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.

Norris Trophy Pilfering '98 vs '11

View Poll Results: Who was robbed more?
Lidstrom in '98 47 68.12%
Weber in '11 22 31.88%
Voters: 69. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-19-2012, 02:58 AM
  #1
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Norris Trophy Pilfering '98 vs '11

Simple question, who was robbed more?
Lidstrom in '98 or Weber in '11?

'98
Blake: 81GP 23G 27A 50P -3 26:26mins/G 22PP 1SH 27ES
Lidstrom: 80GP 17G 42A 59P +22 27:14mins/G 33PP 1SH 25ES

Kings 87 points, 227GF, 225GA
Wings 103 points, 250GF, 196GA


'11
Weber: 82GP 16G 32A 48P +7 25:19mins/G 17PP 2SH 29ES
Lidstrom: 82GP 16G 46A 62P -2 23:28mins/G 39PP 1SH 22ES

Preds 99 points, 219GF, 194GA
Wings 104 points, 261GF, 241GA


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 11-19-2012 at 04:02 AM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 05:17 AM
  #2
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,268
vCash: 500
Lidström was robbed more than Weber were. Actually think Zubov, Pronger, Stevens and Niedermeyer were more worthy of the Norris than Blake.

Weber might have been robbed too but atleast it was the closest rival who robbed him and not someone with highlight reel big hits.

Edit: Now that I think of it. There might even be a case for Numminen over Blake in '98.

jkrx is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 06:40 AM
  #3
danincanada
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,238
vCash: 500
'98 was the bigger mistake. That season was also sandwiched in between two cup runs for Lidstrom. He was really dominating defensively and out produced Blake offensively as well. I thought everyone already realized this was a case of poor voting with the media constantly saying "no one is seeing what Blake is doing out west".

You forgot about '09. Lidstrom should have won the Norris that season, too. He showed down the stretch and in the playoffs that he was still the best dman in the world by a decent margin. '11 was definitely debatable. Maybe the voters were making up for '09.

btw, with regards to '98, would you rather have Blake for the '97 and '98 cup runs in Detroit than Lidstrom? Would that be an upgrade, downgrade or would he fill Lidstrom's spot equally? Considering the '98 season is right in between both playoff runs it should answer the question. After the '97 playoffs I don't think Bowman would have traded Lidstrom for any other defenseman, he was that good.


Last edited by danincanada: 11-19-2012 at 06:46 AM.
danincanada is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 10:55 AM
  #4
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,782
vCash: 500
man, rob blake has really taken a beating these last couple of years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Lidström was robbed more than Weber were. Actually think Zubov, Pronger, Stevens and Niedermeyer were more worthy of the Norris than Blake.

Weber might have been robbed too but atleast it was the closest rival who robbed him and not someone with highlight reel big hits.

Edit: Now that I think of it. There might even be a case for Numminen over Blake in '98.
i mean, this is nuts. you can say lidstrom and blake were very close that year and that it could have gone to lidstrom. i'll even accept that lidstrom was demonstrably better that year but the trophy went to the guy with the rough and tumble game carrying a crappy team instead of the quiet swedish guy overshadowed by the six other hall of famers on his team. and, why not, let's say pronger belonged there too. it was definitely a three horse race, though pronger still had one step to go before he became pronger.

but '98 niedermayer? zubov? and teppo numminen had a fantastic year, by his standards. but '98 rob blake was basically '11 or '12 shea weber without the ryan suter. blake's d partner was garry galley. no, strike that; garry gallery at age 34.

blake wasn't pronger-- certainly not lidstrom-- on the back end. but we are now acting like he was kevin hatcher, or jovanovski at his worst. he was a very good defender with a very long reach, made game changing hip checks (not quite scott stevens, but the kind you would carry the puck down the other side of the ice to avoid), and he was nasty and punishing in his own zone. we're talking about a hall of fame defenseman at his most dominant. and you act like this is phaneuf or bryan mccabe tripping over the blueline trying to do a mohawk turn and still making a second all-star team.

