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

Round 2, Vote 2 (2009 update)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-04-2009, 09:53 AM
  #51
foame
Registered User
 
foame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 255
vCash: 500
If you want to use +/- as an argument, you could use the adjusted data from overpass.

His data clearly shows that Lidstrom and Potvin is pretty even. I think that makes it an advantage to Lidstrom since he played in an era that was less diluted.

foame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:01 AM
  #52
Jungosi
Registered User
 
Jungosi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rendsburg / Germany
Country: Germany
Posts: 881
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Jungosi
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
There are videos and there are statistics.

Consider the portrayal of Niklas Lidstrom as this great superior defenseman in a statistical light, given that he has played for a team that was constantly elite, always made the playoffs, had more than his share of HOF teammates and above average coaching - Scotty Bowman and Mike Babcock.

Note his career +/- is +409 with a career best +43.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...lidstni01.html

Looking at others:
Bobby Orr:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/o/orrbo01.html
Career +597, only season UNDER +43 when injured.Fewer games

Denis Potvin

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...potvide01.html

Career +460, fewer games including a start with a team one year removed from expansion, three season better than +43.

Larry Robinson

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...robinla01.html

Career +720, including a +120 season with seven better than +43.

Mark Howe
Not in the HHOF but a career +400 with at least three +43 seasons.

Simple numerical meritocracy. Lidstrom's numbers do not carry the day, in fact they suffer quite a bit. Once you get beyond the smoke and mirrors of Lidstrom's career the substance is not as impressive as it should be.
You have to take this statistics with a grain of salt. Lidstrom was really more of a defensive defensemen while all the mentioned players were known for their offensive abilities. You also have to take a look at the context. He has roughly +100 more than the second best player during the lenght of his career.(Jagr reknown for his defensive game , you see what I did here don't you?).

+/- is certainly an interesting stat but you have to spend a lot of time to make it a valid stat. It's value is very dependent on the context. You took it out of context which gives it about as much value as saying that Ted Lindsay never had a 100 point season.

Lidstrom definitley belongs into the top-20. He was the best and most consistent player in the world for the last ten years.

Jungosi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:05 AM
  #53
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Overlooking

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
Lidstrom is better player than Yzerman. By a lot. Other HHOF quality plaers? Who besides Fedorov and old versions of Fetisov, Hull, Robitaille, Chelios and Hasek? Wings are not even close to Islanders or Habs dynasties.



Your post "If he had some Ulf in him definite top 10." is totally empty, ridiculous and stupid at the same time. Eddie Shore and Cleghorn were players with little to no self control and I would love to see how would they play under current rules. I personally do not see how is Shore better than Harvey, Bourque, Potvin, Lidstrom or Kelly.



Nice one. So Lidstrom should have give him a two hander to the head..to prove how tough he is?
Lidstrom never went out of position to hit somebody, never took stupid penalties by being reckless. His way of play allowed him to stay healthy and play almost every game he could.
Overlooking the contributions by Larry Murphy, Brendan Shanahan, Igor Larianov, Paul Coffey to the Red Wings or their Stanley Cups during the length of Lidstroms tenure.

Yzerman and Fedorov. Well Bowman managed to get both to forego individual stats and play for the sake of team play after the Devils with Jacques Lemaire coaching beat an individualistic Red Wings team 4-0 in the 1995 Stanley Cup finals with the Red Wings slowly falling apart as the series progressed. Each loss worse than the previous. 2-1, 4-2 in NJ then 5-2, 5-2 in Detroit.

But Lidstrom was NOT willing to take on physical responsibilities of the position. His choice but one that is fair game for analysis and criticism.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:11 AM
  #54
DaveG
Mod Supervisor
How's the thesis?
 
DaveG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Durham NC
Country: United States
Posts: 32,617
vCash: 562
Here's my list as I have it right now for this vote
1: Morenz - the first true superstar in the NHL. He's just short of those we consider the best of all time IMO, due in part to not having all that terribly much longevity. But he was tremendous in growing the game in North America.
2: Plante - revolutionized the position of goaltending (a tend to put a lot of emphasis on when a player can do that, hence where I voted for Orr last round) and was the best in the league for the majority of his career.
3: Mikita - this is where my new list (and voting obviously) starts to deviate from my submitted list that I ended up being not all too satisfied with in the end. Mikita is a player that could play any style going from one of the most penalized players in the league to winning the Lady Byng twice. Very consistent in his production although he was often overshadowed by his teammate Hull.
4: Hasek - If you had to pick one player to define the Dead Puck Era this would be the guy. Probably the most athletic goalie we've seen in hockey and most certainly a generational talent. He was playing in the Czechoslovakian top league at a young age for years and dominated there, then dominated the NHL when he finally got his shot (IE: got out from under a couple idiot coaches in Keenan and... trying to remember the other one). There are some speculated off ice issues with Hasek, but nothing enough to significantly drop him on my list.
5: Roy - Another player who revolutionized goaltending as we know it, with his style being widely emulated around the league today. Performed what are quite possibly the two greatest postseason runs of any goalie in NHL history.
6: Lafleur - In terms of his talent he should be 2nd on this list only behind Morenz, if not outright topping this list. But his actions off the ice caused a career to end prematurely. Still arguably the most dynamic talent in this vote, and also one of the three most polarizing figures up for vote this round, which is saying a lot.
7: Potvin - Extremely thin line between Denis and the next guy on my list, and if I included his work as a broadcaster that would probably knock Potvin down to the mid 20s. Some people just aren't meant for the booth. That said, he was a dominant force on the blueline offensively and defensively while being argably one of the biggest (but cleanest) hitters in NHL history. He was an absolute lynchpin on the Isles dynasty defense and despite his short career that's what has him over Lidstrom for me.
8: Lidstrom - The best player still playing the game right now, easily. Much like Hasek he's a player that is definitive to the Dead Puck Era. The biggest critique that I have about him is the level of competition he had in winning his Norris Trophies, and he certainly would have still won most of them even in tougher eras. A rare player that can dominate a game both offensively and defensively while having a "quiet" game. This one is a significant deviation from my placement on the submited list.
9: Sawchuk - Terry, when on his game (see early in his career), to me is the best there ever was at the position. He's the one goaltender I would have put in the top 10 (probably at #7 or 8) had he played his entire career as he did his first few years in Detroit. Even still his play throughout the majority of his carrer is very strong, if not a bit erratic after he started to hit the bottle. But his alcoholism, depression, and the issues that come along with it are what leads me to drop him from my top 5 in this round. Otherwise he would probably be my #3 goalie after Hasek.
10: Hall - The biggest argument against the guy that I can find is that he did not step up his game in the post-season. That's it, that's all there is to it. Considering he was one of the most dominant goalies of all time in the regular season I don't see that as much of a negative.
11: Lindsay - Looking just at the statistics you would wonder if I'm insane having him in my top 20, and really I don't but a few other options like Lalonde and Kharlamov aren't available to vote on yet. But Lindsay was notably one of the toughest and most fearsome competitors in the history of the sport. Maybe I overrate him due to his importance in getting the players union going.
12: Esposito - One of the best players of all time in his role, and winner of two Hart trophies for MVP. He didn't invent the "garbage goal" but he might as well have perfected it. I remember even living outside Boston in the 80s I would still see bumper stickers that read "Jesus saves... Esposito scores on the rebound". That said, I do have to wonder just how his career would have panned out if not for playing with Bobby Orr.
13: Kelly - One of the best two-way players at a time when defensemen weren't typically noted for offensive play. Extremely versatile player. Has more cups then any player that did not play for Montreal.
14: Jagr - Surprisingly not last on my list with all the negatives I have towards him. He's a generational talent and if not for some of his off and on ice issues would have placed much higher in my rankings. But to me he's hockey's answer to "Manny being Manny", and this is a player that at one point was my second favorite in all of hockey.
15: Clarke - Honestly I'm surprised he's up for voting already. That said, he's one of the best two-way players of all time in hockey and has 3 Harts, a Selke and 4 all star selections to prove it. I think he'd probably be more suited to voting for the next round but I can easily see him in the top 30.

DaveG is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:32 AM
  #55
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Effectively

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jungosi View Post
You have to take this statistics with a grain of salt. Lidstrom was really more of a defensive defensemen while all the mentioned players were known for their offensive abilities. You also have to take a look at the context. He has roughly +100 more than the second best player during the lenght of his career.(Jagr reknown for his defensive game , you see what I did here don't you?).

+/- is certainly an interesting stat but you have to spend a lot of time to make it a valid stat. It's value is very dependent on the context. You took it out of context which gives it about as much value as saying that Ted Lindsay never had a 100 point season.

Lidstrom definitley belongs into the top-20. He was the best and most consistent player in the world for the last ten years.
Yes you jigged comparisons to make Lidstrom look good,effectively removing Chris Chelios from the picture who has a +352 with a much longer career that covers Lidstrom's career to date. The +352 generated by Chelios includes app seven seasons when he was 40 or older.Likewise you eliminated Scott Stevens with a + 393 who was a physical horse on defense. So comparing between defensemen that were contemporaries, the gap is not as impressive as your Jagr comparison.

Marginally better than Chelios and Stevens. If you include the Scott Niedermayer or Chris Pronger types then you have a gap but the comparison is with players that would rank significantly below Chelios and Stevens, well beyond the top 100.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:33 AM
  #56
Reds4Life
Registered User
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Overlooking the contributions by Larry Murphy, Brendan Shanahan, Igor Larianov, Paul Coffey to the Red Wings or their Stanley Cups during the length of Lidstroms tenure.

Yzerman and Fedorov. Well Bowman managed to get both to forego individual stats and play for the sake of team play after the Devils with Jacques Lemaire coaching beat an individualistic Red Wings team 4-0 in the 1995 Stanley Cup finals with the Red Wings slowly falling apart as the series progressed. Each loss worse than the previous. 2-1, 4-2 in NJ then 5-2, 5-2 in Detroit.

But Lidstrom was NOT willing to take on physical responsibilities of the position. His choice but one that is fair game for analysis and criticism.
Lidstrom is not a physical defenseman. It is not his style. He has other ways of defending. Lack of physical play is NOT a minus for HIS game. It is not that he is not WILLING, he just does NOT NEED to be physical. Gretzky was not physical either, and he could not play defense if his life depended on it. But it's not like he was not WILLING to do that, he just did not NEED to do that.

Reds4Life is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:47 AM
  #57
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post


How could FF accept you into HOH Top 100 project is beyond me.
I honestly agree - the unbelievable pro-canadia(e)n anti-european bias from a voter is disturbing. Reminds me of a rejected list from the previous vote that had Hasek at #49 and Lidstrom at #83 -- though I know that particular list is not his because Canadiens players are not ranked nearly high enough.

Cup counting to the extreme; Actually using dead-puck era +/- comparisons to the 70s as a reason to discount Lidstrom; Falling back on a completely unsubstantiated "accusation" to discredit Hasek to the extreme; as well as a myriad of other flimsy hijinks against players he appears to simply "not like" each of which collapse like a house of cards with the barest amount of scrutiny before he moves onto the next one.

15 players up for votes this round, 12 canadian and 3 european -- guess which three are dead last on his list? -- the only voter to do so (even God Bless Canada had Hasek 10th in this vote).

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:48 AM
  #58
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Well...................

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
Lidstrom is not a physical defenseman. It is not his style. He has other ways of defending. Lack of physical play is NOT a minus for HIS game. It is not that he is not WILLING, he just does NOT NEED to be physical. Gretzky was not physical either, and he could not play defense if his life depended on it. But it's not like he was not WILLING to do that, he just did not NEED to do that.
Comparing out of position now.

Historically defensemen are required to contribute a physical game. Some that do not are considered accordingly - Bill Quackenbush HOF but middling,, moved to forward when their defensive skills slip - Red Kelly recognized for their dual contribution by the HOF, denied HHOF consideration - J.C. Tremblay.

Basically you have yet to show an overriding contribution by Lidstrom that compensates for his lack of physical play. Are young defensemen from youth leagues on up imitating him like they did Bobby Orr? Are youth coaches teaching his style like they did for Orr and all the offensive defensemen that followed?

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 10:55 AM
  #59
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Overlooking.................

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I honestly agree - the unbelievable pro-canadia(e)n anti-european bias from a voter is disturbing. Reminds me of a rejected list from the previous vote that had Hasek at #49 and Lidstrom at #83 -- though I know that particular list is not his because Canadiens players are not ranked nearly high enough.

Cup counting to the extreme; Actually using dead-puck era +/- comparisons to the 70s as a reason to discount Lidstrom; Falling back on a completely unsubstantiated "accusation" to discredit Hasek to the extreme; as well as a myriad of other flimsy hijinks against players he appears to simply "not like" each of which collapse like a house of cards with the barest amount of scrutiny before he moves onto the next one.

15 players up for votes this round, 12 canadian and 3 european -- guess which three are dead last on his list? -- the only voter to do so (even God Bless Canada had Hasek 10th in this vote).
Overlooking critics of Canadian or Canadiens icons like Eddie Shore, Bobby Hull, Maurice Richard, Guy Lafleur, Bobby Clarke, Sprague Cleghorn, Stan Mikita and others to come


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-04-2009 at 10:55 AM. Reason: typo
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 11:00 AM
  #60
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Comparing out of position now.

Historically defensemen are required to contribute a physical game. Some that do not are considered accordingly - Bill Quackenbush HOF but middling,, moved to forward when their defensive skills slip - Red Kelly recognized for their dual contribution by the HOF, denied HHOF consideration - J.C. Tremblay.

Basically you have yet to show an overriding contribution by Lidstrom that compensates for his lack of physical play. Are young defensemen from youth leagues on up imitating him like they did Bobby Orr? Are youth coaches teaching his style like they did for Orr and all the offensive defensemen that followed?
Yet you have Red Kelly 9 spots ahead of Lidstrom.... why? Lidstrom and Kelly both played a very cerebral, non-physical games. Because he scored once in the top 10 as a forward? Lidstrom's non-dynasty teams made him, but not the two separate dynasties Kelly had the good fortune to be a part of?

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 11:01 AM
  #61
poise
Registered User
 
poise's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
Lidstrom is better player than Yzerman. By a lot.
I'd take the exact opposite view to be quite honest.

Well attested media reports until even 2002 have many reporters calling Yzerman the best Red Wings Player when he played. In fact, it was Yzerman who used to disagree with the words of reporters when he was referred to as the best player. Also Sergei Fedorov cannot be ignored until 2003, as he was always in the conversation. This despite Yzerman's best years clearly behind him by a decade.

I'm honestly surprised at Lidstrom's high ranking, relative not only to Defenseman but to Red Wings (this is from recent rankings of Top 10 Defenseman and Top 5 Red Wings).

Most people in Red Wings management (Holland, Devallano, Nill, Illitch) have categorically stated that Yzerman was the second greatest player the franchise has ever seen.

I think if you poll Red Wings fans who've watched the careers of both Players, Yzerman would come out ahead by some margin.

Then again, awards voting tends to be a major factor in the rankings on this board, and Lidstrom undoubtedly has a lot more honors to his name (though I will remind you that Yzerman has a better Hart record in a much more competitive time and also outdid Lidstrom in Hart voting when they played together at high levels during the Dead Puck Era - I am sure the obvious reply will be that the Hart has a Defensive bias, but consider that Lidstrom was able to outdo Datsyuk and Zetterberg recently).

At least from what I've seen, Yzerman at his best was a clearly superior player to Lidstrom at his best, and even during the late 1990's and early 2000's, when Lidstrom started contending for the Norris Trophy, I thought Yzerman was the better Player (Fedorov too).

poise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 11:09 AM
  #62
Reds4Life
Registered User
 
Reds4Life's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Czech Republic
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,522
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Comparing out of position now.

Historically defensemen are required to contribute a physical game. Some that do not are considered accordingly - Bill Quackenbush HOF but middling,, moved to forward when their defensive skills slip - Red Kelly recognized for their dual contribution by the HOF, denied HHOF consideration - J.C. Tremblay.

Basically you have yet to show an overriding contribution by Lidstrom that compensates for his lack of physical play. Are young defensemen from youth leagues on up imitating him like they did Bobby Orr? Are youth coaches teaching his style like they did for Orr and all the offensive defensemen that followed?
Imitating Bobby Orr? Impossible. And it has nothing to do with Lidstrom. There will always be only one Orr.

You have yet to show me how lack of physical play makes Lidstrom worse defenseman. I say it makes him better because he is never out of position (lets forget this last "bad" year he had), he is (almost) never injured and he takes only few penalties.

But it is not just Lidstrom.

Hasek has negatives, but Roy does not?
Jagr is moody fuc*er, but Lafleur is just fine player?

Pathetic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by poise View Post
I'd take the exact opposite view to be quite honest.

Well attested media reports until even 2002 have many reporters calling Yzerman the best Red Wings Player when he played. In fact, it was Yzerman who used to disagree with the words of reporters when he was referred to as the best player. Also Sergei Fedorov cannot be ignored until 2003, as he was always in the conversation. This despite Yzerman's best years clearly behind him by a decade.

I'm honestly surprised at Lidstrom's high ranking, relative not only to Defenseman but to Red Wings (this is from recent rankings of Top 10 Defenseman and Top 5 Red Wings).

Most people in Red Wings management (Holland, Devallano, Nill, Illitch) have categorically stated that Yzerman was the second greatest player the franchise has ever seen.

I think if you poll Red Wings fans who've watched the careers of both Players, Yzerman would come out ahead by some margin.

Then again, awards voting tends to be a major factor in the rankings on this board, and Lidstrom undoubtedly has a lot more honors to his name (though I will remind you that Yzerman has a better Hart record in a much more competitive time and also outdid Lidstrom in Hart voting when they played together at high levels during the Dead Puck Era - I am sure the obvious reply will be that the Hart has a Defensive bias, but consider that Lidstrom was able to outdo Datsyuk and Zetterberg recently).

At least from what I've seen, Yzerman at his best was a clearly superior player to Lidstrom at his best, and even during the late 1990's and early 2000's, when Lidstrom started contending for the Norris Trophy, I thought Yzerman was the better Player (Fedorov too).
Because Yzerman is viewed as an icon, not a player. He is not better than Sakic, but just ask Wings fans. I love Steve Y, but he was not the best Red Wing in last 15 years. Neither was Fedorov. Lidstrom is quiet guy, not flashy player, yet it was his presence on the blue line that made the Wings winners. Not to mention there was still bias towards European players in the early 90s, like it or not.

Reds4Life is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:15 PM
  #63
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Red Kelly

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Yet you have Red Kelly 9 spots ahead of Lidstrom.... why? Lidstrom and Kelly both played a very cerebral, non-physical games. Because he scored once in the top 10 as a forward? Lidstrom's non-dynasty teams made him, but not the two separate dynasties Kelly had the good fortune to be a part of?
Leonard "Red" Kelly outstanding at two positions - defense and center. Within three seasons of his arrival in Detroit and Toronto became a key part of dynasty teams. Facilitated Borje Salming's adaptation to the North American game.

My appreciation of Red Kelly was posted previously, copied above.

Kelly was physical especially when he was playing center, fighting thru checks to get into the slot and being very responsible defensively tying up the other center. He was not a perimeter player. Kelly was also a contemporary of Maurice Richard and I never saw Maurice Richard pull his "buttonhook" move on Kelly when Kelly was playing defense. Kelly was not above using his body to create obstacles or eliminate them. Lidstrom as evidenced by the Umberger video rarely does use his body in such a fashion.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...kellyre01.html

Kelly's PIM during his Detroit years reflect a physical side to his game, including majors.

Whereas Lidstrom's PIM are comparable to Kelly with Detroit when you factor in app 20% more games:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...lidstni01.html

The only upward spike comes 2005-06 and later with the anti - obstruction calls - willing to hook, hold etc instead of using the body like Kelly did to eliminate a threat without trying to blast the player into the cheap seats.

Red Kelly was the last NHL player to successfully blend a career as a defenseman and a forward. Similar to greats like Cyclone Taylor, Ebbie Goodfellow and others.

As for good fortune. Conveniently overlooking that Lidstrom had the good fortune to be drafted by Detroit as opposed to one of the weak teams.

Granted great players and great teams have a way of finding each other. Detroit managed to get Red Kelly out of Ontario and the Toronto Maple Leafs back yard. Then when Kelly refused to be traded to the Rangers the Leafs stepped up and arranged a trade when other teams did not. That the Leafs(Punch Imlach) had the vision to use Kelly in a different role is a tribute to them and to Red Kelly who accepted the change and integrated himself into a new team , adapting to a different position and role creating the resulting rewards for all.

So Kelly is rated higher than Lidstrom for the reasons outlined.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:20 PM
  #64
Der Kaiser
Registered User
 
Der Kaiser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Gothenburg, SWE
Country: Sweden
Posts: 800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Basically you have yet to show an overriding contribution by Lidstrom that compensates for his lack of physical play. Are young defensemen from youth leagues on up imitating him like they did Bobby Orr? Are youth coaches teaching his style like they did for Orr and all the offensive defensemen that followed?
Why would they? Of course Canadian kids grow up idolizing Canadian players. Over here in Sweden every single defenseman prospect is labeled the next Lidström, just as every offensive one is the next Forsberg. I am fairly confident if you asked young kids playing hockey in Sweden they'd have no clue who Bobby Orr is. They sure as hell know Nicklas Lidström though.

Still this tells nothing of the players greatness. I still have not seen any credible evidence of Lidström being inferior to the other top guns (Potvin, Kelly, Park, Bourque, Robinson) apart from a single clip showing him making a mistake and that rabble about +/- which is absolute nonsense as I already adressed. Inferior to Orr? Sure thing, he does not hold a candle to Orr, but neither does any other defensemen in the history of hockey.

Der Kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:25 PM
  #65
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
I can't believe +/- was actually brought up in an attempt to discredit Lidstrom.

Lidstrom, throught his career, blows away the entire NHL in +/- by a greater percentage than any other defenseman ever.

+409 Lidstrom
+282 Stevens (45%)
+279 Jagr (47%)
+255 Chelios (60%)

+730 Robinson
+592 Gretzky (23%)
+474 Clarke (54%)
+464 Trottier (57%)
+460 Potvin (59%)

+597 Orr
+482 Savard (24%)
+391 Lafleur (53%)
+387 Robinson (54%)

+528 Bourque
+518 Gretzky (2%)
+444 McCrimmon (19%)
+400 Howe (32%)

Potvin, Stevens, Chelios -- did not lead the NHL in cumulative +/- throughout their careers.

