why is no one even mentioning Malkin? Leads in takeaways and is a +19

Posted by btumpak on 03/24/09 at 08:13 AM ET

Nobody mentions Malkin because he doesn’t play against his opponent’s best offensive players.  A Selke candidate has to be used in a role to shutdown their opponent’s top scorers.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 08:16 AM ET

yeah i forgot he plays against 4th liners every night… his name should be mentioned thats all I am saying.

Posted by btumpak on 03/24/09 at 08:40 AM ET

More often than not, Malkin plays against a checking line that is trying to stop him.  He is not playing a defensive role at all in those circumstances.

The only mention Malkin should get for the Selke Trophy is that he is far too much of an offensive forward to be considered a defensive one - let alone the best defensive forward in the league.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 08:56 AM ET

Has anyone consideres Patrick Marleau.  He does play against the other teams top players, is +20, with 37 goals(5 shorthanded), and plays in all situations.

Posted by pelonshark on 03/24/09 at 09:30 AM ET

Marleau is a far better candidate than Malkin is.  He doesn’t measure up to Richards in terms of the quality of opposition numbers he has on behund the net, but he could be in the running for a nomination. 

If I had to vote right now, I would nominate Richards, Koivu and Eric Staal - meaning I would not nominate Marleau - though i see him as a very reasonable candidate.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 09:54 AM ET

What about that guy who won it last year?

He doesn’t even get in the top 3?

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/24/09 at 10:34 AM ET

I’m not a fan of the choice of Datsyuk as the Selke winner last year.  He has strong defensive skills but often finds himself playing against the best shutdown players on the opposing team and thus less frequently in a defensive role - more often than those players I would nominate.

I wouldn’t nominate him for the award this year and I wouldn’t have last season either.  I think it is quite likely the voters might disagree with me .

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 11:22 AM ET

But you’d nominate Staal, who plays a whopping 1:25 a night on the PK?

Whatever.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/24/09 at 12:11 PM ET

Playing on the penalty kill is only one part of being a defensive forward.  Another big part is playing in the defensive situations at even strength.  Staal does that a lot more frequently than Datsyuk.

For a player with the offensive skills of a Datsyuk or even a Staal to be used properly offensively and also to play in enough defensive situations to be a Selke nominee the player must log an incredible number of minutes.  Staal plays 21 plus minutes a game and Datsyuk plays 19 something.  That difference of almost two minutes is almost exclusively defensive situations.

I would argue that a quick and dirty way to find Selke candidates (among high scorers) is to find those forwards who have a lot more ice time than their point total would make you expect.  That certainly doesn’t mean that the top forwards in ice time (Ovechkin, Malkin...) are defensive forwards, but those players like Richards, Koivu, Marleau, Staal, Shawn Horcoff, who have a lot more ice time than you might expect from their point total are almost always good defensive forwards and that extra ice time is almost always defensive situations. 

This is a quick and dirry approach that will never unearth the John Madden, Sami Pahlsson type defensive forwards who lack the same offensive upside, but it tends to give good results as far back as I can find ice time numbers.

Pavel Datsyuk just doesn’t play enough in defensive situations to be considered for a defensive forward award with these other forwards who do.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 01:15 PM ET

You’re saying that if you had a choice between Richards, Koivu, Marleau, Staal or Horcoff… you’d take all of them over Datsyuk to stop an opposing scorer from scoring?

That’s just insanity brought on by overanalysis.  Datsyuk’s the #6 faceoff guy in the league, has a 2.1ish GA/60 on a team that’s had a crazy-high GAA all year, the best +/-/60 in the league, only 2 fewer takeaways than a guy with two more GP and a ton more total IT.

would argue that a quick and dirty way to find Selke candidates (among high scorers) is to find those forwards who have a lot more ice time than their point total would make you expect.  That certainly doesn’t mean that the top forwards in ice time (Ovechkin, Malkin...) are defensive forwards, but those players like Richards, Koivu, Marleau, Staal, Shawn Horcoff, who have a lot more ice time than you might expect from their point total are almost always good defensive forwards and that extra ice time is almost always defensive situations. 

Or it might just mean that they are among the best offensive players on their teams, so even though they aren’t producing as much as they should be the team really doesn’t have any better options, so they get the IT.

But, since none of the three guys you’d nominate are actually going to get nominations, I think you’re fairly self-aware about the fringe-ish nature of your position.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/24/09 at 01:28 PM ET

You’re saying that if you had a choice between Richards, Koivu, Marleau, Staal or Horcoff… you’d take all of them over Datsyuk to stop an opposing scorer from scoring?

No I am saying that this season Richards, Koivu, Marleau and Stall all have been used successfully in defensive situations more often than Datsyuk.  That makes them better Selke Trophy candidates this season.

To argue that these guys are the best offensive players on their teams is clearly false in at least two of the cases.  Joe Thornton clearly is a better offensive player than Patrick Marleau.  Ales Hemsky clearly is a better offensive player than Shawn Horcoff.  However, it is Horcoff and Marleau getting the ice time in defensive situations that gives them their team’s ice time lead.

But, since none of the three guys you’d nominate are actually going to get nominations, I think you’re fairly self-aware about the fringe-ish nature of your position.

I think my pick of Mike Richards to win the Selke is very consistent with what the media seems to be writing.  So I think that statement is wrong.  Do you seriously think Richards will not even be a nominee?

Typically, the Selke voting is spread out over a lot of people.  There is no consensus on how best to determine a good defensive forward.  Last year 82 forwards got at least one Selke vote.  19 got at least one first place vote.  The results are here.

I wouldn’t argue my opinions are any more “fringe-ish” than many of the people who actually vote.  I would argue they are much better qualified than a lot of the people who vote.  Last year somebody gave Viktor Kozlov a first place vote.  That is crazy.  His only qualification was a good +/- from playing a lot with Ovechkin.  Eight different Red Wings got at least one vote.  That says that the voters cannot decide who the best defensive forwards on your team are.

Posted by PuckStopsHere on 03/24/09 at 01:41 PM ET

No I am saying that this season Richards, Koivu, Marleau and Stall all have been used successfully in defensive situations more often than Datsyuk.  That makes them better Selke Trophy candidates this season.

As long as you understand you’re making an entirely subjective argument and attempting to pass it off as factual, I’m fine with you saying that.  There’s next to nothing which can be construed as factually supportive of your assertion, and the only reason I say ‘next to’ is that it’s always possible to find a stat to prove something.

You do realize that the Selke is supposed to be “Awarded to the forward who best excels in the defensive aspects of the game.” Now granted, the award has become bastardized to the point that if a guy doesn’t score at least 20 goals he won’t even be considered for the Selke, but come on.

Just because a team is deeper than another club and isn’t forced by their lack of depth to trot the same matchups out on the ice for every situation of every game isn’t even remotely reason enough to attempt to denegrate a guys level of play relative to other NHLers.

I mean, come on… do you really think that if an NHL coach has Pavel Datsyuk and Shawn Horcoff sitting on his bench equally rested in a critical late game defensive situation he’s going to tap Horcoff on the shoulder and leave Datsyuk on the bench?

Really?

To argue that these guys are the best offensive players on their teams is clearly false in at least two of the cases.  Joe Thornton clearly is a better offensive player than Patrick Marleau.  Ales Hemsky clearly is a better offensive player than Shawn Horcoff.  However, it is Horcoff and Marleau getting the ice time in defensive situations that gives them their team’s ice time lead.

I think you’re missing my point.  First, I said “Or it might just mean that they are among the best offensive players on their teams”, so I have no idea where you get that ‘To argue that these guys are the best offensive players on their teams is clearly false’ malarkey.  Secondly, I’m saying a reason guys like Horcoff and Marleau may be getting this elevated IT which you seem to think automatically means they are good defensive players is that there may not be a ton of other options for that IT.  Seriously, prior to the recent trades who exactly was Edmonton going to play more if they decided to play Horcoff less?  Penner?  Gagner?  Cogliano?  Please.  Horcoff is clearly a superior overall player to all of those guys, so he’s going to get a bunch of IT, and far enough superior that he should get as much IT as he can handle.  As he should.  Same thing in SJ with Marleau.  Thornton already gets a ton of IT, so who would get any IT the team would shed from Marleau?  Goc?  Again, please.

Now don’t mistake my intent here, I’m not trying to draw a universal correlary from a single statistical aberration… I just think it’s moderately silly for you to do that, either.  There are a bunch of other equally probable explanations for why a guy with a slightly depressed point total is getting minutes in excess of what that production might warrant.

Eight different Red Wings got at least one vote.  That says that the voters cannot decide who the best defensive forwards on your team are.

Or, perhaps, that there are a lot of good defensive forwards.  Just because there may be more defensive forwards on one team than another does not mean that the best defensive forwards on either club are any better or worse.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 03/24/09 at 05:59 PM ET