Lidstrom's place in history - ALL DISCUSSIONS OF LIDSTROM'S "ALL TIME RANKING" HERE
View Single Post
12-06-2012, 06:15 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Originally Posted by
Perhaps, we will likely never know the complete truth in this regard and I find it largely irrelevant. Bourque is ahead IMO regardless if he was less effective on the pp. he was more effective at ES where the majority of the game is played. Lidstrom closes the gap some on longevity in his later years, but it's not enough to close the gap from their earlier years, he did better later, bourque was better earlier and
there is a 0% chance lids became a better player at 35-40yrs old. When they were both in the league bourque was still better, bordering on retirement.
To me, it's somewhat close, yet quite clearly bourque.
Post is a mess, posting from an iPhone again
Of course no one gets better after age 35 but has any Dman aged better between the ages of 35-41?
As for Ray being better than Nick in their time in the league, Norris voting reflects this as being true until 96 (Nick aged 21-25 Ray 31-35) but after that Nick was clearly better (age 26-30, Ray 36-40).
Not that the above really means anything though as it's unfair to both guys to compare their time in the league in the way that you did.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Hardyvan123