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.

Potvin vs Lidstrom

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2011, 10:56 PM
  #51
overpass
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,639
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick View Post
This thread = the '98 Norris race in a nutshell. On one side you've got a big visually impressive defenseman with big hits and a big shot that is noticed every shift. On the other you've got slight, subtle positioning wizard that does everything in his power to make sure nothing exciting happens when he's on the ice. Lidstrom is an anti-highlight reel. And after 20 years in the league people still don't fully get it.
No, this thread would be the '98 Norris race if it were Potvin vs Lidstrom vs Robinson.

(Chris Pronger was a strong 3rd in the Norris voting that season.)

overpass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 12:24 AM
  #52
Stonefly
Registered User
 
Stonefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Potvin helped his team to 4 Stanley Cups, with one Conn Smythe, at a time when dynasties were a given.

Lidstrom helped his team to 4 Stanley Cups, with one Conn Smythe, at a time when dynasties were a thing of the past.

Lidstrom was much better defensively than Potvin, and that is where I place the most value in a defenseman. Ultimately, a defensman is never going to make as much of a difference offensively, as he can defensively (the best offensive defensemen are well under the best offensive forwards in production).

I am still a little surprised how much offense from a defenseman is valued over defense on this very forum, not so much from the general forum.

Lidstrom's defensive peak was decisively higher than Potvin's (despite his physicality), and he maintained an elite defensive game far longer than Potvin was able to. That's most important to me - but I appear to be in the minority with this view.

Offensively, Potvin has a peak of two years slightly above what Lidstrom obtained, but beyond those two years Lidstrom steadily outproduced him, offensively, for about 15 years.

I don't think these two defenseman are even close - especially if we allow defensemen have the ability to impact a game more defensively, than offensively (just as a forward has the opposite impact).

Lidstrom on that Islanders team is a 90 pt producer from the blue line, while providing better defense than Potvin, while also committing far less penalties, missing far less games to injury, and maintaining his elite play for a decade longer than Potvin. Islanders most likely win more Cups with a player like Lidstrom.
1 - Does hyperbole make it feel better inside?
2 - Never said any such thing
3 - When did Lidstrom ever approach 30 goals in a season? Slightly above? Don't think so
4 - Well we agree here yet we are diametrically opposed
5 - Nonsense

You are greatly under appreciating Potvin's defensive abilities.
4 -

Stonefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 12:37 AM
  #53
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,215
vCash: 800
If I was a forward I would rather face a Lidstrom-type defenseman.Losing the puck is annoying but receiving an elbow in the face is painful , and even more psychologically exhausting if the guy is better at hockey than you are on top of everything.Then , I would rather face a physical defenseman that is not as good than a Lidstrom , but if we're talking about 2 elite and close players , the choice is pretty easy.

BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 12:50 AM
  #54
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,759
vCash: 500
You're going to be hard pressed to find evidence Potvin was the best defensive defenseman of his own time, versus the plethora of articles and assessments viewing Lidstrom as not only the best defensively of his own time, the word "perfect" is often used to describe him defensively, but amongst the best defensively in history.

I just don't weigh a couple seasons of higher offensive production from a defenseman more than that.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 12:59 AM
  #55
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,759
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ReenMachine View Post
If I was a forward I would rather face a Lidstrom-type defenseman.Losing the puck is annoying but receiving an elbow in the face is painful , and even more psychologically exhausting if the guy is better at hockey than you are on top of everything.Then , I would rather face a physical defenseman that is not as good than a Lidstrom , but if we're talking about 2 elite and close players , the choice is pretty easy.
If you are a competitor, and want to win, you are going to take that elbow two times out of three, because you can get around him or draw the penalty that third time.

Little such luck with Lidstrom, though admittedly less bruises, you wuss

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 01:04 AM
  #56
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,215
vCash: 800
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
If you are a competitor, and want to win, you are going to take that elbow two times out of three, because you can get around him or draw the penalty that third time.

Little such luck with Lidstrom, though admittedly less bruises, you wuss
If I'm talking about it it's because I took those elbows.Doesn't mean I appreciated them.

I also never said I was in the majority , but I'm confident we're quite a bunch that ranks Potvin higher , lots of people have legitimate reasons to put Potvin ahead if they value prime and impact on the game higher than others.

At one point we'll have to agree to disagree.


Last edited by BenchBrawl: 11-18-2011 at 01:10 AM.
BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 01:18 AM
  #57
ozzie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,045
vCash: 500
Two of my favourite players Are Potvin and Yzerman. Lidstrom is definately pretty close to the next for me.

While I would take a healthy peak Potvin any day of the week over Lidstrom. But that is just the point, while Potvin was a joy to watch, the terror, the hip checks, the physical play. Combined his leadership. offensive play, passing, shooting and high enery was amazing. But it also wrecked his body and he retired somewhat earlier then he should have.

Lidstrom has changed the game, he has changed how defensemen play. There is a whole generation of defensemen in Sweden and around the world who are modeling themselves after Lidstrom. The sleak postional play, the amazing stick work, good passing, skating and hockey smarkts. His style of play is so effective and effortless and his career speaks volumes how it extends your potential career.

Lidstrom is the better player and perhaps as important as Patrick Roy and his influence on goalies.

I miss players like Potvin, what a bull to watch. But As a wings fan I have to say lidstrom is better.

ozzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 01:26 AM
  #58
BenchBrawl
joueur de hockey
 
BenchBrawl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 10,215
vCash: 800
this is one thing that needs to be said , I feel wrong to take away from a player because his style of play ruined him physically after 10 years , we could also take it the other way around , and giving him credit for sacrificing his body to his level of dominance and the great game we all love.

In a sense , criticizing a player or taking something away from his career because of this is un-glorifying players that sacrifice their body to acheive the highest possible level of hockey at the present , like Orr with his knees , would you have preferred a more caustious Orr and missed the highest level Orr reached playing in crazy traffic for 5 other sub-prime Orr seasons?


Last edited by BenchBrawl: 11-18-2011 at 01:36 AM.
BenchBrawl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 01:29 AM
  #59
ozzie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,045
vCash: 500
For the record, I woudln't change Potvin 1 bit. 4 Cups and awards and the best offensive defenseman next to Orr and Coffey. I'll take his 4 cups and short career.

ozzie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 03:25 AM
  #60
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,914
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Don't go trying to make yourself sound sane and all. Fact is, the vast majority of media, fans and historians have Lidstrom ahead of Potvin. You are a pretty extreme minority.

Potvin's lucky he wasn't facing Fetisov for Norris votes, and still only managed 3 Norrises to Lidstrom's 7 - and Lidstrom was facing the absolute best in the world at the time, unlike Potvin.

To me, you sound like someone trying to convince me Lindros was better than Sakic, because he was more dynamic and intimidating at his best, despite Sakic being an elite player (and we are talking -elite- not just 'good') for far longer.
It's just crazy talk to me.
Lidstrom facing the absolute best at the time? Shea Weber, Kris Letang, Zdeno Chara are more talented than Potvin's contemporaries?

The position of defenseman is unique, because it allows one to control every inch of ice. Both Potvin and Lidstrom excelled at doing that.

Both defenseman were in ideal situations. Good coaching, great teammates, ideal systems; great development. On longetivity, I would argue that Lidstrom's longetivity is much enhanced because Babcock protects him...Lidstrom has always been paired with a puck-moving defenseman who could win the board battle/take the hit in Lidstrom's pace.

It just seems that, objectively, Potvin was more effective than Lidstrom. One of the best blueline-to-blueline passers in the game's history. A physical monster. Defensively, maybe it is hockey eisegesis, but Potvin just seemed harder to beat.

Put in another way, defensively, Potvin could stop 90% of all NHLers with 90% effectiveness, and 10% with 80% effectiveness. Lidstrom could stop 98% of NHLers with 90% effetiveness, but the other 2% he'd only be 50% effective against.

Lidstrom, for example, is a little weak in front of the net, especially against big guys. If you were wizard enough, or big enough, you could finesse or bulldoze around him because he wouldn't play the body. Of course, the list of people talented enough is tiny, but still...

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 05:34 AM
  #61
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Lidstrom facing the absolute best at the time? Shea Weber, Kris Letang, Zdeno Chara are more talented than Potvin's contemporaries?

The position of defenseman is unique, because it allows one to control every inch of ice. Both Potvin and Lidstrom excelled at doing that.

Both defenseman were in ideal situations. Good coaching, great teammates, ideal systems; great development. On longetivity, I would argue that Lidstrom's longetivity is much enhanced because Babcock protects him...Lidstrom has always been paired with a puck-moving defenseman who could win the board battle/take the hit in Lidstrom's pace.

It just seems that, objectively, Potvin was more effective than Lidstrom. One of the best blueline-to-blueline passers in the game's history. A physical monster. Defensively, maybe it is hockey eisegesis, but Potvin just seemed harder to beat.

Put in another way, defensively, Potvin could stop 90% of all NHLers with 90% effectiveness, and 10% with 80% effectiveness. Lidstrom could stop 98% of NHLers with 90% effetiveness, but the other 2% he'd only be 50% effective against.

Lidstrom, for example, is a little weak in front of the net, especially against big guys. If you were wizard enough, or big enough, you could finesse or bulldoze around him because he wouldn't play the body. Of course, the list of people talented enough is tiny, but still...
To re-phrase what Rhiessan likes to say about Lidström. Potvin only won Norrises because Orr retired.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 06:06 AM
  #62
MessierThanThou
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oil Country
Posts: 134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
To re-phrase what Rhiessan likes to say about Lidström. Potvin only won Norrises because Orr retired.
To play devil's advocate, Lidstrom only won one Norris when Bourque was still playing, and it was his last season.

MessierThanThou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 07:02 AM
  #63
Sens Rule
Registered User
 
Sens Rule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,064
vCash: 500
I think Potvin and Bourque were better at their best than Lidstrom. Lidstrom was more conservative than either Bourque or Potvin. Lidstrom always plays it as safe as possible and gets monster points on the PP. There are arguments in this thread that this makes Lidstrom a more effective player. I disagree. Bourque or Potvin picked their spots. Both were often the best offensive and defensive players on their teams. They would sacrifice defence at carefully selected times when their team needed a goal, or with Potvin when the team needed him to be nasty and intimidate.

Either Potvin or Bourque could have been just as good as Lidstrom defensively, if they stopped gambling pretty much at all. As they were Potvin or Bourque were the tops in the NHL defensively except for select one dimensional types like Langway at times.

Lidstrom is better than Potvin I think due to the longevity factor. But even that has limitations as Potivn came into the NHL out of Junior and was pretty much an elite player. His first season. Even in his last season he was a truly elite player. He had injuries later in his career so he doesn't have the Norris's but if you asked all the GMs who they would want on defence for the playoffs if they could pick anyone in the NHL for just that playoffs in 1986,87,88 at the end of Potvin's career... I think pretty much only Bourque is going to be selected over Potvin, maybe Howe, maybe Coffey if a team needed offence. Potvin was a truly elite player his entire career. And he was definitely better in his last couple of seasons then Lidstrom was last year when he won the Norris. The Norris he one last season can bias someone into thinking Lidstrom was better then other aging defencemen. It is a huge accomplishment because he was over 40 years old, but Lidstrom has clearly declined a lot from his peak, he won the Norris on reputation and because there are no real standout elite defencemen.

If Potvin had wanted to he could have played another 3 or 4 or 5 seasons. He just didn't want to. He had not declined to anywhere close to a point that he had to retire, he was still among the most elite D-Men in the NHL.

Sens Rule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 07:47 AM
  #64
blue425
Registered User
 
blue425's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 2,370
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RECsGuy View Post
The Islanders were deeper than given credit for, it's just that the three-headed monster of Bossy-Trottier-Potvin was so amazing that everyone else looked like **** by comparison.
How they gave me nightmares as a child..I hated them.

Retardedly amazing dynasty though.

blue425 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 07:55 AM
  #65
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,035
vCash: 500
Lidstrom False Comparables

Quote:
Originally Posted by ozzie View Post
Two of my favourite players Are Potvin and Yzerman. Lidstrom is definately pretty close to the next for me.

While I would take a healthy peak Potvin any day of the week over Lidstrom. But that is just the point, while Potvin was a joy to watch, the terror, the hip checks, the physical play. Combined his leadership. offensive play, passing, shooting and high enery was amazing. But it also wrecked his body and he retired somewhat earlier then he should have.

Lidstrom has changed the game, he has changed how defensemen play. There is a whole generation of defensemen in Sweden and around the world who are modeling themselves after Lidstrom. The sleak postional play, the amazing stick work, good passing, skating and hockey smarkts. His style of play is so effective and effortless and his career speaks volumes how it extends your potential career.

Lidstrom is the better player and perhaps as important as Patrick Roy and his influence on goalies.

I miss players like Potvin, what a bull to watch. But As a wings fan I have to say lidstrom is better.
Nicklas Lidstrom benefits from false comparables that go unchallenged.

You claim that he is changing the wat defensemen play the game in a fashion similar to Patrick Roy as coached by Francois Allaire. Patrick Roy popularized the butterfly and you can see the influence in virtually all the post 1889 goalies - exceptions being Dominik Hasek and Martin Brodeur.

Bolded you make a claim about the Lidstrom influence.Of course you can name these defensemen and list their accomplishments and honours?

Fact remains that since Lidstrom established himself in the NHL, post 1997 playoffs, the comparables with other non-physical contemporary defensemen are negligible. Visnovsky is a good journeyman at best. All the other leading defensemen with awards and honours are physical to varying degrees.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 08:16 AM
  #66
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
Nicklas Lidstrom benefits from false comparables that go unchallenged.

You claim that he is changing the wat defensemen play the game in a fashion similar to Patrick Roy as coached by Francois Allaire. Patrick Roy popularized the butterfly and you can see the influence in virtually all the post 1889 goalies - exceptions being Dominik Hasek and Martin Brodeur.

Bolded you make a claim about the Lidstrom influence.Of course you can name these defensemen and list their accomplishments and honours?

Fact remains that since Lidstrom established himself in the NHL, post 1997 playoffs, the comparables with other non-physical contemporary defensemen are negligible. Visnovsky is a good journeyman at best. All the other leading defensemen with awards and honours are physical to varying degrees.
I think he's referring to a young generation of Swedish defensemen including Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Adam Larsson, Erik Karlsson, Tim Erixon, Tobias Enström and to some extent also Victor Hedman and Alexander Edler, although they play a somewhat more physical game. We'll see how these players pan out, but it's not entirely unreasonable that Sweden will have a very strong defensive unit in a few years. I think that a lot of credit for the development of these defensemen should be given to Nicklas Lidström, who provided a great inspiration for a whole generation of Swedish future defensemen.

Naturally we can just speculate what will become of this generation, but I think especially Erik Karlsson, Adam Larsson and Oliver Ekman-Larsson have huge potentials for mastering a game like the one Lidström popularized. They rely on brain more than brawn.

Looking at Swedish young defensemen of today, it is obvious that Lidström has played a huge part on how young kids are tought defense today. In a sense, Lidström's style of defense is even better suited to the SEL, where the games are less physical and with more ice surface. In Sweden, I would say a majority of young defensemen play the "Lidström game". Every single prospect that shows seems to be deemed 'The Next Lidström'.

Der Kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 08:21 AM
  #67
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,035
vCash: 500
Lidstrom False Comparables II

Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
You're going to be hard pressed to find evidence Potvin was the best defensive defenseman of his own time, versus the plethora of articles and assessments viewing Lidstrom as not only the best defensively of his own time, the word "perfect" is often used to describe him defensively, but amongst the best defensively in history.

I just don't weigh a couple seasons of higher offensive production from a defenseman more than that.
In the cyberspace world where anyone can blog this is not surprising.

Let's see how "Perfect" Nicklas Lidstrom really is when comparing apples to apples.

The basic claim is that his non - physical approach is preferred because he receives fewer penalties than physical defensemen. Does this make him "Perfect".

Let's compare his PIM/G with other non-physical defensemen in the history of the NHL.

Nicklas Lidstrom: .33 PIM/G
J.C. Tremblay: .26PIM/G
Red Kelly(HHOF): .25 PIM/G
Bill Quackenbush(HHOF): .12 PIM/G

Compared to other defensemen historically who were non-physical. Lidstrom is the most penalized. Far from your claim of "Perfect".

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 08:42 AM
  #68
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,035
vCash: 500
Numbers

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Kaiser View Post
I think he's referring to a young generation of Swedish defensemen including Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Adam Larsson, Erik Karlsson, Tim Erixon, Tobias Enström and to some extent also Victor Hedman and Alexander Edler, although they play a somewhat more physical game. We'll see how these players pan out, but it's not entirely unreasonable that Sweden will have a very strong defensive unit in a few years. I think that a lot of credit for the development of these defensemen should be given to Nicklas Lidström, who provided a great inspiration for a whole generation of Swedish future defensemen.

Naturally we can just speculate what will become of this generation, but I think especially Erik Karlsson, Adam Larsson and Oliver Ekman-Larsson have huge potentials for mastering a game like the one Lidström popularized. They rely on brain more than brawn.

Looking at Swedish young defensemen of today, it is obvious that Lidström has played a huge part on how young kids are tought defense today. In a sense, Lidström's style of defense is even better suited to the SEL, where the games are less physical and with more ice surface. In Sweden, I would say a majority of young defensemen play the "Lidström game". Every single prospect that shows seems to be deemed 'The Next Lidström'.
Their PIM/G numbers and the physical elements that each brings do not fully support this.

The comparables are limited to Sweden whereas the initial claim covered the hockey playing world. Big retreat.

Michigan produces a great number of hockey players. First "American Lidstrom" coming from Michigan would indicate a small change. The butterfly was popularized by Patrick Roy / Francois Allaire worldwide.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 08:49 AM
  #69
Psycho Papa Joe
Porkchop Hoser
 
Psycho Papa Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cesspool, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
I see some posts indicating, that adjusted by era, peak Potvin really wasn't that much more higher scoring than Lidstrom. The overall sentiment is that Lidstrom's longevity trumps Potvin's peak. That said, players of Lidstrom's era, due to training, medicine ect have had longer careers. Shouldn't we also make an adjustment for career length for players who started their careers in the 70's vs the 90's. For instance, odds are, that if Lidstrom starts his career in the 70's, he probably doesn't play beyond 35, whereas if Potvin starts in 1990, he might still be playing.

Psycho Papa Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 08:49 AM
  #70
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,337
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadiens1958 View Post
In the cyberspace world where anyone can blog this is not surprising.

Let's see how "Perfect" Nicklas Lidstrom really is when comparing apples to apples.

The basic claim is that his non - physical approach is preferred because he receives fewer penalties than physical defensemen. Does this make him "Perfect".

Let's compare his PIM/G with other non-physical defensemen in the history of the NHL.

Nicklas Lidstrom: .33 PIM/G
J.C. Tremblay: .26PIM/G
Red Kelly(HHOF): .25 PIM/G
Bill Quackenbush(HHOF): .12 PIM/G

Compared to other defensemen historically who were non-physical. Lidstrom is the most penalized. Far from your claim of "Perfect".
I'm pretty sure the post-lockout PIMs is pretty unfavourable to any player. You are including seasons where lady byng players like Karyia had 40+ PIMs. The 06 seasons spiked most players PIMs for example Joe Sakic had 60PIM compared to his all-time high of 50.

Lidstrom had never hit 40PIM before that season. So before you start throwing out numbers you might want to give us a little context of those numbers. His career average between 92-04 is .27PIM/G which is more or less the same as Kelly and Tremblay.

I would also ask a question, since when has a raw number average between players from different eras been a good measurement?

Roy/Allaire simplified goaltending, their technique is easy to learn. Lidströms techniques is harder. It's much easier to play a physical defenseman than to rely on positioning, stick-handling and hockey IQ.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 09:04 AM
  #71
Halifaxhab*
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,219
vCash: 500
Defenceman A has excellent D positioning, great 1st pass, solid point shot, plays 30minutes and has good leadership qualities.


Defenceman B has all that AND a mean streak that literally scares the opposition away from the front of the net giving your goalie an easier time.


Which do you choose?


I choose B every time.


take off the rose coloured glasses folks. Both are great but one is is slightly better

Halifaxhab* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 09:17 AM
  #72
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,035
vCash: 500
Financial Motivation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Psycho Papa Joe View Post
I see some posts indicating, that adjusted by era, peak Potvin really wasn't that much more higher scoring than Lidstrom. The overall sentiment is that Lidstrom's longevity trumps Potvin's peak. That said, players of Lidstrom's era, due to training, medicine ect have had longer careers. Shouldn't we also make an adjustment for career length for players who started their careers in the 70's vs the 90's. For instance, odds are, that if Lidstrom starts his career in the 70's, he probably doesn't play beyond 35, whereas if Potvin starts in 1990, he might still be playing.
Add the financial motivation to play as long as possible. Chelios signed significantly reduced contracts his last years because there was noth that paid nearly as well outside the NHL.

Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 09:33 AM
  #73
Canadiens1958
Registered User
 
Canadiens1958's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,035
vCash: 500
SEL PIMs/g

Quote:
Originally Posted by Der Kaiser View Post
I think he's referring to a young generation of Swedish defensemen including Oliver Ekman-Larsson, Adam Larsson, Erik Karlsson, Tim Erixon, Tobias Enström and to some extent also Victor Hedman and Alexander Edler, although they play a somewhat more physical game. We'll see how these players pan out, but it's not entirely unreasonable that Sweden will have a very strong defensive unit in a few years. I think that a lot of credit for the development of these defensemen should be given to Nicklas Lidström, who provided a great inspiration for a whole generation of Swedish future defensemen.

Naturally we can just speculate what will become of this generation, but I think especially Erik Karlsson, Adam Larsson and Oliver Ekman-Larsson have huge potentials for mastering a game like the one Lidström popularized. They rely on brain more than brawn.

Looking at Swedish young defensemen of today, it is obvious that Lidström has played a huge part on how young kids are tought defense today. In a sense, Lidström's style of defense is even better suited to the SEL, where the games are less physical and with more ice surface. In Sweden, I would say a majority of young defensemen play the "Lidström game". Every single prospect that shows seems to be deemed 'The Next Lidström'.
Had to find the data manually:

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=1000315&page=5

Post #112 compares PIMs in European leagues to the NHL - 2010-11 season. Most of the leagues have higher PIMs/G. SEL is on a par with the NHL once the number of teams and length of schedule is accounted for.

Suggest that the young Swedish defensemen are well prepared for the NHL because the SEL is very similar.


Last edited by Canadiens1958: 11-18-2011 at 09:34 AM. Reason: wording
Canadiens1958 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 09:34 AM
  #74
lolwut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MessierThanThou View Post
To play devil's advocate, Lidstrom only won one Norris when Bourque was still playing, and it was his last season.
Bourque also only won 1 while Lidstrom was in the league, rather moot topic imo.

lolwut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-18-2011, 09:42 AM
  #75
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 37,236
vCash: 500
I'm curious to know more about Potvin's injuries. There have been a few references that they were due to his style of play, but that has to be taken in context with the difference in overall style during the 1970s and 1980s. I wonder how many of his injuries were strictly due to his own style (ie, injuring himself on a check) and how many were due to the style of the era (ie, getting slashed across the wrist by Bobby Clarke).

Here's what I can find on his specific injuries:

1973-74: Suffers a fractured instep in the early season. I can't find a reason, but it sounds like a blocked shot? Plays with a cast on his foot and an extra-large skate, wins the Calder.

1979-80: Broken thumb from an early-season game against the Oilers. I can't find a reason for this one either. Couldn't grip a stick for 3 months, returns in February, scores 41 points in 31 games and captains the Isles to their first Cup.

1986-87: Sprains knee ligaments in a "collision" (unspecific) against a Montreal player in February. Misses 17 games and soon thereafter becomes the first defenseman to reach 1,000 points.

Other than that, all I can find is general commentary about his injuries. Does anyone remember more specifically whether these injuries were random accidents, targeted cheapshots or the result of his own physicality?

tarheelhockey 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 04:25 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.