Get bent if you think Pietrangelo is a 2nd pair, top 4 d-man. That is all. I'm not gonna argue.

You are right, he's a legit top line guy. He doesn't belong on here, I kind of forgot what I was doing there for a bit. Lol

I'm pacing around with my fists clenched! j/k

Lol, I hear you, I am getting so annoyed with people calling everyone that plays defence a top 4 because they play in the top 4 of their ****ty team. Talk to a blackhawks fan and they'll say Connor Murphy is definitely a top 4 guy, because he would be a 2nd pair guy on most teams but never a top pair guy. Well if he isn't capable of playing top line minutes, then he isn't a top 4, he's a middle pair, or a bottom 4 guy.

Oh god haha we’re gonna have an issue with this list

Can't lie, it's a very annoying term to me too. I think because it's mostly used to downplay a trade offer on this site into generic terms that don't at all account for player value. Top 6 F for top 4 D? Steen plays in the top 6, Rielly plays in the top 4, let's make a deal!

Jake Muzzin?

He isn't a player that'd I'd want on my top pair. He's a middle pair guy.

I am open to feedback.

Here's my take, and I'll try to keep it short.

The easiest way to classify defenseman is with a number. It's not the most effective, but it's the easiest. So...

Guy plays all situations, 25+ min per night, scores 40+ pts, 10+ goals most seasons, is on the ice for the biggest minutes of the game? He's a no.1

Guy plays well with with a number 1, might not drive play, might be less balanced than the no.1 but can handle the same workload? He's a no.2

Guy is really good at defense or really good at offense, but can't handle 25+ minutes per night so he finds a home on the 2nd pair? He's a no. 3

Guy makes zero mistakes if he's on a bottom pair, can play some special teams but probably doesn't get much of a chance, and wouldn't really explode if he did? He's a no.4

These aren't perfect, but it's much better than going to daily faceoff or leftwinglock or wherever, reading what pairing he is on today, and considering that to be his value in a trade.

Fair enough. I'd argue that he's much closer to being on a top pair if need be than he is to being pushed down to a bottom pair.

Completely agree that top4 D is thrown out there way too much though.

What’s your definition of top 4 D? Cause I see a whole lot of top pairing guys on this list.

I like that breakdown a lot. In that case, I see a lot of #1s and #2s on this list

At least half the time top 4 is thrown around, you can just as easily say the player is a bottom 4 defenceman. In reality most of these guys are 2nd pair guys. I don't understand why people don't shift their thinking to top pair, middle pair or bottom pair, that actually at least means something.

That definitely is far more accurate, but you then you have trouble with certain players ranking based on the team they play for. For example, Rielly is definitely #1 in TO but what is he in San Jose? Or Nashville? Well probably still on the top pair but he'd be relegated to possibly not even being on the PP.

Pretty much why it's an imperfect system, but it's very possible that teams have multiple no.1's or no.2's. Nashville alone ruins the no.1-no.4 ranking system lol. They have 4 x ... no. 1.5's????

I hate the term top 4 defenceman, hardly anyone says 3rd pairing d-man, so it makes it seem like there is only top 4 defenseman and 7th defenseman with no in between.

Majority ofThe guys you listed though are not second pairing guys haha. I agree with what you’re saying but bad examples

Right!?!?! This defenceman who played 3 minutes on the top pair one time and got scored on 14 times before being put on the 2nd pair for the rest of the time is a top 4 defenceman worth a 1st, top prospect and a roster player. It's so stupid

To me a top 4 guys is someone who generally plays on the middle pair but under certain circumstances can play solid minutes on the top pair but are not at all #1's. Pietrangelo should be on here.

There is 1 #1 in Pietrangelo.

I am sure you would rate Parayko and Manson as #2's which I won't argue.

When I see the the trade value of the the four Carolina RHD....seems like all four of their RHD are "top four" Dmen. Yes, I agree with LoganOliver. Also I'm surprised and disappointed that so many fans dismiss the so called 5 and 6 Dmen on a team as relatively insignificant. Gee when a pair of Dmen are playing 14 minutes a game, they better be NHL competent, or your team is going to suck.

These are guys who are great 2nd pair guys and can play on the pair without a problem. Outside of Pietrangelo though, there isn't a number 1 guy here. Hence why they fit as a top 4 defenceman.

But many others will say Connor Murphy or Justin Faulk are top 4 guys and neither of those guys would you want on your top pair. So they are middle pair guys not top 4

Interested on how you view nisk. My bias tells me he’s top 4 more 2nd pairing being able to play top pairing on some to most nhl teams but not sure if everyone would agree. I think top 4 potential is also confusing when taking about prospects or younger nhl players.

I mean it depends what team. If your top pairing is
Lindholm-parayko that’s a very good top pairing. Parayko would be #1 in that case with lindholm close behind at #2.
I’d say: parayko, Hamilton, and peiterangelo could all be #1s on a cup contending team.
Manson, spurgeon are really good #2s
And the rest are all 3s and 4s