i won't address the lidstrom part of this thread, nor the comparison because i don't want to get sucked into another lidstrom maelstrom. i will concede that lidstrom could certainly have won that norris. but that doesn't mean we have to paint peak rob blake with the lazy stereotype of the overrated hard hitting, hard shooting canadian defenseman who secretly can't defend.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 11:39 AM
  #5
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
man, rob blake has really taken a beating these last couple of years.



i mean, this is nuts. you can say lidstrom and blake were very close that year and that it could have gone to lidstrom. i'll even accept that lidstrom was demonstrably better that year but the trophy went to the guy with the rough and tumble game carrying a crappy team instead of the quiet swedish guy overshadowed by the six other hall of famers on his team. and, why not, let's say pronger belonged there too. it was definitely a three horse race, though pronger still had one step to go before he became pronger.

but '98 niedermayer? zubov? and teppo numminen had a fantastic year, by his standards. but '98 rob blake was basically '11 or '12 shea weber without the ryan suter. blake's d partner was garry galley. no, strike that; garry gallery at age 34.

blake wasn't pronger-- certainly not lidstrom-- on the back end. but we are now acting like he was kevin hatcher, or jovanovski at his worst. he was a very good defender with a very long reach, made game changing hip checks (not quite scott stevens, but the kind you would carry the puck down the other side of the ice to avoid), and he was nasty and punishing in his own zone. we're talking about a hall of fame defenseman at his most dominant. and you act like this is phaneuf or bryan mccabe tripping over the blueline trying to do a mohawk turn and still making a second all-star team.

i won't address the lidstrom part of this thread, nor the comparison because i don't want to get sucked into another lidstrom maelstrom. i will concede that lidstrom could certainly have won that norris. but that doesn't mean we have to paint peak rob blake with the lazy stereotype of the overrated hard hitting, hard shooting canadian defenseman who secretly can't defend.
couldn't have said it better myself. if lidstrom was "robbed" in 98, it was more than made up for with several norris's afterwards. Weber has yet to win one, even though he is constantly one of the top D-men in the game. My vote goes to Weber getting "robbed". how Lidstrom was could win the Norris with a -2 rating on a team that was +20 that year, and had the 6th best record in the NHL, is a head scratcher.

jack mullet is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 12:15 PM
  #6
Elever
Hth
 
Elever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,481
vCash: 500
Weber was robbed even more in 2012 than 2011 imo. Voters got too excited about a dman who could put up better offense than everyone else even though Chara/Weber seem by far to be the two tougest dmen to score against who can put up 40+ pts.

Elever is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 12:29 PM
  #7
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
couldn't have said it better myself. if lidstrom was "robbed" in 98, it was more than made up for with several norris's afterwards. Weber has yet to win one, even though he is constantly one of the top D-men in the game. My vote goes to Weber getting "robbed". how Lidstrom was could win the Norris with a -2 rating on a team that was +20 that year, and had the 6th best record in the NHL, is a head scratcher.
Blake was a minus player in 1998 too, though that was a weaker team.

I hate the term "robbed" because it makes it sound like there is only one guy with a legit case to win. But if we are going to use the word, I think Lidstrom was "robbed" of a Norris in both 1998 and 2009, and "robbed" of a 2nd Team All Star in both 1996 and 2004.

Since I would have given the 2011 Norris to Chara, I don't think Weber was "robbed" at all. So it's an easy choice for me.

Lidstrom was the runner-up for the Norris 3 years in a row before he won his first one, so Weber still has time.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 12:43 PM
  #8
Hobnobs
Pinko
 
Hobnobs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Blake was a minus player in 1998 too, though that was a weaker team.

I hate the term "robbed" because it makes it sound like there is only one guy with a legit case to win. But if we are going to use the word, I think Lidstrom was "robbed" of a Norris in both 1998 and 2009, and "robbed" of a 2nd Team All Star in both 1996 and 2004.

Since I would have given the 2011 Norris to Chara, I don't think Weber was "robbed" at all. So it's an easy choice for me.

Lidstrom was the runner-up for the Norris 3 years in a row before he won his first one, so Weber still has time.
Well, the thread was created by Lidströms biggest "critic", is that the best word to use?

Hobnobs is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 12:58 PM
  #9
quoipourquoi
Moderator
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,583
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobnobs View Post
Well, the thread was created by Lidströms biggest "critic", is that the best word to use?
From what I understand, Rhiessan71 believes Lidstrom to be the fifth-best defenseman of all-time. He is not Lidstrom's biggest critic or detractor.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 12:59 PM
  #10
JackSlater
Registered User
 
JackSlater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,118
vCash: 500
Lidstrom was more deserving of the 98 Norris than Weber was of the 11 Norris. Neither was outright robbed, but Lidstrom has an easier case for being the best defenceman that year.

JackSlater is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 01:10 PM
  #11
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,874
vCash: 500
'11 because '98 was just a strange year where there was a lot of worthy nominees, not really any worthy winner. So it was bound to produce a result that many would be unhappy with. Lidstrom is only viewed as being robbed because of what he went on to do afterward. At the time, it was any defenceman's race.

2011 on the other hand, Lidstrom was only given the trophy because of his history. Weber was the best defenceman in the NHL. Chara was second best. Having someone win on reputation is always the worst way to win.

__________________
Every post comes with the Nalyd Psycho Seal of Approval.
Nalyd Psycho is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 01:38 PM
  #12
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Lidstrom was more deserving of the 98 Norris than Weber was of the 11 Norris. Neither was outright robbed, but Lidstrom has an easier case for being the best defenceman that year.
based on what?

jack mullet is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 01:47 PM
  #13
jack mullet
@jackmullethockey
 
jack mullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Baxter, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Blake was a minus player in 1998 too, though that was a weaker team.

I hate the term "robbed" because it makes it sound like there is only one guy with a legit case to win. But if we are going to use the word, I think Lidstrom was "robbed" of a Norris in both 1998 and 2009, and "robbed" of a 2nd Team All Star in both 1996 and 2004
i realize Blake was a minus player, but LA's goal difference was +2, and they were a rather over achieving team at that. Lidstrom still had a team of all stars in front of him, and lets not forget Lidstrom played in front of Chris Osgood, not Stephane Fiset. personally i don't think Lidstrom or Weber were robbed. both are top D-men and will get whats coming to them. but if i had to choose of the 2, i think Weber was "robbed" (if you can call it that)

jack mullet is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 01:51 PM
  #14
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack mullet View Post
i realize Blake was a minus player, but LA's goal difference was +2, and they were a rather over achieving team at that. Lidstrom still had a team of all stars in front of him, and lets not forget Lidstrom played in front of Chris Osgood, not Stephane Fiset. personally i don't think Lidstrom or Weber were robbed. both are top D-men and will get whats coming to them. but if i had to choose of the 2, i think Weber was "robbed" (if you can call it that)
Is that a huge difference? Lidstrom clearly had the worst goaltending of any of the three finalists in 2011.

Agree that "robbed" is too strong a word, but I do think that Lidstrom was closer to being robbed than Weber was.

I agree that Lidstrom's 2011 Norris was very weak, but the thing is, it was an incredibly weak season overall for defensemen at the top.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 01:53 PM
  #15
struckbyaparkedcar
Zemgus Da Gawd
 
struckbyaparkedcar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Country: Cote DIvoire
Posts: 10,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Since I would have given the 2011 Norris to Chara, I don't think Weber was "robbed" at all. So it's an easy choice for me.
Why?

I don't remember Chara doing anything that really stood out in a "give this man the Norris" sort of way since 2009. I mean, he was a top all-situations player on a top defensive/goal-differential team in the regular season, but I'd have to include the playoffs and credit Chara for facilitating A) Thomas' numbers, B) Bergeron's development into a top defensive forward since concussions, and C) guys like Marchand and Siedenberg raising their games in the postseason in order for him to be in the top spot.

I really don't think Z's 2011 was that different from his 08, 10, or 12 (everything else being a step below his 2009). Boston's team success that year had a lot more to do with staying healthy, getting step-up performances from various places (Horton, Bergeron-Marchand and Siedenberg being the biggest names) and getting various bounces they just didn't get in seasons prior, rather than Chara taking his game up a notch.

struckbyaparkedcar is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 03:11 PM
  #16
Richard
Registered User
 
Richard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 649
vCash: 500
Maybe I am in the minority, but I didn't feel that Lidstrom became other-wordly until late99/2000ish. In fact Im sure of it. He was always very very good, but from say 2000-08 he was playing some of the best defensive hockey ever played on the planet.

