HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The History of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The History of Hockey Relive great moments in hockey history and discuss how the game has changed over time.

Round 2, Vote 3 (Stanley Cup Playoff Performers)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-20-2017, 02:54 PM
  #201
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Lidstrom already leads nearly every other candidates (to whom he can be compared to) when it comes to the amount of long runs, hence why he doesn't need more long runs.
He could have had even more with consistent quality goaltending on his team.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-20-2017, 08:05 PM
  #202
Sentinel
Registered User
 
Sentinel's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 5,519
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
He could have had even more with consistent quality goaltending on his team.
Yeah. Imagine Hasek on those 90s Wings teams, and 50s Habs would be forgotten.

Sentinel is offline  
Old
04-20-2017, 09:39 PM
  #203
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
1995 Finals New Jersey vs Detroit

The Lidstrom comparison to Brodeur is interesting given they faced each other in the 1995 finals. Devils swept the Red Wings 4 -0 after winning the first two games in Detroit. Not even close.

Detroit had 75 SOGs in the four games, or 18.75 per game. Little evidence of the backend - Lidstrom, Coffey generating any offence consistantly. Lidstrom had two PP assists and was - 6. Considering that the Devils scored 13 ES strength goals in the series while allowing only 2 ES, 4 PP and 1 SH goal in the four games, it is rather obvious that the Devils outplayed the Red Wings offensively and defensively to such a degree where the goaltending was not a factor.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-20-2017, 09:48 PM
  #204
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by quoipourquoi View Post
But what adjustments were made to stop the bleeding on the fly? We saw already that once things went bad for Detroit from 1992-2009, they went bad fast.

What are some series from Detroit where they stopped the snowball from continuing down the hill? And are the turning points a proximate cause of something Lidstrom did offensively (2002 Vancouver would be an example), an adjustment to defensive strategy, or a goaltender change (2008 Nashville)? Because with the names we have eligible, it seems like we have a plethora of people who individually raised their contributions in the playoffs.
Detroit as a whole? There's a lot...

1992 vs Minnesota didnt see any adjustments after going down 3-1? How about the disappointing 1996 St. Louis series where Yzerman guaranteed a victory before game 6? The best example is 1997 which Draper and others still talk about the players' meeting with Yzerman after game 4 vs St. Louis which led to almost all Wings players raising their games and playing like a machine the rest of the way? 2002 after game 2 meeting as well in the quarterfinals? And i would bet that they certainly made the same adjustments not to lose to another clearly inferior Colorado team in the conference finals after game 5 as well. Even Dave Lewis got in the action with the switch from Legace to Joseph against Nashville in 2004.

The Red Wings are by far the most successful team in the playoffs in the time period you mentioned. Of course they made adjustments. Especially as compared to other players and teams i mean... Just to pick on two names also being discussed here we all know Forsberg and Sakic in games 6-7...

Quote:
Manny Legace was a small goaltender throughout a 58-16-8 season; he didn't shrink just before the Edmonton series.
Yes, Legace's 06 regular season was good. It doesnt mean he didnt shrink in the playoffs since we even know what he actually said in interviews... We just watched Bob have an amazing regular season and then saw him in the playoffs...

toob is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 06:12 AM
  #205
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 6,127
vCash: 500
Voting is open.

I probably won't have them calculated first thing on Monday like in the last two votes. Mrs. quoipourquoi and I are spending a nice weekend in Chicago. Good thing is we didn't have tickets for Saturday...

quoipourquoi is online now  
Old
04-21-2017, 08:56 AM
  #206
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 32,893
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
He could have had even more with consistent quality goaltending on his team.
Nice argument against him, if anything.

MXD is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 10:31 AM
  #207
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MXD View Post
Nice argument against him, if anything.
There were numerous times when Lidstrom performed up to his standards in the playoffs but his team was badly out goal tended. How is this an argument against him, especially when he's often being compared here to other players who had more stable goaltending on their teams?

