Erik Karlsson’s 100 points should not make him a Norris Trophy shoo-in

Erik Karlsson’s 100 points should not make him a Norris Trophy shoo-in
Credit: Darren Yamashita-USA TODAY Sports

The NHL released its finalists for the Norris Trophy for best defenseman on Thursday night, and the announcement was not without controversy. Cale Makar was included despite playing in only 60 games, while Erik Karlsson got the nod thanks to an outstanding offensive year on a poor team. On Friday’s edition of Daily Faceoff Live, hosts Nick Alberga and Mike McKenna discussed whether Makar should be considered at all, and if Karlsson has scored his way into yet another Norris Trophy.

Nick Alberga: I was a bit perplexed that Cale Makar was a Norris Trophy finalist. Fox, Makar, and Karlsson were nominated. My reasoning behind that wasn’t because I don’t like Cale Makar; I think he’s a tremendous player. I think he’s the best defenseman in the game right now. Having said that, with the sample size I think there were other guys worthy of the nomination. We all know who’s winning the award, but how’d you see it play out?

Mike McKenna: Do we really know who’s winning the award? Is it going to be Erik Karlsson? He wasn’t my number 1 pick. 

I don’t think Makar deserved to be a finalist. It’s not because he’s bad or he didn’t have a good year, but he only played 60 games. I can’t have anyone on a trophy list that didn’t play at least 70 games. You’re talking about the course of an entire season.

I had Adam Fox as my number 1 and I’ll tell you why. He’s the first guy over the boards on the Ranger’s penalty kill. He’s on their number 1 power-play unit. He’s +28. He’s a one-man offensive show. 

The Norris Trophy is given to the defensive player who demonstrates outstanding ability in the position throughout the season. That means in all situations to me, I’m an ex-goalie. That’s why I didn’t have Josh Morrissey on my list. I didn’t even have Erik Karlsson on my list. Was Erik Karlsson an All-Star for me when I picked those? Oh yeah! Absolutely, but for all-around D, no chance.

I think there were some players who probably deserved some love. I thought that Heiskanen deserved a look. Lindholm, Hughes, Dahlin, any of those guys would have been a better choice than Makar, but hey, it comes down to voting. This is who we have. What’s your take?

Nick Alberga: I got a lot of backlash on social media for saying there were other players involved that played more games and had a similar impact to Cale Makar, but I would have loved to see them recognized. Morrissey is one, Dahlin’s another guy. I love the Heiskanen shout. Hampus Lindholm is such a wild card but gets lost in the shuffle sometimes in Boston. I just think we are losing sight of what this award’s about a bit.

I don’t discount what you said about Erik Karlsson, I totally get it. I want the most all-around defenseman to win this award. We have gotten away from that a bit, no?

Mike McKenna: We have, and I think it needs to be corrected. I don’t like it; I’m an old goalie, I know who plays well in front of you and who you can trust. Pete DeBoer was pretty pissed last night postgame when the awards nominations came out, and he went “where’s Miro Hieskanen?” I agree with him. There’s a lot of players like that, where they are not only good in defensive situations, but they’re also putting points up, Nick. Quinn Hughes should have been in the mix and Heiskanen was 7th overall scoring by a defenseman. I don’t like it that we just give it to the highest-scoring D-man, I don’t think that’s the spirit of this award.

You can watch the entire episode here…

Keep scrolling for more content!
19+ | Please play responsibly! | Terms and Conditions apply