View Single Post
07-22-2009, 06:35 PM
Dark Shadows
Registered User
Dark Shadows's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,986
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Lidstrom was better defensively and puts up a heck of a lot more points than Potvin did in the 80s -- add on the fact Potvin was often injured for more than 10% of the season and I see no reason asides from your preference for hitting and physical play. Physical play is nice, but it is not any more effective in keeping pucks out of the net than Lidstrom being in the perfect place at the perfect time and essentially serving as a black hole in the defensive end.
Lidstrom would not put up more points than potvin did. Not without chaning his style. At best, lidstrom would be Ray Bourque with 10% less offense in the 70's/80's. And Defensively? potvin was as good as Scott Stevens in his defense only years, only while also poviding the offense. And Stevens was very very close to lidstrom defensively. The gap between Potvin's offense over lidstrom is much larger than Lidstrom's small defensive edge.

Wilson, Hartsburg, Carlysle, Engblom, Becke, Howe, Marsh, Lowe, Larson, Babych, Marois, Green, Samuelsson, Ramsey, Patrick, McCrimmon were all beating Potvin in Norris votes in the 80s -- are all of them better than Lidstrom's competition as well?
Wilson, Howe and Carlyle in their best years were equal to or better than Pronger, Niedermayer or Blake. You try to point at their career achievements and say "Look, they are not as good", but it is a paper shield. In their best years they were outstanding, and many of the other names there were as well.

Besides which, it is moot. On per per game basis, Potvin was more valuable than any of them.

Potvin's injuries kept him from contributing squat to his team while he was injured and largely contributed to an early retirement. That's a liability; though sure -- it helped him produce more on a per game basis. Though I bet if I adjust for era Lidstrom on a point per game basis is very comparable to Potvin.
I wasn't talking about points per game. I was talking about the complete package per game. Potvin, offensively, Defensively and everything else he brought to the table on top in 70 games was worth a Lidstrom in 82 games.

Hogwash. Lidstrom's style would prevent him from scoring 35+ goals, but increased overall scoring makes 55 assists in the clutch and grab period into 75 assists in the 80s. 60 assists post-lockout is well over 80 in the 80s. Lidstrom would be scoring 90+ points in the 70s and 100+ points in the 80s.
Nope. Lidstrom's style would not have gotten him more than a 10-15 point boost a year on his stats. His very style would not have been as effective in the 70's/80's anyways

Lidstrom outperformed Potvin in assists in a much deeper league (and finished as high as 17th overall) than the league Potvin was in during the 70s. Potvin jumped up more often to score more goals, but Lidstrom makes up for that with better defense.
Lidstrom's defensive edge over Potvin is tiny. Certainly not as big as the offensive edge. I don't care what stats you continually bring up. I saw what i saw with my own eyes.

There is no doubt in my mind Potvin could easily have a couple Conn Smythes to his name. But Lidstrom could have more than his one, as well.
Lidstrom only has 1 Smythe worthy performance, and it is not equal to several of Potvin's performances.

Over his career Potvin had 164 points in 185 games. .89 PPG
Lidstrom has had 165 points in 235 games. .70 PPG

It does not take much wizardry to realize Lidstrom's numbers and PPG would look a heck of a lot better in the 70s and 80s.
No, they really really wouldn't. You still don't get it do you? The reason other people were out scoring more in the 80's is because they took more chances and went out looking for gambling opportunities. Lidstrom would nto suddenly become a miraculous scorer without changing his game to adapt to the style of the time. Lidstrom, for lack of a better comparison, would be a Mark Howe in the 80's.

Scoring averaged 7.34 GPG from 1975 to 1988 (when Potvin was in the playoffs)
Scoring averaged 5.85 GPG from 1992 to 2009 (when Lidstrom was in the playoffs)

Normalizing that gives Lidstrom 207 pts in 235 games or .88 PPG --> virtually identical to Potvin.
That's why lidstrom was eating up the league offensively in his early years when scoring was that high right? Lidstrom's offensive style changed not one bit from when he started to present day and that part of his game never really improved. it just stayed constantly good. He always played a safe stay at home style. He just was not as good defensively early in his career. A trait he worked at and worked at as the league changed and eventually he became the best at.

He would not be lighting the league up without sacrificing some of his defense, and his defensive style would not have been as effective in the early days.
If I wasn't lazy, and actually factored in that the majority of Potvin's playoff games took place in the higher scoring 80s, and the majority of Lidstrom's playoff games came in the much lower scoring dead puck era and post-lockout (as opposed to the early 90s) -- Lidstrom would easily get the edge in the playoffs.
Already covered this.

I don't buy it. You admit Lidstrom was better defensively, and I have shown Potvin barely outproduced Lidstrom offensively in their best years.
you have not shown anything. You have made faulty assumptions based on an era you know nothing about except what you see on paper. lidstrom's defensive edge on Potvin is much smaller than potvin's offensive edge.

Your assertion of 5 years has nothing to back it up but your own waxing nostalgic eyes.
Your constant backing of Lidstrom against players who were better than him in their peaks is nothing more than red wing goggles. You have Little objectivity when it comes to red wing players vs anyone else. I am not a fan of either team, and both players were among my favorites of all time. I am being completely objective. You are not.

Lidstrom's 73 points in 2000 was good for 93 pts the year Potvin scored 101. His 80 pts in 2006 is good for 90 pts in 1979.
Probably a little less, but close sure. Potvin would have lit the world on fire in 2006 though. Lidstrom's and everyone's scoring that year was in correlation with the new rules and tons of PP's the league generated that year. Potvin's power play quarterbacking was superior to Lidstrom's by no small margin.

