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.

Myth: Lidstrom won his Norrises against "weak" competition

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-31-2012, 10:56 AM
  #76
Gobias Industries
Registered User
 
Gobias Industries's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,386
vCash: 500
I think you can find your answer in how contentious any threads with the names Lidstrom and Bourque are. Given how often their compared I'm not surprised to see "Bourque had the hardest level of competition" turn into "Lidstrom had a weak level of competition".

Gobias Industries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 11:49 AM
  #77
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Also, I am not quite buying Lidstrom's reputation as the greatest defensive d-man of the last 30 years. I certainly think that Bourque is in that discussion.
I think this is a valid point.
If puck possession held the value it actually should have in any defensive play discussion, then Bourque would be ranked as one of the best defensive D-men ever.
Other than Orr, Bourque is the best D-man I have seen at puck possession and controlling the entire Ice rink.
I only say the best I have seen because it's been noted at length that Harvey also had incredible full rink control and puck possession skills.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 12:16 PM
  #78
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
What slightly taints Lidstrom's reputation for me (relative to the other great defensemen of the NHL's lore) is the fact that he scored so many of his points on the power play.

Normalize his PP scoring, and he's a lot less legendary offensively. And there is no question that power play efficacy is highly influenced by the skill of your team's power play, and for the entirety of Lidstrom's career, the Wings had a great powerplay.

Also, I am not quite buying Lidstrom's reputation as the greatest defensive d-man of the last 30 years. I certainly think that Bourque is in that discussion.
So what?

This argument is as strange to me as when it was used in 2011 to knock Lidstrom's point production.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 12:23 PM
  #79
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
So what?

This argument is as strange to me as when it was used in 2011 to knock Lidstrom's point production.
It wasn't about knocking Lidstrom's point production.
It was about how Lidstrom ranked with the other great offensive D-men people were trying to put him in with.
At the end of the day, Lidstrom was NOT a great offensive D-man, he wasn't even a great 2-way D-man.
What he was, was a great defensive D-man that could run a very good power play.
His offensive production at even strength was so far below that of true great offensive D-man(Orr/Coffey) and true great 2-way D-men(Potvin/Bourque) that it was the only determination to be made.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 10-31-2012 at 12:29 PM.
Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 12:45 PM
  #80
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
It wasn't about knocking Lidstrom's point production.
It was about how Lidstrom ranked with the other great offensive D-men people were trying to put him in with.
At the end of the day, Lidstrom was NOT a great offensive D-man, he wasn't even a great 2-way D-man.
What he was, was a great defensive D-man that could run a very good power play.
His offensive production at even strength was so far below that of true great offensive D-man(Orr/Coffey) and true great 2-way D-men(Potvin/Bourque) that it was the only determination to be made.
I think that is a terrible underrating of the guy considering he is regarded as one of the best defensemen to play the game, and he had great offensive production during his career, powerplay or not. It's especially strange if you think Orr and Coffey are the only great offensive defensemen and Potvin/Bourque are the only great two-way defensemen.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 12:57 PM
  #81
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I think that is a terrible underrating of the guy considering he is regarded as one of the best defensemen to play the game, and he had great offensive production during his career, powerplay or not. It's especially strange if you think Orr and Coffey are the only great offensive defensemen and Potvin/Bourque are the only great two-way defensemen.
He had good to very good offensive production during his career. Very good PP production and good even strength production.
And I don't consider those guys to be the ONLY great offensive and 2-way D-men, those are just the examples I used.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:01 PM
  #82
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
He had GOOD offensive production during his career and mostly due to PP production.
And I don't consider those guys to be the ONLY great offensive and 2-way D-men, those are just the examples I used.
I guess my question would be why he should be faulted for that?

I would understand it if his PP time was significantly higher than other players, or if he was on a team who had a PP that was leagues better than other players. But he produced more than other players in one aspect of the game and less in another. That doesn't make one method "cheaper" than the rest.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:07 PM
  #83
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I guess my question would be why he should be faulted for that?

I would understand it if his PP time was significantly higher than other players, or if he was on a team who had a PP that was leagues better than other players. But he produced more than other players in one aspect of the game and less in another. That doesn't make one method "cheaper" than the rest.
I never said it did.
All I did was answer to the people saying that Lidstrom was great offensively when he actually wasn't.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:29 PM
  #84
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I never said it did.
All I did was answer to the people saying that Lidstrom was great offensively when he actually wasn't.
If it doesn't cheapen it then why mention it at all when trying to make the point that his offensive skill and production was good and not great?

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:30 PM
  #85
seventieslord
Moderator
 
seventieslord's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Regina, SK
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,265
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nalyd Psycho View Post
Look at the top 4.
Here are their ages when Lidstrom won his first Norris:
3 Bourque-40
10 Chelios-39
18 MacInnis-37
19 Stevens-36

The youngest in the group was over 35.
1) He was not against any of them in their prime.
2) He couldn't win until their primes were done.

Whether or not his competition is weak is open to debate. But to act like he was competing with 1990 Bourque is just wrong.
You said it, man.

I was hoping this exact post would be one of the first few replies and you didnít disappoint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
I wouldn't say it's a myth as much as an exaggeration.
.
That is fair.

seventieslord is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:33 PM
  #86
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,448
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I guess my question would be why he should be faulted for that?

I would understand it if his PP time was significantly higher than other players, or if he was on a team who had a PP that was leagues better than other players. But he produced more than other players in one aspect of the game and less in another. That doesn't make one method "cheaper" than the rest.
The rest of my post made this point. His team's powerplay (without a careful analysis of it) was definitely extremeley good relative to the competition.

People have to remember, that when people question Lidstrom's offensive ability, it is the context of comparing him to the greatest of all time. Relative to them, he falls short.

Relative to his contemporaries, even his even-strength dominance is very good, and his PP production on top of that makes him one of the best, if not the best, of his "time". But that means nothing when one gets compared to Coffey, Bourque, Potvin, Robinson, Harvey, etc.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:33 PM
  #87
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
Did Pronger ever really play a style that refrained from taking penalties? He was getting suspended from playoff games after the lockout. That's just the way he played. People praise physical play like hockey was UFC (some even using PIM as a positive overall indicator), criticize players who shun contact, and then criticize players for taking penalties due to physicality. If you play overly physical, you're gonna take your share of penalties.
There's a difference between playing disciplined physical hockey (Larry Robinson, Devils-era Scott Stevens) and taking dumb penalties because you're busy roughing up someone in the corner who isn't involved in the play.

Maybe I have a very low tolerance for dumb penalties because I watched so much of Scott Stevens in New Jersey.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:39 PM
  #88
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
The rest of my post made this point. His team's powerplay (without a careful analysis of it) was definitely extremeley good relative to the competition.
And that is a statement that can be very dangerous when you don't do a closer look of it. It is too easy to say "look at his linemates" when talking about his powerplay production and ignore the defensive aspect of that when he is playing in front of Chris Osgood for most of his career, both of which deserve to have more analysis to be utilized factually.

Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
People have to remember, that when people question Lidstrom's offensive ability, it is the context of comparing him to the greatest of all time. Relative to them, he falls short.
I understand that, and am not going to argue that he is at the top offensively. But I think that calling him "good" is an understatement. Perhaps it is semantics and beside the point, but I do think his dominance on the powerplay and his ability to keep the puck out and put the puck in relative to his peers is a positive factor, not a negative.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:40 PM
  #89
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
If it doesn't cheapen it then why mention it at all when trying to make the point that his offensive skill and production was good and not great?
It doesn't "cheapen" it!
Lidstrom's offensive production is being overstated to begin with so all I'm doing is removing the exaggeration.
I'm not lessening Lidstrom's offensive production, I'm just keeping others from making it greater than it actually was.

Please see the difference.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I understand that, and am not going to argue that he is at the top offensively. But I think that calling him "good" is an understatement. Perhaps it is semantics and beside the point, but I do think his dominance on the powerplay and his ability to keep the puck out and put the puck in relative to his peers is a positive factor, not a negative.
Calling Lidstrom production at even strength just good is NOT an understatement, it's absolutely correct.
Just like calling Lidstrom's PP production very good is not an understatement either, it also, is absolutely correct.
This is all in the context of the GOAT, not in the context of how he did vs Zubov or Niedermayer.

And his defensively abilities were not called into question. What I said was that I believe Bourque's defensive contributions (due to puck possession and full rink control) are being underrated not that Lidstrom's were being overrated.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 10-31-2012 at 01:48 PM.
Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:41 PM
  #90
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,939
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
What slightly taints Lidstrom's reputation for me (relative to the other great defensemen of the NHL's lore) is the fact that he scored so many of his points on the power play.

Normalize his PP scoring, and he's a lot less legendary offensively. And there is no question that power play efficacy is highly influenced by the skill of your team's power play, and for the entirety of Lidstrom's career, the Wings had a great powerplay.

Also, I am not quite buying Lidstrom's reputation as the greatest defensive d-man of the last 30 years. I certainly think that Bourque is in that discussion.
That should also taint Doug Harvey's reputation.

Lidstrom is a "new" type of defenseman in terms of defending without playing physical, but in some ways he's a throwback - he's a defense-first defenseman at even strength but showcases his offensive skills on the powerplay.

I don't think Bourque was as effective defensively, only because he was more likely to cheat to put up points at even strength.

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:45 PM
  #91
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
It doesn't "cheapen" it!
Okay, I got that when you said it the first time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Lidstrom's offensive production is being overstated to begin with so all I'm doing is removing the exaggeration.
I'm not lessening Lidstrom's offensive production, I'm just keeping others from making it greater than it actually was.

Please see the difference.
There is no exaggeration to remove in regards to his powerplay production, so there is no reason to separate the two methods of production as if there is a vast difference between the two.

And with another post you go and separate the two again. What, in your opinion, is the difference between even strength and powerplay production that I am missing?

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:46 PM
  #92
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I understand that, and am not going to argue that he is at the top offensively. But I think that calling him "good" is an understatement. Perhaps it is semantics and beside the point, but I do think his dominance on the powerplay and his ability to keep the puck out and put the puck in relative to his peers is a positive factor, not a negative.
Just last season Karlsson scored 50 ESP, Lidstrom's career high is 38 and he typically scored ~30. Karlsson may never repeat that season, but he certainly illustrates the difference between being good and great offensively.

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:49 PM
  #93
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
Just last season Karlsson scored 50 ESP, Lidstrom's career high is 38 and he typically scored ~30. Karlsson may never repeat that season, but he certainly illustrates the difference between being good and great offensively.
I'm not sure I would call Karlsson great offensively just on one season, though.

Green scored 30 goals during his first Norris nomination. Does that make him great offensively?

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:52 PM
  #94
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
Just last season Karlsson scored 50 ESP, Lidstrom's career high is 38 and he typically scored ~30. Karlsson may never repeat that season, but he certainly illustrates the difference between being good and great offensively.
Actually I'm pretty sure his highest was 37 and his career average is around 25 a season.
Unless of course you meant during his prime, which is indeed around 30.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:52 PM
  #95
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I'm not sure I would call Karlsson great offensively just on one season, though.

Green scored 30 goals during his first Norris nomination. Does that make him great offensively?
Well I was only referring to that one season as great. I even mentioned he might not do it again.

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:55 PM
  #96
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
Well I was only referring to that one season as great. I even mentioned he might not do it again.
Well then I'm not sure of the "illustration" you are pointing out.

His production in general was great. I think Lidstrom has had great production in his career. Not Coffey or Orr great, but still great.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:56 PM
  #97
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,182
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I'm not sure I would call Karlsson great offensively just on one season, though.

Green scored 30 goals during his first Norris nomination. Does that make him great offensively?
No, it remains to be seen if Karlsson will end up being a great offensive D-man but he DID have a great offensive season.

The level of even strength production Karlsson achieved last year hasn't been seen since Bourque, Coffey and Leetch in the early 90's.
It's 25% better than anyone else since (Green 40 ES points) and 35% better than any season of Lidstrom's (37ES points).


Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
Well then I'm not sure of the "illustration" you are pointing out.

His production in general was great. I think Lidstrom has had great production in his career. Not Coffey or Orr great, but still great.

Sigh...just stop. Prolly best that we all just go our separate ways at this point.

Rhiessan71 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:57 PM
  #98
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Actually I'm pretty sure his highest was 37 and his career average is around 25 a season.
Unless of course you meant during his prime, which is indeed around 30.
As per TSN it says it says Lidstrom's 99-00 was 73 pts, 31 via PP, 4 SH. Perhaps it's incorrect, but that leaves 38 ESP. And I was just eye-balling his average ESP per season at around 30, I didn't actually average it out.

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:58 PM
  #99
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 25,605
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
No, it remains to be seen if Karlsson will end up being a great offensive D-man but he DID have a great offensive season.
I never denied that. I'm just not looking at just even strength as the indicator. He was at almost a point per game in a league which has seen offense going down since Lidstrom's ppg season in 2006.

ArGarBarGar is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 01:59 PM
  #100
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
Well then I'm not sure of the "illustration" you are pointing out.

His production in general was great. I think Lidstrom has had great production in his career. Not Coffey or Orr great, but still great.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
No, it remains to be seen if Karlsson will end up being a great offensive D-man but he DID have a great offensive season.

The level of even strength production Karlsson achieved last year hasn't been seen since Bourque, Coffey and Leetch in the early 90's.
It's 25% better than anyone else since (Green 40 ES points) and 35% better than any season of Lidstrom's (37ES points).
Exactly this. Perhaps it was a fluke (I doubt it though), but even so he still did something Lidstrom never came close to doing in 20 years.

Stansfield* 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 01:17 PM.

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.