Norris Trophy Pilfering '98 vs '11
View Single Post
11-21-2012, 03:56 AM
Just a Fool
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Originally Posted by
The on ice off ice isn't a perfect measurement, as recall there were some other great players that had surprisingly weaker numbers than one would expect.
Was it overpass that presented these numbers? Something to go back and look at again.
Yes, you going to have another look at it is a very good idea.
There are other number floating around out there as well like adjusted plus/minus, hockey share points and the hockey prospectus one as well. Not sure if all of those capture playoff games as well, in which Lidstrom has an advantage IMO.
Of course he does, he played more PO games, on a stacked team year after year and didn't have to face 13 years of the Dynasty Isles, Oilers and Pens.
My bad I misread that and thought you were talking about his offensive, which in a previous post you claimed that Lidstrom wasn't an offensive Dman but rather a "defensive one who could QB a PP well."
It's not only inaccurate but a contradiction, why would any coach put a defensive Dman on the ice as the PP QB if he wasn't offensive.
Perhaps you are working on a different notion of what an offensive Dman does.
Happens all the time. There are a ton of guys that play a conservative defensive game at even strength and then run a PP.
Still alot of what happens on defense isn't measurable and not sure what you mean about 5 man units. The Red wings certainly were not a Tikinov coached team.
I'm not talking about a 5 man unit that always has the same players playing together.
I'm talking about all 5 players on the ice playing their zones and positions in elaborate defensive zone coverages or in a trap or left wing lock in the neutral zone.
Yes I do, and not the most outstanding field of all time ever if you look at it really closely.
Pilote is 2nd despite missing 11 games , but with Hull emerging as a scoring threat his assist totals look very impressive for 62.
Talbot has his career year with 47 points sandwiched between 31 and 25, replacing Harvey as the top offensive threat (on the back end) on that great Habs team.
Brewer is 23 and great on d but provides little offense.
Mohns scores well but is never really in contention for the best Dman in the league ever.
Evans makes an appearance tied for 5th spot in a career year and an average career at that.
Tim Horton doesn't gain traction for actually being in the running for the Norris until the next season, perhaps the voters missed him and/or Brewer took away some of his possible votes, not sure.
Compared to Lidstrom???
The only guy on that list that he beat in their prime was Pronger.
Bourque, MacInnis, Chelios, Stevens and Coffey were all 35 years or older by the time Lidstrom was winning his first Norris or garnered a single All-star nod.
And what are you talking about?
Harvey faced Kelly, Pilote, Horton and Gadsby all in their primes.
And you don't think that the increase in talent from the US, Europe and BC and the maritime is enough to make up for this?
I have already stated previously that the early 90's from 90/91-96/97 was the deepest I had ever seen the league. Then the NHL ruined it by adding yet another 4 teams and suddenly it felt like we were back in the mid 70's again.
Oh yeah, I wonder how Bourque fared during that time...
3 2nd place finishes
1 3rd place finish
Along with 5 First Team All-star nods and a Second
Just to compare Nick started with 22 teams in 92nad reaches 30 in 01.
1 season with 6 teams,
then 3 with 12,
2 more with 14, (WHA appears along with these 2 teams as well)
2 with 16 and 1 with 18
Does it matter with Orr though?
The only thing this argument does is reduce Orr's points.
It doesn't change the fact that he would still be the best PLAYER in the league and he would have still made all other D-men look like minor leaguers.
So Orr Wins 2 Art Ross with only 100-120 points instead of 120-135.
He'd still be the only D-man in history to win even one, let alone two of them!
Like I said, I will do an in depth look at it from Havey to Lidstrom when I have some time as it will take many hours to do.
Just a suggestion...if you're going to try and make a case for Lidstrom over anyone in the top 3, you prolly should have done all this research before hand and had it ready from the beginning
Last edited by Rhiessan71: 11-21-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Rhiessan71