View Single Post
07-22-2009, 06:53 PM
Registered User
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,761
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
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.
Lidstrom would only have to alter his game if he wanted to score goals like Potvin in the 70s. Plop him on that Islanders team and let him pad his stats against the abundance of rotten teams around at the time and his assists would sky-rocket.

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.
Uhhh... Potvin was losing out to Hartsburg, Engblom, Becke, Marsh, Lowe, Larson, Babych, Marois, Green, Samuelsson, Ramsey, Patrick, and McCrimmon in the 80s as well. Not just Wilson, Howe and Carlyle. Were they all better than Lidstrom's competition as well?

Besides which, it is moot. On per per game basis, Potvin was more valuable than any of them.
The Norris voters at the time certainly disagreed with you.
Yeah, I have *****ed about Lidstrom placing 2nd in 1998 and 3rd in 2009, but you are talking about Potvin deserving to be bumped 3-9 (and more) places ahead of where he ended up in the voting, not a mere 1 or 2 places like I am.

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.
Ha! What did he bring? Worse defense, less points and less games?

You are such a "hits" slappy. Didn't you state Phaneuf deserved the runner-up for the Norris in 2008?

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
Playing in a higher-scoring era, on a dynasty team with every other game against an AHL level team certainly would though.

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.
I've read quotes from Potvin stating Al Arbour had to remind him to be more responsible defensively -- never heard a coach needing to tell Lidstrom that.

"With your own eyes" -- Did you live in New York? I'm curious how many Islanders games you were able to catch each season back then. I caught playoff games, but that was about it.

Lidstrom only has 1 Smythe worthy performance, and it is not equal to several of Potvin's performances.
I disagree. 1998 was tip-top for Lidstrom and he was a beast to behold in the 2007... had Detroit advanced. He was listed amongst the top considerations for 2008 (along with Osgood) and his handling of the Legion of Doom in 1997 was none too shabby either -- but Lidstrom's play should have been ineffective against that, right?

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.
Did you think I was a tweener or something?
Lidstrom would not need to put up 35+ goals in the 70s or 80s to score 90+ points.
Regardless, he has done quite well for himself jumping up into the play, though he usually has not done so -- often being the "defensively responsible" member of his defensive pairing. He certainly has a good shot.

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.
Lidstrom got better as the years wore on, Potvin got worse. So what?

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.
I am obviously a lot older than you think.

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.
And your refusal to consider actual results and stats over "your own eyes" is the complete opposite of objective.

I also question just how much of Potvin's games you were able to catch in the 70s and 80s.

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.
You're like the anti-Nordic

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.
Well, I did watch him in the playoffs from about 1980 on...

I don't buy your "I saw him play, so I do not have to back it up with anything" argument... as compelling as it is.

Did you just imply that Salming was not physical?
Salming did not rely primarily on physical play in any sense of the word.

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
Again, your "eyes" told you a completely different story from the Norris voters at the time -- and we are talking about a major disparity here. Who should I believe?

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.
So instead of having 3 more Norrisses, one more runner-up and some other top 6 finishes in a much deeper league -- he might have only one or two more Norrisses, a few runner-ups and a few more top 3s over Potvin? Still an awfully big difference.

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.
So competition was strong until literally Lidstrom started taking over? How conveniant for your argument.

Lidstrom got better as the years progressed -- what can I say?

Lidstrom was one of those players who got better as he got older instead of vice versa.
Why does it seem like he is being penalized for this?

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.
With Lidstrom scoring more points and playing better defense? Sure.

Their best seasons are not comparable at all.
So you keep saying - the actual results and scoring at the time beg to differ.

Potvin carried that team in his early years on his back. visibly.
He was very good -- I'm certainly not denying that.

Potvin maintained that level for many year more than you imply.
Why do the Norris voters at the time strongly disagree with you?

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote