Guys, just be okay with the fact that we disagree.

Most of the circular arguments that go nowhere on this site are, ultimately, about people's opinions on players. And, sometimes, the differences between 2 players are small enough that it'd be simpler just to say, "yeah, they're both good, so just move on with your life." It comes down to opinions that are subjective and not easily comparable (e.g. liking smooth-skating defenders vs. ones that throw hits).

But there are some opinions and stances that are based on incorrect facts, and operating under those opinions typically gets people into trouble. In this case, you assert that Dustin Byfuglien is, at best, a third-pair defender because he wastes most of his time hitting and does nothing else. The concept of pairings is generally accepted by most to be predicated on point production, and Byfuglien's very high point production stands in stark contrast to this label of a 'third-pair defender.' And the claim that he does nothing else besides hits implies that he does no useful things, which has already been shown to be false by his point production, which people generally accept as a 'useful thing,' because points are the ultimate objective for most players, and goals and assists win games.

I'm mostly just doing this to try and help you understand that you need to be able to gather and verify facts about a hockey player before you begin to evaluate them. I assume that you can do the same in real life, where, when presented with a situation, you can evaluate it properly and come to a conclusion based on correct facts. It shouldn't be too hard to extend that skill to hockey players.

That's a pretty bold assumption lol but great post.

Well i'm guessing you think Girardi is a 3rd pairing defenseman when i think he's a good player. If you want be to i can make a post like this one you made except about you thinking Girardi's bad. Sorry if i'm wrong but you do think Girardi is a 3rd pair d-man, right?

Do it. Let's see your argument about Girardi being good.

Girardi is near the top of the league in shot-blocks, plays on the top pair, play's every game (and i don't think he's ever ben a healthy scratch in his career), was signed for 5.5mil a year, stops scoring chances, etc.

His 44.24% corsi shows shows that he does very little to reduce scoring chances, his 5.5 million dollar salary makes him an offseason favourite to be bought out and things like playing on the top pairing are completely arbitrary as it is completely team dependent. Statements like "stops scoring chances" need empirical evidence to be supported, not just eye tested. And to the blocked shots, Russell led the league in blocked shots which should prove that blocked shots is not correlated to being a top pairing dman.

I know, and i think Russell is a VERY good player.

At this point I'm not even surprised.

If you think shot blocks tell nothing then how is Karlsson a top 3 d-man in the league?!?!?!?

You can't be serious... Karlsson is a Norris caliber dman because he is an elite skater, passer, shooter etc etc etc. He could have blocked 0 shots this season and he would still be the best dman in the world. Any person on the planet can block shots, only a select few can make the saucer pass to Hoffman.

So true.

Doughty is all of those things PLUS a 2 time stanley cup winner and all that. Doughty is the best defenseman if you ask me.

Nice deflection and though Doughty is an elite skater/passer/shooter Karlsson is still superior in those categories.

Doughty can skate, move the puck, block shots, get to loose pucks, etc. Karlsson can do those things and is better offensively but i'd go with Doughty, the more defensive defenseman of the two.

Goodness gracious...

Yeah... It's not pretty...

what's wrong with taking the guy who's better defensively?