I'll give you 3 years (76, 78 and 79) where Potvin offensively outproduced Lidstrom's best, but the margin is barely 10%. That does not blow me away -- and Lidstrom has at least 3-4 seasons better than Potvin's 4th best.
Your problem is you are looking at stats and you did not see Potvin play. Potvin in 74-75 was better(Carried that team on his back). 75-76 was better. 76-77, 77-78, and 78-79. No, I don't care for your silly stats argument. I saw him play.

Because non-physical defensemen in the 70s were utterly ineffective? Like Salming?
I had no idea forwards were so much larger and faster back then than they are today.
Did you just imply that Salming was not physical?

I posted the reasons Lidstrom's angle cutting style would not be as effective here.

It's a lot more than "barely".
Potvin may have 2-3 years slightly better than Lidstrom's best, but then he follows it up with only 3 more seasons anywhere in the ballpark of Lidstrom's consistent excellence, and then Lidstrom tacks on a good 5+ years of Norris caliber years on top of it, which Potvin cannot compare to.
its nothing more than barely.

Lidstrom's peak/prime is literally twice as long as Potvin's.
No, it wasn't. In trophy voting alone maybe. on a per game basis, Many of Potvin's 70 game seasons were better than lidstrom on average during Lidstrom's best

Because all those guys had incredibly high peaks -- why are they not in the top 100 if that is what is most important? I would guess someone like Potvin distinguishes himself with many more years of sustained excellence - just as Lidstrom distinguishes himself from Potvin.
And I do not award any bonus points for missed games to injury.
Not if you are looking at career no. but looking at peak, Potvin's 70 game season were better than many of Lidstrom's 82 game seasons.

In 1984 Gretzky scored 100 pts in only 34 games. Unfortunately for him he ended up playing most of those remaining games and only ended up scoring 205 pts -- if he was lucky enough to get injured at that time, people like you would never let us hear the end of how "Gretzky was on pace to score 272 points in 1984, if it weren't for his injury".
This analogy is not fitting at all.

Gretzky always started stronger than he finished. 2 different players and situations.

Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Potvin has placed 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10 in Norris voting -- 6 great seasons with a couple more good seasons.
Lidstrom has placed 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 8

Eliminating the redundancy and it becomes:
Potvin = 4, 10
Lidstrom = 1, 1, 1, 2, 6, 6, 6, 8

Yes, Lidstrom has a hell of a lot more great, as well as good, seasons than Potvin.
Nobody was denying lidstrom had a longevity edge. but those finishes of Lidstrom's would be drastically reduced against Potvin's competition AND this does not take into account that several of the 70's and 80's year only has the top 5 Voting, when Potvin would undoubtedly have some 6th place finishes.

Competition was better for top defensemen in the 80s and 90s than it was in the 70s and 00s -- Potvin lost to a lot of great defensemen in the 80s as well as a lot of not-so-great defensemen. Admittedly he was not as good of a player as he was in the 70s.
Correction. Competition in the 90's was strong until about 1996-97, when it took a visible gigantic step down as all the best started to get older and slower and few young defensemen were replacing them. Between 1991-96 when competition was still strong, Lidstrom had no top 5 finishes. Competition became very very weak from 97 forward, as all the best players were shadows of their former selves.

Lidstrom did much better in the 90s (2, 2, 2, 6, 6, 8), than Potvin did in the 80s (2, 4, 8, 10) -- and Lidstrom's game improved a lot in the 00s.
All against over the hill competition in the late 90's. The late 90's does not even remotely compare to the 80's. you point at guys like Carlyle and Wilson winning, but they had outstanding seasons, and pointing at their careers does not take away from their outstanding seasons. Certainly Wilson and Carlyle's years were better than Blake's. Everyone loves to hate on Carlyle, who had only a flash in the pan year, but forget that that flash in the pan year was stellar.

And Lidstrom was still winning Norrises in his 15th season.
Lidstrom was one of those players who got better as he got older instead of vice versa.

Potvin never again had performances similar to what he did in the 70s.
He had some incredible playoff runs on a dynasty team, absolutely.
Yes, he did. Simply not as big because he missed a few more games. On a per game basis, Potvin's 80-81 to 84-85 were still superstar stellar. Against 2000-09 competition in Lidstrom's place, they likely even win him a few Norris trophies.

Lidstrom fared much better in the 90s than Potvin did in the 80s.
Their best seasons are also very comparable, except Lidstrom maintained that high level for much, much longer than Potvin... and Lidstrom is not done yet.
Their best seasons are not comparable at all.

The year Potvin came into the islanders also happens to be the year Al Arbour came. Detroit experienced a similar drop over the first 5 years Lidstrom played for the team -- but I hesitate to single out one player as the main reason.
Potvin carried that team in his early years on his back. visibly.

Potvin started out with a bang but did not maintain that level for long, while Lidstrom slowly built up steam and is still rolling at the top of a much better league for a much longer period than Potvin.
Potvin maintained that level for many year more than you imply.

It is. I'd say it is the 6th or 7th best resume of all-time for defenseman.
Lidstrom's is better though, and by no small margin.
6th in my opinion, while Lidstrom is 5th. But the gap is much smaller than you are implying.

The gap between 4th and 5th is much much larger.
Lidstrom's is better though, and by no small margin.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote