View Single Post
11-19-2012, 01:07 AM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,553
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Then explain to me how your criteria keeps changing depending on whether you are comparing to Bourque or you are comparing to Harvey and Orr.
My criteria is always the same, i look at as much information from as many different points of view as possible when evaluating players

I talk about team strength when it's vastly different between two players and weigh it accordingly. It has not place in a conversation about Harvey and Lidstrom.
And saying Lidstrom got "recognized" due to receiving a single Norris vote....
Read below, its from from OP and includes everything that Lidstrom did before Harvey gets a mention with his 2nd to Kelly in 52. Harvey played in 4 seasons in the NHL up to and including his age 26 season.

Below is what Lidstrom did the same age and younger,

6 NHL seasons which includes

In his 1st season in 92 he is in the mix for the Calder (probably should have won it) and was 8th in all star voting for Dmen.

93(22) He suffers a bit of the sophomore slump.

94 (23) He has one vote placing him 20th overall for an all star berth

95 (24) Doesn't figure in Norris or all-star voting due in part to shortened season and limited voting.

Still overall in his 1st 3 years he has been pretty productive and has been during that stretch at least one of the top 20 Dmen overall IMO.

96 (25) he places 6th in Norris and all-star voting behind Chelios, Bourque, Leetch, Vlad Konstantinov and Paul Coffey (that's 2 guys from Canada, 2 from Europe and 1 from US)

97 (26) he places 6th in Norris and all star voting again behind Leetch, Vlad, Sandis Ozolinsh, Chelios and Scott Stevens (only 1 Canadian this year)

That's part of his record.

The level of play was the highest in the world at the time.
Faulting a player for being born in 1924 instead of 1970 or 1990 aint going to get you any where.
I believe there is even sticky about this kind of ******** around here
Okay suspicion confirmed that you treat each era as the same which it clearly isn't.

The sticky has nothing to do with how one compares to ones peers and what that peer group is like and consists of.

Top 30...maybe and being robbed by Blake is an opinion, as is Weber getting robbed in '11 sooo....
One thing I will say though, is that the opinion of Weber being robbed in '11 is a lot "stronger" than the opinion that Lidstrom was robbed in '98.
Both Lidstrom and Weber were in the mix and would ahve been worthy winners of the Norris, the voting was extremely close in both cases. Weber gets robbed in 12 as well but I will get to that later.

With Lidstrom after '97, definitely, previous that...not so much. Not a joke anyway, only in your revisionist world.
So I guess the voters for Norris were wrong in 96 and 97 when Nick was 6th in voting for the Norris? Maybe it was his highlight reel that confused the voters right?

You aren't going to get alot of support claiming that Coffey was near as good as Lidstrom defensively at any point in his career period.

Hahaha you took Lidstrom's 20 years in the league and gauged everyone against just THOSE years.
Well it's one way of looking how a player stacks up in his career and I took the playoffs as the example as I did an in depth comparison of Norris voting between Harvey and Lidstrom for the regular seasons.

I could have mentioned how Lidstrom stacked up to Harvey all time in points ect but that would ahve been unfair since there eras were vastly different right?

First of all, if you are doing those numbers against all players and not just D-men, it should read...

1st in GP
7th in points (Jagr, Selanne, Sakic, Recchi, Sundin and Modano)
84th in goals
2nd in assists
1st in plus/minus

Look what happens when I do that for Bourque..79/80-00/01

2nd in GP (3 games behind #1)
5th in points (Gretzky, Yzerman, Francis and Messier)
34th in goals
2nd in assists (only behind Gretzky)
1st in plus/minus

Hey, look what happens when I do the same for Leetch 88/89-05/06, just vs D-men...

5th in GP (Lidstrom 10th)
1rst in points (Lidstrom 5th)
2nd in goals (Lidstrom 8th)
1rst in assists (Lidstrom 6th)
139th in plus/minus (Lidstrom 3rd)

The only reason Lidstrom's offense looks so good is because he wasn't up against a very good class or very consistent group of offensively gifted D-men.
Both Leetch and bourque are better offensively than Lidstrom. Why didn't you post how Harvey stacks up in the regular season since that was the original comp?

The argument used to be that Lidstrom's offense was the best anyone's could be in today's PP oriented league. That it was no longer possible for a D-man to be successful at even strength offensively like Leetch or Bourque or Coffey was.
Nice set up of the straw man here which is the usual last resort.

Take a good look here

Do you see the column PP% and how it is generally lower in the time that Bourque and Coffey played in compared to Lidstrom?

I'm really not sure what point you are trying to make here.

Enter stage left...Erik Karlsson, who put up 35% more even strength points last year than Lidstrom did in his best year.
Proving that it's not that it wasn't possible, just that there weren't any D-men playing that were capable of doing it in the league any more.
Oh yes the one season where Letang is injured, Pronger as well, so is Big Buff.

Not to mention were scoring was lower in the more defensive Western conference and the unbalanced schedules as well.

One player in the Western conference was in the top 11 of scoring overall, I guess the superior talent is in the east right?

If Karlsson does it again, heck even by 25% and plays more than 7th on his on team for Dman PK, then you might be onto something until then it's a perfect storm unlikely to repeat itself even if Karlsson remains a last resort on the PK.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote