the past 6-7 years or so.

Why is his defensive play just bagged on here constantly yet we have all this love for Kronwall who made one of the biggest gaffs i've seen in my life last game giving the puck away right in the slot.

Dats +/- surely is an indicator that he is a good defensive player. Where does it say that +/- is an "offensive statistic". Is this another one of Eva's make believe facts?

If its an offensive indicator then why do coaches and commentators look at +/- when they're talking about defensive abilities or liabilities?

I've never heard anybody say that Brad Richards -25 is a poor indicator of his offensive ability.

So no, I don't agree with that blanket statement of yours that +/- is an "offensive statistic".

Whatever, I don't know that Dats has any chance of winning it even though I think he's a fantastic defensive player given his role is not to be Kris Draper. We all watch the games and see just how good he is at defending, taking the puck, controlling the puck, making great decisions on where and how to get the puck out of the defensive zone. Can anyone recall the last time Dats did not get a puck cleared out of the zone when he had the chance?

I don't think Dats gets nearly enough credit.

Plus minus is an offensive statistic. The best players for plus-minus are invariably the top offensive players on good teams. ALWAYS. Defensively-minded players on bad teams will come out with mediocre plus-minus scores even if they are top defensive players. Offense-only players on good defensive teams will generally come out with a strong plus-minus because their team doesn't allow many goals, and as such there is not much opportunity to receive a minus. Dany Heatley this season is a prime example; he is at best only above average defensively but has a better plus-minus rating per game than Datsyuk. Is Heatley more Selke material than Datsyuk? Or is he simply playing on a line that generates more offense?

I didn't say Dats wasn't good defensively. Just that anyone putting him as a Selke nominee is overrating his D.

[Guest LivingtheDream]

Where does it say it's purely an offensive stat? If it was then it might just be "+." Oh no, now I will get a 600 word stat laden reply. It isn't just his +- that is evidence that he is playing great two way hockey, it isn't just takeaways, it is also comments from no less than Hasek saying he has never had any forward play better D for him along with numerous similar comments by the coach and other big shots in the game. Again, not talking about Selke, leave that out of this, just that he is playing great hockey on every end of the ice. Unselfish, adaptive and becoming more complete each season.

Edited March 14, 2008 by LivingtheDream

[eva unit zero 271]

Where does it say it's purely an offensive stat? If it was then it might just be "+." Oh no, now I will get a 600 word stat laden reply. It isn't just his +- that is evidence that he is playing great two way hockey, it isn't just takeaways, it is also comments from no less than Hasek saying he has never had any forward play better D for him along with numerous similar comments by the coach and other big shots in the game. Again, not talking about Selke, leave that out of this, just that he is playing great hockey on every end of the ice. Unselfish, adaptive and becoming more complete each season.

I will say again. Plus-minus, with relation to forwards, is driven by lines that have good offensive succes, and have more offensive success than their counterparts. This is a statistical fact. Most forwards towards the top of the plus-minus charts have at least one regular linemate nearby.

Of the top 30 forwards in +/-, only Getzlaf, Parise, Sharp, Stastny, Gaborik, Sundin, and Perron do not have a regular linemate also included in the group. Sharp is about the only guy there who belongs anywhere near the Selke conversation. All of the remainder except Perron are their team's top scorer by a significant margin this season.

And takeaways are a better gauge of skilled forecheckers than anything else, and even this must be taken into the context of ice time...a guy with ten takeaways in ten games playing ten minutes is not a better forechecker by this metric than a guy with 8 takeaways in 8 games playing 10 minutes.

[dicksmack 33]

Eva unit zero says: "a guy with ten takeaways in ten games playing ten minutes is not a better forechecker by this metric than a guy with 8 takeaways in 8 games playing 10 minutes."

I may not know what the hell you're talking about and you might not know what in gawd's name you're talking about, but I know this: Datsyuk is the best two - way player in the NHL.

[GiantRobot 0]

Eva unit zero says: "a guy with ten takeaways in ten games playing ten minutes is not a better forechecker by this metric than a guy with 8 takeaways in 8 games playing 10 minutes."

I may not know what the hell you're talking about and you might not know what in gawd's name you're talking about, but I know this: Datsyuk is the best two - way player in the NHL.

He is not the best, but he is surely one of them.

Takeaways are only a part of that distinction.

[Kira 451]

Being Sergei Fedorov would certainly help his chances.

How pathetic.

[eva unit zero 271]

Eva unit zero says: "a guy with ten takeaways in ten games playing ten minutes is not a better forechecker by this metric than a guy with 8 takeaways in 8 games playing 10 minutes."

I may not know what the hell you're talking about and you might not know what in gawd's name you're talking about, but I know this: Datsyuk is the best two - way player in the NHL.

Datsyuk isn't even the best two-way player on his team. That said, he's still top five or ten in the league.

[GiantRobot 0]

How pathetic.

Yet Fedorov has won The Selke, and Pavel has not.