Lidstrom's team was more effective when Lidstrom was on the ice (compared to all his peers in the NHL at the time) than any other defenseman, throughout their careers.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:25 PM
  #66
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Facts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post
Imitating Bobby Orr? Impossible. And it has nothing to do with Lidstrom. There will always be only one Orr.

You have yet to show me how lack of physical play makes Lidstrom worse defenseman. I say it makes him better because he is never out of position (lets forget this last "bad" year he had), he is (almost) never injured and he takes only few penalties.

But it is not just Lidstrom.

Hasek has negatives, but Roy does not?
Jagr is moody fuc*er, but Lafleur is just fine player?

Pathetic.




Because Yzerman is viewed as an icon, not a player. He is not better than Sakic, but just ask Wings fans. I love Steve Y, but he was not the best Red Wing in last 15 years. Neither was Fedorov. Lidstrom is quiet guy, not flashy player, yet it was his presence on the blue line that made the Wings winners. Not to mention there was still bias towards European players in the early 90s, like it or not.
My criticism of Lafleur is well known. So your Jagr comparison is rather weak.

When the "anti-obstruction" calls started in 2005-06 Lidstrom's penalties spiked upwards because he was still playing the cute cerebral game with the subtle interference, hooks, holds, etc.


http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...lidstni01.html

A willingness to simply use the body to take the player out of the play as opposed to trying to blast him into the cheap seats would have reduced his penalty totals - a benefit to him and the Red Wings. So your few penalties point is rather weak when attributing advantages to Lidstrom's style.

Both Hasek and Roy had quirks but Roy had vastly superior win totals which make a difference.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 08-04-2009 at 12:27 PM. Reason: typo & addition
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:26 PM
  #67
Sturminator
I voted for Kodos
 
Sturminator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: West Egg, New York
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 7,386
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Fred "Cyclone" Taylor was mainly a defenseman / rover(seven man hockey) who moved up to center later in his career. His main contribution to hockey was his ability to skate backwards which defined how the defensemen of all future eras had to play the game.

His scoring is rather pedestrian by the standards of his era. 194 goals in 186 regular season games. Joe Malone and Newsy Lalonde had slightly better goals per game stats but none compared to Russell Bowie, 234 goals in 80 games or Frank McGee 71 goals in 23 games.
My god, man, you desperately need to stick to what you know, and that clearly includes next to nothing about Cyclone Taylor and likely the entire pre-merger era. Nalyd is not arguing this point with you only because it is not worth his time.

I simply do not understand what game you are playing. You have some areas of very specific knowledge which are valuable to the group as a whole, but you seem to take the attitude that you know everything, and that you are speaking with simpletons. The HOH project is not a penis measuring competition, mon frère.

Sturminator is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:36 PM
  #68
Canadiens Fan
Registered User
 
Canadiens Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 735
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reds4Life View Post

Because Yzerman is viewed as an icon, not a player. He is not better than Sakic, but just ask Wings fans. I love Steve Y, but he was not the best Red Wing in last 15 years. Neither was Fedorov. Lidstrom is quiet guy, not flashy player, yet it was his presence on the blue line that made the Wings winners. Not to mention there was still bias towards European players in the early 90s, like it or not.
Not to degrade Yzerman or Federov, but I'm extremely curious to see how well the Red Wings are going to do when Lidstrom takes his leave.

Despite the loss/retirement of some Hall of Fame talent, the Red Wings continue to be one of the top teams in the league. I think a large part of the credit must go to the Wings front office but there has been one constant on all the great Detroit teams.

It will be interesting to see how they do long term without him.

After all six-time Norris Trophy winners don't come along every day and neither do players who make the first all-star team nine years in a row.

I also find it interesting to see Lidstrom being denegrated for his plus/minus not that I think that the stat is the be all end all of defensive greatness. Six times in the top ten (5 in the top 3), 11th best all-time, and first amongst active players.

Canadiens Fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:37 PM
  #69
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,683
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Kaiser View Post
Why would they? Of course Canadian kids grow up idolizing Canadian players. Over here in Sweden every single defenseman prospect is labeled the next Lidström, just as every offensive one is the next Forsberg. I am fairly confident if you asked young kids playing hockey in Sweden they'd have no clue who Bobby Orr is. They sure as hell know Nicklas Lidström though.

Still this tells nothing of the players greatness. I still have not seen any credible evidence of Lidström being inferior to the other top guns (Potvin, Kelly, Park, Bourque, Robinson) apart from a single clip showing him making a mistake and that rabble about +/- which is absolute nonsense as I already adressed. Inferior to Orr? Sure thing, he does not hold a candle to Orr, but neither does any other defensemen in the history of hockey.
Didn’t Victor Hedman recently take #77 and say his favourite defender growing up was Ray Bourque? And Jonas Gustavson was considering playing in Denver because his favourite goalie had been Patrick Roy and it was widely speculated Roy would be given a position in the Avs organization.

I know plenty of younger kids who like Hasek better than Roy, or grow up idolizing Bure Forsberg and Selanne. Canadian kids, who at the time of their youth in the 90's the most exciting and some of the best players were Euros.

Great players transcend nationality even in Canada. Contrary to popular belief, we're not all a bunch of bigots and racists.

Lidstrom simply did not play an exciting type of game that an 8 year old can appreciate. No bone crushing hits, no end to end rushes, no fighting. In his own right he has been a very influential player, guys like Timonen and even Jay Bouwmeester are held in much higher regard than they would have in the early 90's. Perception of non-physical defenseman has changed since Lidstrom showed you need not be a big tough hitter to be an effective defender.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I can't believe +/- was actually brought up in an attempt to discredit Lidstrom.

Lidstrom, throught his career, blows away the entire NHL in +/- by a greater percentage than any other defenseman ever.

+409 Lidstrom
+282 Stevens (45%)
+279 Jagr (47%)
+255 Chelios (60%)

+730 Robinson
+592 Gretzky (23%)
+474 Clarke (54%)
+464 Trottier (57%)
+460 Potvin (59%)

+597 Orr
+482 Savard (24%)
+391 Lafleur (53%)
+387 Robinson (54%)

+528 Bourque
+518 Gretzky (2%)
+444 McCrimmon (19%)
+400 Howe (32%)

Potvin, Stevens, Chelios -- did not lead the NHL in cumulative +/- throughout their careers.

Lidstrom's team was more effective when Lidstrom was on the ice (compared to all his peers in the NHL at the time) than any other defenseman, throughout their careers.
This will be considered "statistical smoke" you realize?

Anyways, with 4 defenders in the top 10 I will be spotting Lidstrom and Potvin and Kelly in the 17-25 range to reflect the big gap between them and Bourque. There are some very deserving goalies and forwards I think that go ahead of those 3 easily.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:41 PM
  #70
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
Leonard "Red" Kelly outstanding at two positions - defense and center. Within three seasons of his arrival in Detroit and Toronto became a key part of dynasty teams. Facilitated Borje Salming's adaptation to the North American game.

My appreciation of Red Kelly was posted previously, copied above.

Kelly was physical especially when he was playing center, fighting thru checks to get into the slot and being very responsible defensively tying up the other center. He was not a perimeter player. Kelly was also a contemporary of Maurice Richard and I never saw Maurice Richard pull his "buttonhook" move on Kelly when Kelly was playing defense. Kelly was not above using his body to create obstacles or eliminate them. Lidstrom as evidenced by the Umberger video rarely does use his body in such a fashion.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...kellyre01.html

Kelly's PIM during his Detroit years reflect a physical side to his game, including majors.

Whereas Lidstrom's PIM are comparable to Kelly with Detroit when you factor in app 20% more games:

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...lidstni01.html

The only upward spike comes 2005-06 and later with the anti - obstruction calls - willing to hook, hold etc instead of using the body like Kelly did to eliminate a threat without trying to blast the player into the cheap seats.

Red Kelly was the last NHL player to successfully blend a career as a defenseman and a forward. Similar to greats like Cyclone Taylor, Ebbie Goodfellow and others.

As for good fortune. Conveniently overlooking that Lidstrom had the good fortune to be drafted by Detroit as opposed to one of the weak teams.

Granted great players and great teams have a way of finding each other. Detroit managed to get Red Kelly out of Ontario and the Toronto Maple Leafs back yard. Then when Kelly refused to be traded to the Rangers the Leafs stepped up and arranged a trade when other teams did not. That the Leafs(Punch Imlach) had the vision to use Kelly in a different role is a tribute to them and to Red Kelly who accepted the change and integrated himself into a new team , adapting to a different position and role creating the resulting rewards for all.

So Kelly is rated higher than Lidstrom for the reasons outlined.
So in other words, your entire argument comes down to Kelly had more penalty minutes?

Lidstrom scored more than Kelly as a defenseman (adjusted as well), earned more Norrises than Kelly plus retroactive awards (6 vs. 4). Both Kelly's teams are recognized as dynasties, Lidstrom's is not.

Lidstrom is a 9-time 1st Team All Star and 1-time 2nd Team All-Star as a defenseman.
Kelly is a 6-time 1st Team All Star and 2-time 2nd Team All-Star as a defenseman.
One season in the top 10 for points as a forward does not overcome the difference, let alone more penalties

Demonstrate how Lidstrom's lack of physicality contributed to his defensive game? How about Norris voting? He certainly wasn't leading defensemen in points all those years. How about simply the fact he is noted as a defensive defenseman first and foremost, despite his incredible offensive game? How about that he absolutely destroys the rest of the NHL in +/- throughout his career? How about that he is known as the "perfect player"? This is bonkers.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:44 PM
  #71
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
Seriously

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Kaiser View Post
Why would they? Of course Canadian kids grow up idolizing Canadian players. Over here in Sweden every single defenseman prospect is labeled the next Lidström, just as every offensive one is the next Forsberg. I am fairly confident if you asked young kids playing hockey in Sweden they'd have no clue who Bobby Orr is. They sure as hell know Nicklas Lidström though.

Still this tells nothing of the players greatness. I still have not seen any credible evidence of Lidström being inferior to the other top guns (Potvin, Kelly, Park, Bourque, Robinson) apart from a single clip showing him making a mistake and that rabble about +/- which is absolute nonsense as I already adressed. Inferior to Orr? Sure thing, he does not hold a candle to Orr, but neither does any other defensemen in the history of hockey.
Kids in Montreal idolize(d) Koivu, Kovalev,Markov. In Ottawa kids idolize Alfredsson, Toronto they idolized Sundin, Calgary they idolize Kiiprusoff, Edmonton its Hemsky, Vancouver the Sedins.Quebec it was Peter Stastny, while Winnipeg kids loved Teemu Selanne. Throughout Canada its Malkin and Ovechkin besides the usual Canadian superstars like Crosby, Price, Iginla, Spezza, etc. Makes you wonder where the bias is coming from when YOU admit that in Sweden the history of North American hockey greats is ignored.

Canadian kids know the hockey greats from generations ago.They do not distinguish between non Canadian and Canadian players.

Again Lidstrom only looks good with smoke and mirrors comparisons.
Head to head against defensemen where careers overlapped he suffers.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:44 PM
  #72
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,739
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post

This will be considered "statistical smoke" you realize?
Of course - but it is simply a response to Canadiens1958 using +/- to discredit Lidstrom. That is a pretty dumb route to take, if you care about +/- at all.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:53 PM
  #73
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 11,625
vCash: 500
No

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
So in other words, your entire argument comes down to Kelly had more penalty minutes?

Lidstrom scored more than Kelly as a defenseman (adjusted as well), earned more Norrises than Kelly plus retroactive awards (6 vs. 4). Both Kelly's teams are recognized as dynasties, Lidstrom's is not.

Lidstrom is a 9-time 1st Team All Star and 1-time 2nd Team All-Star as a defenseman.
Kelly is a 6-time 1st Team All Star and 2-time 2nd Team All-Star as a defenseman.
One season in the top 10 for points as a forward does not overcome the difference, let alone more penalties

Demonstrate how Lidstrom's lack of physicality contributed to his defensive game? How about Norris voting? He certainly wasn't leading defensemen in points all those years. How about simply the fact he is noted as a defensive defenseman first and foremost, despite his incredible offensive game? How about that he absolutely destroys the rest of the NHL in +/- throughout his career? How about that he is known as the "perfect player"? This is bonkers.
No my point is that Kelly had a physical side to his game that Lidstrom does not.

The rest of your post is basic smoke and mirrors.We are not comparing to an era defined by Lidstrom's career. If you adjust for scoring then adjust for other factors as well. How many awards does Lidstrom win if he is competing against a Bobby Orr or a Doug Harvey?

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:54 PM
  #74
foame
Registered User
 
foame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 255
vCash: 500
I saw that a lot of you has Howie Morenz high on the list but none of you made a case for him (other than saying he was the first superstar). I think it would be interesting if someone compared him to the other centers available for voting.

foame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-04-2009, 12:55 PM
  #75
lextune
I'm too old for this
 
lextune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 9,593
vCash: 500
+/- is a team stat.

For instance in 1986 Cam Neely was a -30 with Vancouver. The next season he was a +23 with Boston. Do you mean to tell me that he personally got "53 goals better defensively" that summer....?

lextune is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 03:24 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.