View Single Post
07-22-2009, 07:45 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 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.
As previously stated, Potvin did not pad his stats on weak teams.

Potvin in fact was a phenomenal scorer against the best teams.

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?
Potvin's 80-81 year and 83-84 year would have won Norris trophies in Lidstrom's time if you swapped them out yes.

Very generous of you to list guys who beat out Potvin either in a season he missed 20 games, or towards his decline in the later 80's.

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 don't think he should have been bumped up in the voting at all(Except in the year Carlyle beat him). I accept that his missing of games lost him some Norris votes. But his per game value was much higher than his Norris voting record, and yes, that is what I look at when I judge peak.

Ha! What did he bring? Worse defense, less points and less games?
By worse defense, you mean by the slightest of hairs? Denis Potvin was a wizard defensively.

You are such a "hits" slappy. Didn't you state Phaneuf deserved the runner-up for the Norris in 2008?
Potvin was more than just a hitter. He was one of the best defensive defensemen in the league, and certainly was very close to Lidstrom in that regard. Anyone who says otherwise simply did not watch him play.

Playing in a higher-scoring era, on a dynasty team with every other game against an AHL level team certainly would though.
Potvin played phenomenally against the very best teams. Not just the shrubs.

And Please, let's not talk like the Wings have not bee a head and shoulders above most of the league and Lidstrom did not run up the score against his weak teams too.

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.
Potvin was a phenomenal defensive defenseman. Let's see this quote from Arbour. Link it.

"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.
No, but I did live in LA for 3 years, then Philly for 3 years in the late 70's, early 80's, and the Islanders played Philly 8 times a year, and LA 4 times a year(Which is over 30 games right there), as well as ESPN showing roughly 40 games of Hockey a year and me catching any Hockey I could, as well as all of the playoffs I could.

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?
Why would Lidstrom's play be ineffective against that? His angle cutting play would be less effective in the 80's for the very reasons I posted earlier in that post.

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.
I think at his absolute best, he maxes out at 90-95 points, and generally hovers around 77-83 points.

Lidstrom got better as the years wore on, Potvin got worse. So what?
P0otvin was better earlier, lidstorm later.

I am obviously a lot older than you think.

And your refusal to consider actual results and stats over "your own eyes" is the complete opposite of objective.
Oh I incorporate stats and awards into my ratings. But I do not rely on them completely. Bobby Orr did not win every Hart trophy, but he was the best player in the league for more than 3 years.

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

You're like the anti-Nordic
I take that as a compliment.

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.
If you watched Potvin play, then I cannot comprehend your train of thought.

Salming did not rely primarily on physical play in any sense of the word.
Salming was quite physical. If you want to compare Lidstrom to a player from back then, take JC Tremblay.

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?
Again with the Norris crap. He could not win Norris trophies missing tons of time, but he would certainly have had 5-6 if he played in Lidstrom's time.

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.
Lidstrom winning 3 Norris trophies against Potvin's competition sounds about right.

So competition was strong until literally Lidstrom started taking over? How conveniant for your argument.
Not my fault that's right about when Bourque, Macinnis, Chelios and co started hitting the ages of 35+, or that Leetch went on decline and they were replaced by lesser players.

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

So you keep saying - the actual results and scoring at the time beg to differ.

He was very good -- I'm certainly not denying that.

Why do the Norris voters at the time strongly disagree with you?
They don't. Nobody is denying Lidstrom has a longevity edge in award voting.

But his best was better than Lidstrom's best by no small margin.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote