The Adam Fox slander was always exaggerated, but we are starting to reach ridiculous levels. Given some of the discourse, you’d think he was the second coming of Tom Poti. Cries about his defensive play, his skating, his production, the flailing powerplay, and other nonsensical complaints are becoming louder, yet the facts haven’t changed. Here are the facts: Adam Fox is a top-three defenseman in the NHL. This is not up for debate, but I’ll entertain the debate for now.
Why the Adam Fox slander?
The Adam Fox slander only started last year during the Four Nations tournament, where he had a bad few games. I don’t think anyone will disagree that he didn’t have the best tournament. Things calmed down a bit until Fox was left off Team USA’s roster for the 2026 Olympics, and that’s when the Adam Fox slander really took off.
There are two consistent arguments that I see regarding Fox that are easily disproved: Fox is a bad skater and Fox is bad at defense.
Addressing Fox’s skating, Fox does not have elite top speed. No one is debating that, but if you think that makes him a bad skater, then perhaps a course on scouting would be beneficial. Fox makes up for lack of high end speed with great agility and edgework, he is the best I’ve seen at walking the line to keep the zone, and he excels with quick cuts and deception to change direction. Those little head fakes you see on the powerplay are a factor in his skating.
As for the Adam Fox slander for his defensive play, this is again wildly overblown. The Rangers are having two awful seasons in a row and it’s easy to blame the stars for not putting the team on their backs. But Fox isn’t the issue here, especially with his defensive play. No one is perfect and Fox makes mistakes, but so do Vlad Gavrikov, Quinn Hughes, Cale Makar, Brock Faber, etc. If you’re looking for perfect defensive play, then you’re never going to be happy.
How does Fox compare with his peers?
The Adam Fox slander usually ends with something along the lines of “Fox isn’t nearly as good as (player X).” The most commonly named players are Hughes, Makar, Faber, Victor Hedman, Zach Werenski, and Charlie McAvoy. I’ve seen Jake Sanderson and Jackson Lacombe mentioned as well.
Starting with raw counting stats, we have to factor in Fox’ injuries this year. Raw counts put Fox (5-34-39 in 45 games) near the bottom of the list. But he’s also missed 27 games. If we were to put Fox’s numbers into a 72 game pace–the Rangers have played 72 games–then he’d be around 8-54-62 in 72 games. Keeping in mind how bad the Rangers are, that would most likely calm some of the Adam Fox slander.
Per QuantHockey, Fox is still top-ten in scoring in terms of points-per-60 minutes in all situations. At even strength, Fox does drop to 28th in points-per-60 (Quinn Hughes is 22nd), but is 3rd in powerplay P/60. From a per game standpoint, Fox is 10th in scoring at .867 points per game. This is a bit ironic, since all the Adam Fox slander is about his defense, but his offense puts him near the middle of the pack among his peers mentioned above.
Defensively, Fox is far and away the best at a macro level. No one is perfect and he makes mistakes, but his overall game is just far better defensively.
Above is how Fox compares to, in order from left to right, top to bottom, Quinn Hughes, Victor Hedman, Brock Faber, Jackson Lacombe, Jake Sanderson, Charlie McAvoy, Zach Werenski, and Cale Makar.
In terms of overall package, the only player who comes close to Fox is Hughes, but Fox’s overall play still edges him out. Hughes is just a faster skater. Werenski has better offensive numbers, but falls off on defense. The only players comparable to Fox on defense are Sanderson and Hughes.
So the Adam Fox slander on his defensive play seems misguided at best. He’s much like Henrik Lundqvist – consistently elite, which changes the discourse when someone has a one-off absurd season (Cale Makar scoring 30 goals, for example).
That doesn’t mean Fox is untouchable
The Adam Fox slander is proven to be misguided at best, and outrageously biased at worst. But that doesn’t mean the conversation about trading him should be abandoned. In fact, there is a strong argument for trading Fox based on the Rangers current team, its rebuild trajectory, and Fox’s age/contract status.
Fox has three years left at a $9.5 million cap hit. It’s highly unlikely the Rangers are truly competitive by the time Fox’s contract runs its course. That’s more on Chris Drury, and I’d be happy to be wrong here. If Drury threads the needle, then perhaps Fox stays. But right now, Fox is in that grey area as hitting the wrong side of 30 and needing a new contract around the time the Rangers may be growing into legitimate contenders.
If the argument for a trade isn’t based on the Adam Fox slander that is easily disproven, and more on team direction and timeline, then it makes a lot of sense. Fox should get the Quinn Hughes return, and using Anaheim as an example (there is nothing linking these two teams), would be something like Mason McTavish, one of Olen Zellweger or Pavel Mintyukov, a 1st round pick, and a sweetener. Those are significant pieces that jumpstart a rebuild.
Fox controls his own fate at this point. He may not be a Ranger after this summer, but the Adam Fox slander should have nothing to do with it.