Apparently Lidstrom was as good as Lemieux
View Single Post
09-12-2012, 07:37 AM
Join Date: Jun 2006
Lidstrom is the D version of Joe Sakic. He was a very good player for a long time, but it's hard to put him in the greatest ever class.
For one, Orr's claim to fame is that he was by far the best D in his time.
If you look at Lidstrom, people always bring up his Norris's. Well, he didn't deserve his last one (he wasn't even good let alone the best). He didn't deserve to win in 06-07 (Niedermayer was significantly better but lost because Pronger was the third nominee), could easily have lost 07-08 to Pronger, and didn't deserve the 05-06 award (but for some reason the writers didn't feel Chara should be a finalist, let alone win). He also should have won in 2000.
Lidstrom was very good, but took advantage of being a good D when there weren't a lot (he and Niedermayer were the only guys to get more than 3 nominations in the 2000s). Even then, it could easily be disputed whether or not he was the best D in any given year.
That's not on the Orr scale. That's not on the Lemieux scale.
D that could be compared to Lidstrom include Potvin, Harvey, Bourque, Robinson, Shore and Chelios.
View Public Profile
Visit Bjindaho's homepage!
Find More Posts by Bjindaho