Housley over Bourque? Didn't they play at the same time and Bourque outscored him by a decent margin?
Bourque played a lot more than Housley and on better teams.
The fact that Bourque and Housley are on opposite ends of the spectrum defensively means Bourque's teams had the puck a lot more when he was on the ice than Housley's teams did.
I really wonder how different the numbers would have been if Housley and Coffey played on each others teams for their whole careers.
But, looking at my list now, I wish I'd have found a spot for Lidstrom. Almost like I didn't even consider him. I should have.
Bourque played a lot more than Housley and on better teams.
The fact that Bourque and Housley are on opposite ends of the spectrum defensively means Bourque's teams had the puck a lot more when he was on the ice than Housley's teams did.
I really wonder how different the numbers would have been if Housley and Coffey played on each others teams for their whole careers.
But, looking at my list now, I wish I'd have found a spot for Lidstrom. Almost like I didn't even consider him. I should have.
The only thing that would of happened by switching Bourque and Housley would of been making the Bruins worse and any of the teams Housley played for better heh.
For the majority of the time Boston without Bourque were just not that good.
And you left Lidstrom out because he doesn't deserve to be in the top 10 offensively no more than Robinson does.
They both had some offensive talent but they both had their totals padded by the teams they played on.
We talking about guys that lead and created offense, not guys that complimented the offense and waited for PP opportunities.
There is a difference.
The only thing that would of happened by switching Bourque and Housley would of been making the Bruins worse and any of the teams Housley played for better heh.
For the majority of the time Boston without Bourque were just not that good.
And you left Lidstrom out because he doesn't deserve to be in the top 10 offensively no more than Robinson does.
They both had some offensive talent but they both had their totals padded by the teams they played on.
We talking about guys that lead and created offense, not guys that complimented the offense and waited for PP opportunities.
There is a difference.
I mentioned switching Housley and Coffey, not Housley and Bourque.
I certainly agree the Bruins would not be nearly as good with Housley. But the subject is strictly offense and the Bruins teams would not suffer from Housley's offensive but rather his defense.
It is an interesting point tha Bourque played half the game, while Housley saw limited minutes due to being a sieve in his own zone. What would Housley's numbers look like of he was decent enough defensively to play more often?
The only thing that would of happened by switching Bourque and Housley would of been making the Bruins worse and any of the teams Housley played for better heh.
For the majority of the time Boston without Bourque were just not that good.
And you left Lidstrom out because he doesn't deserve to be in the top 10 offensively no more than Robinson does. They both had some offensive talent but they both had their totals padded by the teams they played on.
We talking about guys that lead and created offense, not guys that complimented the offense and waited for PP opportunities.
There is a difference.
Isn't that true for most of the guys listed in this thread, sure they were great but playing on good to great teams sure helps their stats as well.
I'd really like to hear the argument on how Pilote was better offensively than Lidstrom.
Maybe I'm nitpicking here a bit but running a PP is the job requirement of an offensive Dman in most cases isn't it?
sure a guy like bourque has more ESG% than Lidstrom but I'd bet almost all of that % comes from before 92 when Lidstrom was in the league and is a by product in part of the high flying 80's.
Lidstrom has 132 PPG out of a total of 264 for 50%.
Bourque has 173 PPG out of a total of 410 for 42%.
If you look at Bourque after 92 it sure looks like it's more than 50% PPG.
In fact 92 and after Bourque has 13 more PPG than ESG and SHG so if you really want to bring up the padding the stats argument you best look elsewhere.
Also PP% went up from the mid 60's to their peak in the 80's then have settled down again to the level of the 60's for the information we have.
I'm not going to say that the players, and Dmen, in the 80's were any better or worse than at other times but their increased scoring totals sure make it look that way on the surface.
It is an interesting point tha Bourque played half the game, while Housley saw limited minutes due to being a sieve in his own zone. What would Housley's numbers look like of he was decent enough defensively to play more often?
I think the increase in production would be smaller than one would think at 1st.
Housley was already getting top duty PP time and even the few extra minutes a game might have resulted in 5 points a season in the 80's and a bit less in the 90's.
He had a small frame and might have wore down with the minutes Bourque was playing during that time period as well.
That being said on a strictly offensive level it's really hard to leave Housley out of this group as all he brought was offense and plenty of it. I think that his being on poor teams might be what is holding him back off of this list.
I do find it funny that red kelly is being ranked above denis potvin. Potvin scored 98 points before bossy even arrived. Kelly spent his entire prime with gordie howe, a player who is clearly better than either trottier or bossy. Red Kelly was a great rusher, but why is lidstrom being knocked for his team when kelly played with a generational talent his entire prime?
Orr just stands out above the rest, i would love to see his numbers if he had the support cast of red kelly, doug harvey or pierre pilote.
I do find it funny that red kelly is being ranked above denis potvin. Potvin scored 98 points before bossy even arrived. Kelly spent his entire prime with gordie howe, a player who is clearly better than either trottier or bossy. Red Kelly was a great rusher, but why is lidstrom being knocked for his team when kelly played with a generational talent his entire prime?
Orr just stands out above the rest, i would love to see his numbers if he had the support cast of red kelly, doug harvey or pierre pilote.
I agree on Potvin, he lead his team in scoring by 4,14, 3 and 8 points in his 1st 4 years (with Trottier there in 2nd in the last 2).
He also aged very well into his age 34 season and is one guy who gets a bit under appreciated sometimes, if that is possible with a top 5 Dman of all time.
I do find it funny that red kelly is being ranked above denis potvin. Potvin scored 98 points before bossy even arrived. Kelly spent his entire prime with gordie howe, a player who is clearly better than either trottier or bossy. Red Kelly was a great rusher, but why is lidstrom being knocked for his team when kelly played with a generational talent his entire prime?
Orr just stands out above the rest, i would love to see his numbers if he had the support cast of red kelly, doug harvey or pierre pilote.
And I find it funny that you think there can be only one great player per team.
Kelly's Hart record shows that he was considered the second most valuable player of the Red Wings overall and te most valuable on the team for some seasons. His team was no less stacked than Harvey's and he easily outscored Harvey.
Yeah...but ''others'' include his two biggest competitors , which were Harvey and Gadsby.
I was obviously refering to guys who were points leaders/goal leaders/or just guys that were rather consistent offensively in the few years before Kelly joined, which could explain why Kelly could have somewhat been perceived as revolutionnary.
And I find it funny that you think there can be only one great player per team.
Kelly's Hart record shows that he was considered the second most valuable player of the Red Wings overall and te most valuable on the team for some seasons. His team was no less stacked than Harvey's and he easily outscored Harvey.
Okay, well there was also ted lindsay and sid abel and i brought up red kelly because of how lidstrom gets de-valued due to linemates, i never said harvey was as good offensively as kelly.
1) Orr
2) Coffey
3) Bourque
4) Potvin
5) Park
6) Kelly
7) Leetch
8) MacInnis
9) Housley
10) Shore
__________________
Exhibit A as to how hockey doesn't matter on ESPN:
Last night an ESPN program was discussing how the Detroit Pistons needed a hero citing the heroes on the Detroit Tigers, Detroit Lions and no mention of the Detroit Red Wings. All this despite the Red Wings probably being the most succesful team in Detroit right now.