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 10:45 AM
  #208
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Effectively

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
There were numerous times when Lidstrom performed up to his standards in the playoffs but his team was badly out goal tended. How is this an argument against him, especially when he's often being compared here to other players who had more stable goaltending on their teams?
Effectively you have argued that Lidstrom was not the difference maker that you make him out to be, rather the difference makers were the various goaltenders on the Red Wings or on other teams.

Unlike Orr in 1971, you cannot show a great performance in a round 1 upset because of great opposition goaltending - Ken Dryden. Nor can you show an overall team weakness like the 1971 Bruins, meh skaters other than Orr, couple of others.

Your point basically is that "it is always something" when often it was simply Lidstrom not adapting to certain teams, strategies and players.

See the following link:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=2219515

Early Soviet great Nickolai Sologubov and other Soviet ice hockey founding fathers talking about "universal" or complete hockey players, including bodychecking. Very interesting article and discussion because at the same time they admit that the Soviet game was not NHL ready and that physicality within the rules has a place in hockey.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 04-21-2017 at 10:50 AM. Reason: link
Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 10:54 AM
  #209
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
I dont know why team success is being held against Lidstrom so much lol given that he has a ton. 4 cups in 97, 98, 02, 08.

I dont even think Lidstrom belongs here over Yzerman and Fedorov who were the two main guys for the pre lockout playoff dominance and Zetterberg was for post. I think you could easily argue Lidstrom's offensive numbers are inflated due to playing with a deep offensive team... he got to play the most with talented offensive players even if they themselves were spread apart to share the wealth. I think Lidstrom's numbers overstate how good he was offensively.

But in terms of team success, from 92-09 hes the only guy there through all the shared success and hes a part of the core from 97-09. In these periods the Wings won the most. When they lost, they lost to good teams. In 95, 96, 07, 09 they lost to the Cup winners. In 92, 03, 04, 06 they lost to the runner ups. That leaves 93, 99, 00 where they lost to strong Toronto and Colorado teams. 94 and 01 are the years they lost to the Sharks and Kings that didnt do much but well look at the injuries in those series...

toob is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 11:18 AM
  #210
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Team Success

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
I dont know why team success is being held against Lidstrom so much lol given that he has a ton. 4 cups in 97, 98, 02, 08.

I dont even think Lidstrom belongs here over Yzerman and Fedorov who were the two main guys for the pre lockout playoff dominance and Zetterberg was for post. I think you could easily argue Lidstrom's offensive numbers are inflated due to playing with a deep offensive team... he got to play the most with talented offensive players even if they themselves were spread apart to share the wealth. I think Lidstrom's numbers overstate how good he was offensively.

But in terms of team success, from 92-09 hes the only guy there through all the shared success and hes a part of the core from 97-09. In these periods the Wings won the most. When they lost, they lost to good teams. In 95, 96, 07, 09 they lost to the Cup winners. In 92, 03, 04, 06 they lost to the runner ups. That leaves 93, 99, 00 where they lost to strong Toronto and Colorado teams. 94 and 01 are the years they lost to the Sharks and Kings that didnt do much but well look at the injuries in those series...
Other than making the "there is always something" argument better than anyone could, if you accept that credit for team success then you have to accept responsibility for team shortcomings.

More to the point, Orr with the Bruins won two SCs with Gerry Cheevers and Ed Johnston as goalies,, Harvey went to the finals four times with Gerry McNeil as the goalie, winning once with a team that was far from finalist material. Canadiens won four SCs between 1965 and 1969 with a pick a goalie on game day approach - Gump Worsley - demoted various times by the Rangers and the Canadiens, Charlie Hodge, small(much smaller than Legace), Rogatien Vachon - smallish, lacking experience when called up. Bounced around in junior, never taking command on his team.

Others Barrasso dumped by Buffalo, Smith and Resch expansion moves to the Islanders, all had weak playoffs before successful runs. Vernon was dumped by Calgary making his way to Detroit. Just a short history of goalies who struggles but relied on the support of great defencemen.

Not thrown under the bus.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 11:23 AM
  #211
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Effectively you have argued that Lidstrom was not the difference maker that you make him out to be, rather the difference makers were the various goaltenders on the Red Wings or on other teams.

Unlike Orr in 1971, you cannot show a great performance in a round 1 upset because of great opposition goaltending - Ken Dryden. Nor can you show an overall team weakness like the 1971 Bruins, meh skaters other than Orr, couple of others.

Your point basically is that "it is always something" when often it was simply Lidstrom not adapting to certain teams, strategies and players.

See the following link:

http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=2219515

Early Soviet great Nickolai Sologubov and other Soviet ice hockey founding fathers talking about "universal" or complete hockey players, including bodychecking. Very interesting article and discussion because at the same time they admit that the Soviet game was not NHL ready and that physicality within the rules has a place in hockey.
No, I'm stating that teams need quality goaltending to succeed in the playoffs and if they don't get it, or their goalie is badly outplayed by the opposing goalie, then the likelihood of advancing is very small no matter how well the team in front plays. We're all hockey fans here so we witness this nearly every year. Of course it wasn't always the reason for Lidstrom's Red Wings not succeeding but it certainly happened a lot, and unless you expected Lidstrom to block every shot then it wasn't about him not adapting. An interesting question is... when did his team lose a playoff series when they actually received better goaltending than their opposition? It must have happened at least a couple times but I'd have to go back and look at each year to see when.

Lidstrom's Red Wings were the only team from '95 to '03 that won without one of the marquee goalies. That, and the merit of his performances, were proof enough that he was a difference maker. He was a +61 in his playoff career, played the second most playoff games all-time, and won a CS. If you can't even bring yourself to admit he was a difference maker for his team then you're alone on that island because the hockey world acknowledged this long ago.

I can't show a great goaltending performance like Dryden in '71? How about Giguere in '03, and every time they faced Roy in the playoffs?

The rest of your post is not worthy of a response. It's already gone beyond silly.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 11:31 AM
  #212
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Other than making the "there is always something" argument better than anyone could, if you accept that credit for team success then you have to accept responsibility for team shortcomings.

More to the point, Orr with the Bruins won two SCs with Gerry Cheevers and Ed Johnston as goalies,, Harvey went to the finals four times with Gerry McNeil as the goalie, winning once with a team that was far from finalist material. Canadiens won four SCs between 1965 and 1969 with a pick a goalie on game day approach - Gump Worsley - demoted various times by the Rangers and the Canadiens, Charlie Hodge, small(much smaller than Legace), Rogatien Vachon - smallish, lacking experience when called up. Bounced around in junior, never taking command on his team.

Others Barrasso dumped by Buffalo, Smith and Resch expansion moves to the Islanders, all had weak playoffs before successful runs. Vernon was dumped by Calgary making his way to Detroit. Just a short history of goalies who struggles but relied on the support of great defencemen.

Not thrown under the bus.
Harvey won 5 of his 6 Cups with the Vezina winner behind him. Where was Lidstrom's perennial Vezina winner, or even nominee? I'd stay far away from that comparison if I were you... but that's too late.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-21-2017, 10:42 PM
  #213
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Better Goalie

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
No, I'm stating that teams need quality goaltending to succeed in the playoffs and if they don't get it, or their goalie is badly outplayed by the opposing goalie, then the likelihood of advancing is very small no matter how well the team in front plays. We're all hockey fans here so we witness this nearly every year. Of course it wasn't always the reason for Lidstrom's Red Wings not succeeding but it certainly happened a lot, and unless you expected Lidstrom to block every shot then it wasn't about him not adapting. An interesting question is... when did his team lose a playoff series when they actually received better goaltending than their opposition? It must have happened at least a couple times but I'd have to go back and look at each year to see when.

Lidstrom's Red Wings were the only team from '95 to '03 that won without one of the marquee goalies. That, and the merit of his performances, were proof enough that he was a difference maker. He was a +61 in his playoff career, played the second most playoff games all-time, and won a CS. If you can't even bring yourself to admit he was a difference maker for his team then you're alone on that island because the hockey world acknowledged this long ago.

I can't show a great goaltending performance like Dryden in '71? How about Giguere in '03, and every time they faced Roy in the playoffs?

The rest of your post is not worthy of a response. It's already gone beyond silly.
Start with Roger Crozier in 1966, Ron Hextall in 1987, Dominik Hasek in 1999 and keep them coming. Philadelphia has had weak goaltending since Bernie Parent retired but managed to cobble together playoff success beating teams with stronger goaltending, while losing at times.

Second in total playoff games played. Somewhat of an accomplishment but +61, not even Charlie Huddy or Randy Gregg level:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play..._by=plus_minus

2011 SJ beat Detroit with Niemi vs Howard in the series, managing to almost blow a 3-0 series lead.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 05:45 AM
  #214
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Start with Roger Crozier in 1966, Ron Hextall in 1987, Dominik Hasek in 1999 and keep them coming. Philadelphia has had weak goaltending since Bernie Parent retired but managed to cobble together playoff success beating teams with stronger goaltending, while losing at times.

Second in total playoff games played. Somewhat of an accomplishment but +61, not even Charlie Huddy or Randy Gregg level:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play..._by=plus_minus

2011 SJ beat Detroit with Niemi vs Howard in the series, managing to almost blow a 3-0 series lead.
Where to start...

Hextall won the Vezina and CS in '87 so how is he an example of poor goaltending?

Lidstrom is the top guy on that list who isn't an Oiler from their dynasty. Is that really lost on you?

Niemi won the Cup with the Hawks the year before so he may not have been a "marquee goalie" but he was far from providing poor goaltending and played very well in '11 with a .931 SV%. Howard provided very good goaltending as well with a .927 SV%.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 09:34 AM
  #215
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Hextall 1987

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Where to start...

Hextall won the Vezina and CS in '87 so how is he an example of poor goaltending?

Lidstrom is the top guy on that list who isn't an Oiler from their dynasty. Is that really lost on you?

Niemi won the Cup with the Hawks the year before so he may not have been a "marquee goalie" but he was far from providing poor goaltending and played very well in '11 with a .931 SV%. Howard provided very good goaltending as well with a .927 SV%.
Hextall 1987 isn't an example of poor goaltending, nor are the others. They are all exmples of teams - 1987 Oilers winning the SC with the weaker goaltending, 1966 Canadiens won with weaker goaltending, etc

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 12:46 PM
  #216
bathdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Facts are that the Red Wings tended to have stacked teams, disproportionate number of future HHOFers, throughout Lidstrom's career, some of the best coaching and management yet the results are disappointing at times.
4 Cups and another 2 trips to the finals in the 16-year span from the mid-nineties lockout until Lidstrom's retirement is disappointing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
One poster is trying to pimp Forsberg and Sakic over Lidstrom but what did either of those two accomplish without Roy? Not a heck of a lot. It's kind of difficult to win in the playoffs without great goaltending and often that was the achilles heel of Lidstrom's Red Wings.
Look, I agree with the point you're making. Lidstrom often do get overlooked, as he was "merely good for very long".

But you can argue Forsberg is the best offensive playoff player in modern history, and Sakic is the most "clutch" offensive playoff player in modern history.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
The other point is that Lidstrom made the playoffs all 20 years of his career whereas the more modern comparables in this project such as Sakic and Forsberg, who only made it 13 times
Lidstrom is one of the most durable players ever, which is certainly a point in his favor, but you make it sound like only 13 times = missed it now and again. 13 times is literally 100% of Forsberg's career, unless you consider his 2-game stint in 2011 of relevance, and unlike Lidstrom, he played a couple of years on mediocre to bad teams while also struggling severely with injuries.

Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Sakic and Forsberg have very spotty playoff records without Roy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danincanada View Post
Meanwhile, players like Sakic and Forsberg wouldn't have had the quick playoff success they saw if the Avs hadn't acquired Roy.
Forsberg really only had 1 relevant run without Roy. That's like holding Lidstrom playing on Wings against Lidstrom.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
The Red Wings are by far the most successful team in the playoffs in the time period you mentioned. Of course they made adjustments. Especially as compared to other players and teams i mean... Just to pick on two names also being discussed here we all know Forsberg and Sakic in games 6-7...
Relative to whom? Zetterberg maybe, who else?

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
I dont even think Lidstrom belongs here over Yzerman and Fedorov who were the two main guys for the pre lockout playoff dominance and Zetterberg was for post.
So Lidstrom doesn't have an argument vs either Sakic or Forsberg?

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
I think you could easily argue Lidstrom's offensive numbers are inflated due to playing with a deep offensive team... he got to play the most with talented offensive players even if they themselves were spread apart to share the wealth. I think Lidstrom's numbers overstate how good he was offensively.
You could, but then again, maybe you should argue Yzerman/Fedorov benefitted from Lidstrom's puck moving ability instead, especially considering how great of a PP QB Lidstrom was and how reliant Yzerman was on PP for his production?

From 94/95-97/98, which is the best part for Yzerman/Fedorov which they shared with Lidstrom, Lidstrom's ppg was 0.72 ppg.

From 94/95-03/04 Yzerman's/Fedorov's offensive numbers went down with time, as did league wide scoring, but Lidstrom's # increased slightly to 0.75 ppg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by toob View Post
But in terms of team success, from 92-09 hes the only guy there through all the shared success and hes a part of the core from 97-09.
The fact that Wings development as a team over the past decade is almost linear with Lidstrom's decline and departure is of some relevance to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
2011 SJ beat Detroit with Niemi vs Howard in the series, managing to almost blow a 3-0 series lead.
The sole example is one past Lidstrom's prime?

bathdog is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 12:54 PM
  #217
K Fleur
Intangibles Per Game
 
K Fleur's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 1,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bathdog View Post
4 Cups and another 2 trips to the finals in the 16-year span from the mid-nineties lockout until Lidstrom's retirement is disappointing?



Look, I agree with the point you're making. Lidstrom often do get overlooked, as he was "merely good for very long".

But you can argue Forsberg is the best offensive playoff player in modern history, and Sakic is the most "clutch" offensive playoff player in modern history.



Lidstrom is one of the most durable players ever, which is certainly a point in his favor, but you make it sound like only 13 times = missed it now and again. 13 times is literally 100% of Forsberg's career, unless you consider his 2-game stint in 2011 of relevance, and unlike Lidstrom, he played a couple of years on mediocre to bad teams while also struggling severely with injuries.





Forsberg really only had 1 relevant run without Roy. That's like holding Lidstrom playing on Wings against Lidstrom.



Relative to whom? Zetterberg maybe, who else?



So Lidstrom doesn't have an argument vs either Sakic or Forsberg?



You could, but then again, maybe you should argue Yzerman/Fedorov benefitted from Lidstrom's puck moving ability instead, especially considering how great of a PP QB Lidstrom was and how reliant Yzerman was on PP for his production?

From 94/95-97/98, which is the best part for Yzerman/Fedorov which they shared with Lidstrom, Lidstrom's ppg was 0.72 ppg.

From 94/95-03/04 Yzerman's/Fedorov's offensive numbers went down with time, as did league wide scoring, but Lidstrom's # increased slightly to 0.75 ppg.



The fact that Wings development as a team over the past decade is almost linear with Lidstrom's decline and departure is of some relevance to me.



The sole example is one past Lidstrom's prime?
You can? When exactly does modern history start, and end? If it starts in '99 and ends in '02, then maybe..

K Fleur is online now  
Old
04-22-2017, 01:00 PM
  #218
bathdog
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 226
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by K Fleur View Post
You can? When exactly does modern history start, and end? If it starts in '99 and ends in '02, then maybe..
I usually refer to it as mid-nineties lockout and forward, perhaps that's not how it's commonly used? (forgot the asterisk Lemieux excluded if you want to count him to this period)

bathdog is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 02:18 PM
  #219
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Teammates

Quote:
Originally Posted by bathdog View Post
4 Cups and another 2 trips to the finals in the 16-year span from the mid-nineties lockout until Lidstrom's retirement is disappointing?




The sole example is one past Lidstrom's prime?
Yes if over that span a player played with upwards of 16 or 17 HHOF teammates/coaches when the counting is done:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...order_by=goals

Throw in Hasek, Babcock, Bowman perhaps Datsyuk, Zetterberg. Against teams that mainly featured 4 to 6, drifting from 0 to 12(New Jersey, St.Louis) at the high end.

First example working backwards. All that was needed.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 03:09 PM
  #220
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,921
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Hextall 1987 isn't an example of poor goaltending, nor are the others. They are all exmples of teams - 1987 Oilers winning the SC with the weaker goaltending, 1966 Canadiens won with weaker goaltending, etc
Okay, I guess that makes a little more sense. As you've shown it's the exception to the rule which is my whole point.

Besides, how much better was Hextall than Fuhr then? Hextall won the Vezina and Fuhr was 3rd in voting and won it the following season, and both had .908 SV% in those playoffs. I'm referring to series where one goalie played far better than the opposition.

danincanada is offline  
Old
04-22-2017, 06:17 PM
  #221
toob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bathdog View Post
Relative to whom? Zetterberg maybe, who else?

So Lidstrom doesn't have an argument vs either Sakic or Forsberg?
imo he doesnt hes behind Forsberg/Sakic in terms of playoff careers and those two are also ahead of Yzerman/Fedorov (not necessarily as players playoff careers only)... not too big of a gap between any of these 5 in the playoffs though

btw the comment about Forsberg and Sakic was a bit tongue in cheek as a response to the notion that Lidstrom/Red Wings couldnt make adjustments when things went bad in the playoffs dont take it too seriously

Quote:
You could, but then again, maybe you should argue Yzerman/Fedorov benefitted from Lidstrom's puck moving ability instead, especially considering how great of a PP QB Lidstrom was and how reliant Yzerman was on PP for his production?

From 94/95-97/98, which is the best part for Yzerman/Fedorov which they shared with Lidstrom, Lidstrom's ppg was 0.72 ppg.

From 94/95-03/04 Yzerman's/Fedorov's offensive numbers went down with time, as did league wide scoring, but Lidstrom's # increased slightly to 0.75 ppg.
Lidstrom before 96ish is quite different from Lidstrom after. And Lidstrom really came of his own after Konstantinov went down. The numbers dont surprise me given the far bigger role of Lidstrom entering his prime.

Lidstrom is a great PP player for sure i should have nuanced what i said about his offensive prowess with that. That being said, the Red Wings PP was absolutely dominant with or without Lidstrom in the early 90s (in 93 Lidstrom had a pretty poor first half before Coffey showed up) as well

Yzerman/Fedorov had clearly proven offensive primes and ability before the late 90s which is why i think the way i do. I would say their late 90s numbers dont do justice to their offensive prowess due to team style. They werent thinking offense like Forsberg/Sakic their linemates revolved a lot more than other top offensive players and their defensive asks were some of the highest of all top offensive players.

Quote:
The fact that Wings development as a team over the past decade is almost linear with Lidstrom's decline and departure is of some relevance to me.
ofc they would have declined lol... Lidstrom is one of the best defenseman and they didnt replace him on D (no Datsyuk/Zetterberg showing up when Fedorov/Yzerman were checking out). Not only that but Rafalski surprisingly retired before Lidstrom and Kronwall declined badly as well after 13.

Then we have Zetterberg's decline especially (also Datsyuk to a lesser extent). The Wings were pretty plagued with injury troubles in the years after Lidstrom's retirement as well. All of these things are important in the team decline as well

Trust me i know Lidstrom's importance in the playoff success of the Red Wings and he is the common bridge between a new set of core forwards.

With that being said the rise/fall of the Wings solely due to Lidstrom is a bit simplistic. It is like the arguments that show the Wings records with and without Lidstrom. Many of the games he missed were end of season sit out games that saw other key players sit out as well and the games were meaningless in terms of playoff seeding. Or in 08 when the Wings already started in the losing streak before Lidstrom missed some games during it.

toob is offline  
Old
04-23-2017, 08:09 AM
  #222
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 12,078
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Yes if over that span a player played with upwards of 16 or 17 HHOF teammates/coaches when the counting is done:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...order_by=goals

Throw in Hasek, Babcock, Bowman perhaps Datsyuk, Zetterberg. Against teams that mainly featured 4 to 6, drifting from 0 to 12(New Jersey, St.Louis) at the high end.

First example working backwards. All that was needed.
That only affects Lidstrom, or does that hold for the Canadiens players up for voting too?

None of those other Hall of Famers Lidstrom played with have made The List yet. There are already 4 Canadiens on the top 10 list. So where does that leave Lidstrom in comparison to Richard & Boom Boom in this round?

Dennis Bonvie is offline  
Old
04-23-2017, 09:43 AM
  #223
MXD
Registered User
 
MXD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Hôlle
Posts: 32,893
vCash: 500
Now that the curtain is about to fall on Vote 3, it's probably appropriate to post my "hopes" or "hopefuls" for Vote 4...

- We'll probably get a few pre O-6 old-timers. My money would be on Frank Boucher, Frank McGee and Charlie Gardiner.

- I also think it might be the time we'll get players that no one ranked really high, but that everyone or nearly everyone ranked, which might bring a reaction like " Already? ". Consensual players, so to speak. Maybe a bit like Brodeur this round?

- I think we'll get our first active player next round.

- Number of new Canadiens up for voting : One. Possibly Two. Probably due to high consensus level.

- If none of Broda and Dryden (I take for granted that mostly everyone considered Brodeur not quite relevant for this round) makes it this round, which is certainly in the realm of possibilities, the goaltenders appearing next round might find it quite... difficult.

All in all, I'd like to see the three old timers mentionned above, Bower, Horton, and Ed Belfour.


Last edited by MXD: 04-23-2017 at 12:57 PM. Reason: Dawn. Curtain. Always different, usually opposites.
MXD is offline  
Old
04-23-2017, 09:45 AM
  #224
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 14,245
vCash: 500
Contemporaries

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
That only affects Lidstrom, or does that hold for the Canadiens players up for voting too?

None of those other Hall of Famers Lidstrom played with have made The List yet. There are already 4 Canadiens on the top 10 list. So where does that leave Lidstrom in comparison to Richard & Boom Boom in this round?
Comparing contemporaries to contemporaries.

Henri Richard and Geoffrion would compare to Gordie Howe who played with and was coached by approximately 25 HHOFers.

Compared to Lidstrom who did not face much competition from HHofers - played Jagr, Gretzky, Lemieux perhaps 100-125 times combined regular season and playoffs, Henri Richard would have faced Howe's line alone during the course of 200+ games. including 16 in the playoffs.

Canadiens1958 is offline  
Old
04-23-2017, 03:39 PM
  #225
Kyle McMahon
Registered User
 
Kyle McMahon's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Evil Empire
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,840
vCash: 500
Voted. Unfortunately didn't have time to do the more detailed Bossy-Lafleur comparison that I'd hoped to, but they might still be around next round.

Kyle McMahon is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:48 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.