I went with the Nashville trio... if the poll was for top 4 defenders though and you threw in Barker to the Chicago side. I would probably have to go with them.
Campbell is overpaid, but it's not because he sucks. Chicago trio, hands down.
Uh, yes he does suck. He's a defensive zone player about as often as Ken Hitchock is a McDonalds customer. Campbell's contract is based off one skill; his skating. He has a mediocre, at best, point shot, solid passing ability, and is just sickening to watch in his own zone.
Still, as good as Weber is and as bad as Campbell is, I take the Chicago trio without any question. Keith is THAT good, and Seabrook is close to him. That said, Campbell and Hossa's laughable contracts are going to be the the sole reason, if Chicago doesn't win a Cup in the next 2 seasons, they won't win one for a while.
Although, I don't get the love for Barker. He isn't in the class of the above 6. Nice shot, but not great defensively (well haven't watched him this season).
1. Duncan Keith
2. Shae Weber
3. Ryan Suter
4. Dan Hamhuis
5. Brent Seabrook
6. Brian Campbell
Hamhuis should be challenging Campbell and losing for last on that list.
Keith is certainly the best of the bunch.
Personally, I think Suter is slightly better than Weber, but its close. In fact, most Nashville fans think so as well. Every time they had a "If you have a Nashville area code, call in and text who you think Nashville's best defenseman is" poll last season, Suter won by 75% or better, with Weber coming in second, which surprised a lot of non-Preds fans.
Both these guys are well above the #4
When it comes down to the last 3.
Seabrook is an up and coming good all around defender.
Campbell's stock has fallen pretty far in the past year. A fairly one dimensional offensive player, and soft.
Hamhuis is a great defender, but more of a one dimensional defensive presence at this point in his career.
This poll should be pretty close IMO.
__________________
"I would say I've never seen a guy who did as much offensively and
defensively as much as Bobby Orr did."
-Gordie Howe - "Mr. Hockey" HOCKEY HISTORIAN'S CORNER
Chicago for me. I think Keith is pretty clearly the best of the bunch.
And despite Campbell being overpaid, he's still better than Hamhuis. The goal of hockey is to outscore the opposition, so his offensive abilities are, you know, useful.
I'd rank them like this:
1. Keith
2/3. Suter/Weber
4/5. Seabrook/Campbell
6. Hamhuis
I picked nashville but now that I think about it Keith and Seabrook are just too good. I look at their teams shot differential and I think "they have got to have something to do with that."
Chicago for me. I think Keith is pretty clearly the best of the bunch.
And despite Campbell being overpaid, he's still better than Hamhuis. The goal of hockey is to outscore the opposition, so his offensive abilities are, you know, useful.
I'd rank them like this:
1. Keith
2/3. Suter/Weber
4/5. Seabrook/Campbell
6. Hamhuis
That's why teams have forwards. A defenseman's first and foremost priority is defense. If their offensive capabilities are much better than their defensive capabilities, they're more like a 4th forward. I'd take Hamhuis easily over Campbell any day not even taking salary into account in which Hamhuis would win by a landslide.
That's why teams have forwards. A defenseman's first and foremost priority is defense. If their offensive capabilities are much better than their defensive capabilities, they're more like a 4th forward. I'd take Hamhuis easily over Campbell any day not even taking salary into account in which Hamhuis would win by a landslide.