91ish-98 I thought Nik was a really quality dman, a surefire number 1 but he wasn't the best dman in the league. He was arguably playing at that level at times but not consistently. I never feared playing against the perfection that was Lidstroms later game in that period.

Blake was amazing that year.

I'm perfectly happy to find that Blake was the best defender in the league.

Richard is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 03:26 PM
  #17
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard View Post
Maybe I am in the minority, but I didn't feel that Lidstrom became other-wordly until late99/2000ish. In fact Im sure of it. He was always very very good, but from say 2000-08 he was playing some of the best defensive hockey ever played on the planet.

91ish-98 I thought Nik was a really quality dman, a surefire number 1 but he wasn't the best dman in the league. He was arguably playing at that level at times but not consistently. I never feared playing against the perfection that was Lidstroms later game in that period.

Blake was amazing that year.

I'm perfectly happy to find that Blake was the best defender in the league.
i think the slight edge blake had over lidstrom with voters was kind of an MVP consideration. i think in a year less thoroughly dominated by hasek and jagr, blake would have easily been a hart candidate (whereas lidstrom, good as he was, would have been handicapped by playing on such a strong team-- of which he was not the demonstrable MVP).

not to say that he was objectively better than lidstrom (it was very close), but that he was the sole reason that awful post-gretzky team made the playoffs. compare with selanne, who got all sorts of brownie points for succeeding with kariya injured. selanne didn't even make the playoffs; hell, they finished one point out of last in the conference (kariya had a worse team, but how much worse?) blake led a complete garbage roster to the 5th seed in the west. it was a very top-heavy western conference that year, but still the coyotes team that made the playoffs (5 points behind LA) had far more talent.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 03:35 PM
  #18
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Is that a huge difference? Lidstrom clearly had the worst goaltending of any of the three finalists in 2011.

Agree that "robbed" is too strong a word, but I do think that Lidstrom was closer to being robbed than Weber was.

I agree that Lidstrom's 2011 Norris was very weak, but the thing is, it was an incredibly weak season overall for defensemen at the top.
Fair enough.
So if I had have phrased the question better like who had a weaker Norris, Blake in '98 or Lidstrom in '11, you would have answered differently?

Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 03:54 PM
  #19
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Fair enough.
So if I had have phrased the question better like who had a weaker Norris, Blake in '98 or Lidstrom in '11, you would have answered differently?
Yeah, I think so. I think Lidstrom and Blake of 1998 (and probably Pronger) had better seasons than any defenseman did in 2011. But someone has to win.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 03:56 PM
  #20
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 33,938
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
man, rob blake has really taken a beating these last couple of years.
Norris arguments aside, maybe we could look at Blake a little more closely and see if he deserves to be criticized as heavily as he is here. Because he really has become almost a Housley or Phaneuf type of whipping boy.

tarheelhockey is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 04:04 PM
  #21
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 40,711
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by struckbyaparkedcar View Post
Why?

I don't remember Chara doing anything that really stood out in a "give this man the Norris" sort of way since 2009. I mean, he was a top all-situations player on a top defensive/goal-differential team in the regular season, but I'd have to include the playoffs and credit Chara for facilitating A) Thomas' numbers, B) Bergeron's development into a top defensive forward since concussions, and C) guys like Marchand and Siedenberg raising their games in the postseason in order for him to be in the top spot.

I really don't think Z's 2011 was that different from his 08, 10, or 12 (everything else being a step below his 2009). Boston's team success that year had a lot more to do with staying healthy, getting step-up performances from various places (Horton, Bergeron-Marchand and Siedenberg being the biggest names) and getting various bounces they just didn't get in seasons prior, rather than Chara taking his game up a notch.
It's partly weak competition. Nobody in 2011 was as good as Karlson or Weber in 2012 or Keith, Lidstrom, and Green in 2010. I actually think Lidstrom declined quite a bit between 2010 and 2011, but the competition just wasn't there.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 04:08 PM
  #22
Nalyd Psycho
Registered User
 
Nalyd Psycho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: No Bandwagon
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,874
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
Yeah, I think so. I think Lidstrom and Blake of 1998 (and probably Pronger) had better seasons than any defenseman did in 2011. But someone has to win.
My problem is I feel like '98 Lidstrom outplayed '11 Lidstrom. But '11 Weber and Chara outplayed the field in '98.

Nalyd Psycho is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 04:08 PM
  #23
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Norris arguments aside, maybe we could look at Blake a little more closely and see if he deserves to be criticized as heavily as he is here. Because he really has become almost a Housley or Phaneuf type of whipping boy.
Yeah, for sure.
I certainly don't remember him that way.
If anything, I remember him being among the best D-men in the league and was the defensive rock for many LA teams that lets say, weren't known for strong defensive play as a unit heh.

I think he did more and was more responsible for any success his team had in '98 than any other D-man did for theirs that year.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 11-19-2012 at 04:14 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 04:14 PM
  #24
vadim sharifijanov
Rrbata
 
vadim sharifijanov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,782
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Norris arguments aside, maybe we could look at Blake a little more closely and see if he deserves to be criticized as heavily as he is here. Because he really has become almost a Housley or Phaneuf type of whipping boy.
same with pre-NJ scott stevens. i think it's a lazy stereotype. both guys were very good, though less than elite, defensive players-- stevens as early as the late 80s in washington, blake almost from the very beginning.

i mean, rob blake was playing every situation and leading his team in minutes the day he stepped into the league. and while i think he was only the third best defender on that kings team that went to the finals, he was still the big minute guy of that unit and the only guy who was on the first PP and PK units.

if blake really were phaneuf (or jovanovski, mccabe, kevin hatcher, etc.) that people are saying he is, could he have led that '98 kings team to the playoffs? that rob blake season would have won the last three norris trophies, and the two non-karlsson ones it would have won handily.

after zhitnik, sydor, and mcsorley were all gone, blake came into his own as the player that gretzky predicted would win a norris back in the kings training camp of '91.

and i know a lot of people didn't watch too many west coast games back in blake's prime, especially without gretzky around, but do we all forget the '01 playoffs so soon?

sadly, i think a lot of what has been lost is that blake played for so long after his peak that we forget how good he really was and that lidstrom supporters have been beating him up for taking that '98 norris. we all do this-- unfairly dump on one player to prop up the other-- but in this case it's beyond overkill.

vadim sharifijanov is offline  
Old
11-19-2012, 04:19 PM
  #25
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vadim sharifijanov View Post
same with pre-NJ scott stevens. i think it's a lazy stereotype. both guys were very good, though less than elite, defensive players-- stevens as early as the late 80s in washington, blake almost from the very beginning.
No one ever doubted Stevens talent or abilities.
It was his lack of discipline that cost him in those days.
Pronger had the same issues holding him back most of the time.

Quote:
i mean, rob blake was playing every situation and leading his team in minutes the day he stepped into the league. and while i think he was only the third best defender on that kings team that went to the finals, he was still the big minute guy of that unit and the only guy who was on the first PP and PK units.

if blake really were phaneuf (or jovanovski, mccabe, kevin hatcher, etc.) that people are saying he is, could he have led that '98 kings team to the playoffs? that rob blake season would have won the last three norris trophies, and the two non-karlsson ones it would have won handily.

after zhitnik, sydor, and mcsorley were all gone, blake came into his own as the player that gretzky predicted would win a norris back in the kings training camp of '91.

and i know a lot of people didn't watch too many west coast games back in blake's prime, especially without gretzky around, but do we all forget the '01 playoffs so soon?

sadly, i think a lot of what has been lost is that blake played for so long after his peak that we forget how good he really was and that lidstrom supporters have been beating him up for taking that '98 norris. we all do this-- unfairly dump on one player to prop up the other-- but in this case it's beyond overkill.
Agreed.

Rhiessan71 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 04:42 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.