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.

Was Lidstrom a generational talent?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-01-2013, 06:32 PM
  #51
MattyMo35
Moderator
Schwartz Be With You
 
MattyMo35's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Country: United States
Posts: 7,267
vCash: 50
No doubt.

MattyMo35 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:33 PM
  #52
thevil
Lets go Aves?
 
thevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Denver, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 2,143
vCash: 112
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida pwnthers View Post
why wasn't he taken 1OA if he was a generational TALENT? he developped into a generational player.

i do however limit my generational talents to gretzky, lemieux, orr, howe and lindros
So by your reasoning, Patrick Roy isn't anywhere near being one of the top 2 goalies of all time because he was drafted 52 overall?

thevil is online now  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:34 PM
  #53
monster_bertuzzi
registered user
 
monster_bertuzzi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,525
vCash: 500
Hell yes he was, might be a long time until another Lidstrom dominates the hardware again.

monster_bertuzzi is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:35 PM
  #54
cyris
Global Moderator
On a Soma Holiday
 
cyris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 3rd Planet From Sun.
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,209
vCash: 797
It depends on your definition of generational talent/player. He is certainly the best Dman of his generation but that doesn't really make him a generational talent imo.

An amazing player who is one of the best of all time at any position but a clear level below guys like Gretz, Orr and Mario.

cyris is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:37 PM
  #55
bleedblue1223
OMAHA!!!
 
bleedblue1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 20,465
vCash: 50
This is a no-brainer, he is one of the all-time greats.

bleedblue1223 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:37 PM
  #56
Melnyks Mirage
We are what we are.
 
Melnyks Mirage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Cumberland
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,968
vCash: 50
Absolutely.

Put it this way, even in the past few years of his career and in the middling years he was still a cut above the good (and very good) d-men. We're not going to see someone on that level for a long, long time.

If there was a resource I could use to find out goals/against for the team per year while Lidstrom was playing that would be swell, total stats neophyte here though.

Melnyks Mirage is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:37 PM
  #57
cyris
Global Moderator
On a Soma Holiday
 
cyris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 3rd Planet From Sun.
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,209
vCash: 797
Quote:
Originally Posted by tsbilly View Post
From http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...his-generation

"I donít think thereís any doubt he was the class of our generation on defense," [Scott] Niedermayer told ESPN.com on Thursday. "Seven Norris Trophies speaks to that."

"To perform the way he did for 20 years, thatís special. Thatís a special player.íí -Bobby Orr

Lidstrom was actually runner-up to Blake for the 1998 Norris Trophy, Blakeís one inscription on the prestigious award.

"I caught him before people realized how good he was," [Rob] Blake said, chuckling. "I snuck one in before he soon reeled off seven. He just dominated. He never missed games. That absolutely amazes me."



Where a person can get the idea that Lidstrom did not dominate is beyond me.
Is that really what anyone is saying here? He was clearly a great player. Easily one of the best ever at his position. Some people have a higher standard than that for the term generational talent.

cyris is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:39 PM
  #58
cyris
Global Moderator
On a Soma Holiday
 
cyris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: 3rd Planet From Sun.
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,209
vCash: 797
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensFanDan View Post
Absolutely.

Put it this way, even in the past few years of his career and in the middling years he was still a cut above the good (and very good) d-men. We're not going to see someone on that level for a long, long time.

If there was a resource I could use to find out goals/against for the team per year while Lidstrom was playing that would be swell, total stats neophyte here though.
You can find that on NHL.com but it only goes back until 97-98.

cyris is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:44 PM
  #59
robertguess2013
Registered User
 
robertguess2013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New Port Richey Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,653
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to robertguess2013 Send a message via MSN to robertguess2013 Send a message via Yahoo to robertguess2013
Has been one question to me. See I saw potvin than macinnes and bourque and others robinson murphy etc.. All were really good players I dont make them generational talents. All have similar stats to lidstrom except one the staying out of the box. He was smartest defensemen of all time. Is no debate of that probably the best at being in right position etc.. Yet he didnt dominate in any other stat compared to those guys who are 10 to 20 years older potvin is only 20 years before him.

Was he better than people last 20 years yes except for the guys mentioned above who were retiring.

Was he smartest again yes. I am not sure that labels him generational.

I hold those for guys who changed game did something so crazy more than others. Why I have lindros who sadly fell to injuries and he barely makes it onto a list not just because of injuries though than the orr's gretsky's howe's lemiuex and jagr's. I dont have crosby in that league yet. He has missed too much time and has people who are comparable to him at least if go season by season. In last five years he is not top five in scoring. So to me he needs a lot of work to get back to that level which I would say wow he changed the hockey world.

I am older 44 I guess that I seen the end of playing for certain guys who I respected for their careers and numbers which lidstrom is comparable to.

Yep is not any in last 10 to 15 years who are truly doing what he did. Yet was 4-5 10 years before him except the big stat as stated he stayed out of penalty box!! More than anyone in history of hockey defender wise.

Is how you view things. I do not feel he is best defender I have ever seen. In some areas he was in others he was close or pretty much equal but is debate if he was best. So to me that means he is not generational if you can say there is a debate lol.

Is no debate on ORR or gretsky or howe or lemiuex or jagr lol. Is simply no debate they were better than the others by a WIDE margin. That is generational to me

Was lidstrom ELITE one of best of all time no question. He also gets slight down grade cause of his style of play. He is a guy you dont notice at all cause was so smart and skilled unlike others. I think he has that against him but I do not see where he is head and shoulders above a ray bourque at all.

robertguess2013 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:46 PM
  #60
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Criminy, people really will debate anything, won't they?

Question for folks here: If Nicklas Lidstrom is not a generational talent, what OTHER term would y'all like to come up with for someone who dominated as thoroughly at his position as he did? "Generational-ish-but-not-Gretzky-level-because-it's-too-soon-for-rose-colored-hindsight-to-kick-in talent"?

Or is the objection that he didn't produce highlight reel material every period? (Or, IOW, he gets penalized for being so overwhelmingly good that he didn't NEED to be flashy...)

__________________
Remember - when you're a hockey fan, it's not "reckless driving", it's "good forechecking".
"Viqsi, you are our sweet humanist..." --mt-svk on the CBJ boards

Thanks, Howson, for cleaning up MacLean's toxic waste. Welcome, Kekalainen; let's get good things built!
Viqsi is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:51 PM
  #61
JGalt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Huntingdon Vlly, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 1,719
vCash: 500
Lidstrom was elite for a ridiculously long time, but I'm not sure he ever had the unique qualities or separation from his peers to be what I'd call a generational talent. Just in his immediate peers I'd say Pronger, despite obviously having a lesser career, comes closer to my definition of a generational talent.

JGalt is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:53 PM
  #62
Viqsi
carrying the flag
 
Viqsi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Scary Internet
Country: United States
Posts: 20,385
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Viqsi
Quote:
Originally Posted by JGalt View Post
Lidstrom was elite for a ridiculously long time, but I'm not sure he ever had the unique qualities or separation from his peers to be what I'd call a generational talent. Just in his immediate peers I'd say Pronger, despite obviously having a lesser career, comes closer to my definition of a generational talent.
Why? Because he showed up in highlight reels more often? Because folks were more willing to promote the name of a Good Ol' Canadian Boy than some Euro?

Viqsi is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:55 PM
  #63
tsbilly
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 39
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyris View Post
It depends on your definition of generational talent/player. He is certainly the best Dman of his generation but that doesn't really make him a generational talent imo..
Doesn't that, by definition, make him a generational talent? Also, in terms of hockey, he was the best dman of two generations.

tsbilly is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 06:59 PM
  #64
nowhereman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyris View Post
It depends on your definition of generational talent/player. He is certainly the best Dman of his generation but that doesn't really make him a generational talent imo.

An amazing player who is one of the best of all time at any position but a clear level below guys like Gretz, Orr and Mario.
Yes, but that would mean there were really only three generational talents in the history of the game.

I think Howe, Crosby, Hasek, Hull, Richard, and Harvey were/are all generational talents, even though they're not on Gretzky/Orr/Mario's level. Lidstrom is right on the cusp. He was never THAT much better than his pears but he was still the best, for quite a long period of time. He's right there with Bourque, IMO. I could either way, especially since "generational talent" is such a nebulous term.


Last edited by nowhereman: 09-01-2013 at 07:05 PM.
nowhereman is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 07:43 PM
  #65
Poulin 0n My St1ck
Registered User
 
Poulin 0n My St1ck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: LI
Country: United States
Posts: 937
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by nowhereman View Post
Yes, but that would mean there were really only three generational talents in the history of the game.

I think Howe, Crosby, Hasek, Hull, Richard, and Harvey were/are all generational talents, even though they're not on Gretzky/Orr/Mario's level. Lidstrom is right on the cusp. He was never THAT much better than his pears but he was still the best, for quite a long period of time. He's right there with Bourque, IMO. I could either way, especially since "generational talent" is such a nebulous term.
He might not have been that much better than his pears, but he was better than 99% of his peers in the NHL during his career.

Poulin 0n My St1ck is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 07:48 PM
  #66
SERE 24
LGR
 
SERE 24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 9,779
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gardner McKay View Post
Yes and easily. 7 Norris trophies. Are you kidding me?
This is my answer. I will never get people who want to detract from Nik. I mean, literally, are you kidding? Also, for anyone whose argument is "he dominated for 20 years, but does that make him generational"? Well, yes, because, you know... 20 years is enough for an entire generation (and then some) of NHL dmen to come and go without being able to match him.

SERE 24 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 07:50 PM
  #67
robertguess2013
Registered User
 
robertguess2013's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: New Port Richey Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 5,653
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to robertguess2013 Send a message via MSN to robertguess2013 Send a message via Yahoo to robertguess2013
Simply put I do not think he is head and shoulders above murphy, robinson and figure at most he is equal to bourque.

Therefore he is not generational since they all played for a number of the same years

I view generational differently than others probably.

I want the guy who is in a class all by himself. I LOVE lidstrom I am a wings fan. I cannot honestly say he is better than Ray Bourque. I have a debate of that. I saw them playing at same time. I dont feel Bourque is generational because potvin before him and murphy and robinson among others are comparable.

Therefore I do not feel he is generational is that simple is how you view what generational is.


Michael Jordan is generational. Magic and bird were. Dr J was now we have the so called king or kobe. Yes is guys playing the same time but I cant compare any of them and what they bring to table. They are all different and in own way they are better than the others of their time at what they do.

The above are all different players with different skill sets which made them unique and generational talents. I cannot compare Bird to Magic. I cannot say one is better than other but for their time they were the best same as dr j. Than Jordan came along took over. He was by far the gretsky of basketball.

You can have two guys lemiuex and gretsky at same time. Yet go to next level is jagr and NO one really compares stevie for one year federov for one year.

Where in any one year was Lidstrom just a run away with awards?

He had a few great years yes. Yet he didnt dominate the field in most years was a debate for sure. 2009 mike green was in running etc.. I am just saying he wasnt out there beating off the field like a drum as others I have mentioned.

If you have 5-6 guys who compare in same 20 year time frame I cant say that one of them is generational. To me thats crazy. Is one or two? Ok

I just know is very few years when Lidstrom won the Norris where I thought was automatic. I always questioned if he was going to win That is what I base this debate on.

When gretsky was scoring leader I knew it and was no debate He was soundly above everyone every year etc..


Quote:
Originally Posted by Poulin 0n My St1ck View Post
He might not have been that much better than his pears, but he was better than 99% of his peers in the NHL during his career.
This makes sense to me. I just compare Lidstrom to 4-5 others who saw playing same time. Also in 3 years he might have been above others by a considerable amount. But in the other 4-5 norris that he won or should have won there was real debate.

To me that means he was not head and shoulders above everyone. He was arguably the best for a couple years and close to others in the rest. That to me is not generational at all.

Now if someone tells me because of his style of play and how smart he was and how well positioned he was and him staying out of penalty box while shutting down the other teams is more important than scoring plus minus hitting blocking shots etc.. which some he did more than his peers and others he did much less than his peers.

If him staying out of the penalty box makes him sooo much more valuable than the other areas? Than yep can say Lidstrom was generational talent. Till I see someone say that I dont feel he was.

He has two or three things which made him great positioning he was never out of place ever. Best guy ive ever seen if your coming across blue line to have defending. Smartest guy ever at stick checking puck from forwards etc.. and not getting any bad penalties. He did block shots but was always peers who blocked more. He did not do a lot of hitting at all. He just took the puck without doing it.

His plus minus compares with the greats I mentioned and the points are equal.

If look at the years he won the norris this is the same debate. He scored with league leaders. He had a good plus minus in all situations. He took less penalties than anyone while playing defensively. This is the one he is leagues ahead of everyone else in every year. Yet blocking shots I guarantee the peers he was up against were similar or better numbers. I promise the hitting side of things they were way ahead of him.

It all equals out and means he is not generational.

So if we all agree that because he didnt take penalties this is so much more important than blocking shots and hitting other people? I will change my view for this and agree he is generational.

Until is a resounding amount of you who say him not taking penalties.

Is more important than him having equal numbers in all facets that matter except

he blocked less shots than his other norris candidates and he didnt hit people anywhere close to them.

If that stat of not taking penalties is so overwhelmingly more important than those two other areas hits and block shots yep he is generational.

Until we get a high agreement of that he is not

Cause he had equal stats to others and debatable stats to others every year almost that he won the award.


Last edited by robertguess2013: 09-01-2013 at 08:13 PM.
robertguess2013 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 07:51 PM
  #68
Terry Yake
Registered User
 
Terry Yake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 2,519
vCash: 500
top 5 defenseman of all time? absolutely

greatest defenseman of the past 20 years? yes

but generational? definitely not. his leadership skills are generational though but was he way better than guys like bourque and niedermayer during his career? i'd say he was better than those guys but not a level up

the only generational talents to me are orr, gretzky, and lemieux. those guys are a level ahead of everyone else

Terry Yake is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 07:59 PM
  #69
HatTricK09
Registered User
 
HatTricK09's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,412
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gardner McKay View Post
Yes and easily. 7 Norris trophies. Are you kidding me?
That is all.

HatTricK09 is online now  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:07 PM
  #70
Ogie Goldthorpe
Piloted Ogre Hog
 
Ogie Goldthorpe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NS via BC
Posts: 2,453
vCash: 500
Generational talent? That's a hard thing to define. My feeling is "no".

10-15 years from now will people who didn't see him play be using him as a yardstick for measuring defensive greatness? Honestly, I don't think so. A lot of Lidstrom's skills were semi-invisible. His hi-lite reel isn't going to blow future people away.

People who know hockey are going to always speak up for him, but in a generation, he's going to look a lot like Doug Harvey. Which isn't bad, but it's not Orr.

Ogie Goldthorpe is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:08 PM
  #71
Sergei Shirokov
Registered User
 
Sergei Shirokov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: British Columbia
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,023
vCash: 500
clearly

Sergei Shirokov is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:17 PM
  #72
ps241
The Danish Dash!
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 11,028
vCash: 50
Hell yes

ps241 is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:20 PM
  #73
quoipourquoi
Goaltender
 
quoipourquoi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Hockeytown, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 3,204
vCash: 500
I don't get the fascination with "generational talents." Sometimes a generation will get two-three players who are top-ten all-time at their position. Sometimes a generation won't get any. You're not guaranteed to get another Nicklas Lidstrom in the next ten years any more than we were guaranteed to get another Ray Bourque in the last ten years, if that's what you're asking. I think we're even less likely to see a Paul Coffey, but hey, sometimes we'll get a Gretzky/Lemieux and a Roy/Hasek at the same time, and that's pretty cool too.

quoipourquoi is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:26 PM
  #74
nowhereman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poulin 0n My St1ck View Post
He might not have been that much better than his pears, but he was better than 99% of his peers in the NHL during his career.
Uh, that was exactly my point. He was never Gretzky/Lemieux/Orr-dominant but consistently the best defenseman in the NHL for 15 or so years.

nowhereman is offline  
Old
09-01-2013, 08:28 PM
  #75
ps241
The Danish Dash!
 
ps241's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 11,028
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogie Goldthorpe View Post
Generational talent? That's a hard thing to define. My feeling is "no".

10-15 years from now will people who didn't see him play be using him as a yardstick for measuring defensive greatness? Honestly, I don't think so. A lot of Lidstrom's skills were semi-invisible. His hi-lite reel isn't going to blow future people away.

People who know hockey are going to always speak up for him, but in a generation, he's going to look a lot like Doug Harvey. Which isn't bad, but it's not Orr.
I guess this is bit of a semantics argument but there is a difference between the "greatest of all time" in Bobby Orr and a generational talent level type like Lidstrom. Two different categories IMHO.

ps241 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 11:46 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.