View Single Post
Old
12-05-2012, 07:26 AM
  #588
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfanatics View Post
I am thoroughly convinced that Bourque is ahead of Lidstrom, it's close, yet clear imo.

Nothing in these threads will ever change my mind. The two best dmen of all time were Bruins. I hate to say that, but it's true imo.

I won't put Lidstrom down to support my view. I think Bourque's game speaks for itself and he doesn't need over-exaggerations or the downgrading of Lidstrom to achieve a higher ranking.

Bourque was more rounded and could hurt you more places on the ice. For everyone that punishes Bourque's offense for peaking in high scoring times, it would only seem fair to do the same to Lidstrom's defence in lower scoring times, yet it never seems to be done. From seeing both of their careers in entirety there is simply no way I can put lidstrom ahead of Bourque. As far as peak goes, there are a few more ahead of Lids, but I have no problem putting Lids ahead of them based on longevity and longer prime.

It depends on what we're judging here, is the best? In which case Lids would be hard-pressed to make top 5 on my list or is it who had the better overall career? In which case lids would be 3rd on my list. Lids advantage on career and longevity just isn't there with Bourque imo, there isn't enough to make up the peak gap, and I would argue that Bourque's longevity is even more impressive anyways.

All the nitpicking about pp% and pp strength seem to be an attempt to degrade Lidstrom and I don't think that's fair. We have to examine cause and effect here. Was Lidstrom the beneficiary of a solid pp or was he the catalyst? I lean towards the latter, pp quarterback is the most integral part of pp imo.
I understand that the pp quarterback can be the most important player on the PP, but it isn't like everyone else is irrelevant.

With Lidstrom and Bourque being so close, the team-factor is something that requires deep scrutiny. If you equalize for PP% contribution, Lidstrom is 3% more productive on the PP than Bourque. Don't you think the largely inferior cast Bourque played with negates and overtakes that value?

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote