View Single Post
11-18-2012, 01:12 AM
Just a Fool
Rhiessan71's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,602
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Bure missed 19 games of the season in which he didn't do anything to help his team win.

Bure was hot down the stretch and had the "excitement" and "wow" factor. Lidstrom IMO contributed more in terms of offense and defense in helping his team to win but we all know how the vote went.
Hot down the stretch? Just a bit of an understatement.
Bure wasn't just the best rookie in the last half of the season, he was one of the best players in the last half of the season.
You can whine about this all you want, again, but Bure tore it up bigtime. Bure stole it from him fair and square.

I don't think that the statement I made was out of line, Lidstrom was the 15th highest scoring Dman over that time period.

He is playing top paring minutes both on the PP and PK during that time as well.

At least 3 guys ahead of him Brown, Iafrate and Galley are not far enough ahead of him offensively to make up the difference that Nick has on them in defense.

Sure there are some guys below him better defensively by a bit perhaps but nick is well situated to be considered as one of the best 20 Dmen in the league over that time period by what he did IMO.

If we look at it more closely Nick has 3 excellent playoffs before and inducing his age 27 season (95,96,97) and heck he wasn't half bad in 94 either when the Sharks upset the Red Wings.

Harveys big domination years, in terms of voting, actually come without Kelly in the mix and man his competition as a whole is worse than Lidstrom's in their Norris years as well.

Nick is

1st in GP
2nd in points
5th in goals
1st in assists
1st in plus/minus

I didn't go into it into detail but that is how Nick ranks among all players including forwards during his time in the playoffs in the NHL from 92-12.

I could do a season by season breakdown but the overall totals are just absolutely stunning IMO, especially when you consider the type of defense he was playing as well.

We will agree to disagree on Orr, as I was the only guy who even went near there and actual voted for Orr as Lidstrom was still playing but I think that's a mistake because when one considers everything including the competition factor (and how it affects dominance) Orr simply falls short in that his career is too short to be number 1 IMO.

I'm a career guy so that might be the deciding factor in it.
First off, I think you give too little credit for Harvey's influence on the game. He was an innovator and after everything you have said here it's still very close but Harvey takes it with the innovator card IMO.

Second, it's not about Orr and it never will be about Orr. Bobby is #1 and that's not going to change.

Third, even if Lidstrom were ahead of Harvey, then Bourque will also be ahead of Harvey because Bourque is ahead of Lidstrom.

As funny as it sounds, you have actually made a better argument for Lidstrom over Harvey than you have ever even remotely been able to do for Lidstrom over Bourque.
BUT, like I said, Harvey's innovating the game is what keeps him ahead of both of them IMO.

Also, you compare Lidstrom and Harvey's offense and defense but you left out puck possession and full ice game control which Harvey walks away with easily.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote