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, 02:03 PM
  #101
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 24,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
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.
And I've continuously asked about what that means as far as the difference between even strength production and powerplay production, and I have gotten blanks.

I don't think it is an unreasonable question.

ArGarBarGar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:05 PM
  #102
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
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.
Lids had 31PP points(9G 22A) and 5 SH points(4G 1A) assist in 99/00
Confirmed by both NHLcom and ESPNcom

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:09 PM
  #103
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
Sheldon Souray holds the montreal canadians record for ppg by a defenceman at 19 and is second with 26 goals all time for a defenceman for habs.He played with no great offencive forwards.Does that make the big 3 overated?

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:10 PM
  #104
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
And I've continuously asked about what that means as far as the difference between even strength production and powerplay production, and I have gotten blanks.

I don't think it is an unreasonable question.
Does anyone actually need to explain to you the difference between producing when there are 5 opposing players on the ice compared to when there are only 4 or 3?

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:11 PM
  #105
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
And I've continuously asked about what that means as far as the difference between even strength production and powerplay production, and I have gotten blanks.

I don't think it is an unreasonable question.
The majority of the game is played at even-strengh, therefore I, and many others, value ES scoring over PP scoring. Rob Schremp is a superstar on the PP, but he's not in the league because he can't score at ES well enough to be in the NHL.

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:13 PM
  #106
ArGarBarGar
Global Moderator
Defense Please
 
ArGarBarGar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 24,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Does anyone actually need to explain to you the difference between producing when there are 5 opposing players on the ice compared to when there are only 4 or 3?
I understand that it is easier, but every defenseman in the history of the league that has had offensive talent has had time on the powerplay and the ability to put up those easier points.

This isn't an advantage that is allowed to one player.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stansfield View Post
The majority of the game is played at even-strengh, therefore I, and many others, value ES scoring over PP scoring. Rob Schremp is a superstar on the PP, but he's not in the league because he can't score at ES well enough to be in the NHL.
I can understand that logic.

ArGarBarGar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:16 PM
  #107
Theokritos
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,937
vCash: 500
Competition (Top 4 in Norris voting / AS voting before the Norris era) by age:
*Based on the HOH Top 60 Defencemen ranking*

Nicklas Lidström:
1997-98 Lidström (27): behind 44 Blake (29), in front of 20 Pronger (25) and 19 Stevens (34)
1998-99 Lidström (28): behind 18 MacInnis (35), in front of 3 Bourque (39/40) and 20 Pronger (26)
1999-00 Lidström (29): behind 20 Pronger (27), in front of 44 Blake (31) and Desjardins (30)
2000-01 Lidström (30): in front of 3 Bourque (41/42), 19 Stevens (37), 44 Blake (32)
2001-02 Lidström (31): in front of 10 Chelios (39/40), 44 Blake (33), Gonchar (27)
2002-03 Lidström (32): in front of 18 MacInnis (39), Hatcher (30), Gonchar (28)
2005-06 Lidström (35): in front of 33 Niedermayer (32), Zubov (35), 32 Chára (28/29)
2006-07 Lidström (36): in front of 33 Niedermayer (33), 20 Pronger (32), Boyle (30)
2007-08 Lidström (37): in front of Phaneuf (22), 32 Chára (30/31), Gonchar (32)
2008-09 Lidström (38): behind 32 Chára (31/32) and Green (23), in front of Weber (23)
2009-10 Lidström (39): behind Keith (26), Green (24) and Doughty (19/20)
2010-11 Lidström (40): in front of Weber (25), 32 Chára (33/34), Višňovský (34)

Denis Potvin:
1974-75 Potvin (21): behind 1 Orr (26), in front of 32 Lapointe (26) and 22 Salming (22)
1975-76 Potvin (22): in front of 11 Park (27), 22 Salming (23) and 32 Lapointe (27)
1976-77 Potvin (23): behind 9 Robinson (25) and 22 Salming (24), in front of 32 Lapointe (28)
1977-78 Potvin (24): in front of 11 Park (29), 9 Robinson (26) and 22 Salming (25)
1978-79 Potvin (25): in front of 9 Robinson (27), 22 Salming (26) and 28 Savard (32/33)
1980-81 Potvin (27): behind Carlyle (24), in front of 9 Robinson (29) and 3 Bourque (20/21)
1983-84 Potvin (30): behind 29 Langway (26), 13 Coffey (22) and 3 Bourque (21/22)

Bobby Orr:
1966-67 Orr (18): behind Howell (33/34) and 14 Pilote (34/35), in front of 17 Horton (36/37)
1967-68 Orr (19): before 40 Tremblay (28/29), 17 Horton (37/38) and Neilson (25/26)
1968-69 Orr (20): before 17 Horton (38/39), Green (28) and Harris (32)
1969-70 Orr (21): before 11 Park (21), 46 Brewer (31) and 38 Laperrière (27/28)
1970-71 Orr (22): before 11 Park (22), 40 Tremblay (31/32) and Stapleton (30)
1971-72 Orr (23): before 11 Park (23), White (32) and Stapleton (31)
1972-73 Orr (24): before 32 Lapointe (24), White (33) and 11 Park (24)
1973-74 Orr (25): before 11 Park (25), White (34) and Ashbee (34)
1974-75 Orr (26): before 6 Potvin (21), 32 Lapointe (26) and 22 Salming (22)

Doug Harvey:
1951-52 Harvey (26/27): behind 7 Kelly (24), before Buller (25) and Thomson (24/25)
1952-53 Harvey (27/28): behind 7 Kelly (25), before 26 Quackenbush (30) and 21 Gadsby (25)
1953-54 Harvey (28/29): behind 7 Kelly (26), before 21 Gadsby (26) and 17 Horton (23/24)
1954-55 Harvey (29/30): before 7 Kelly (27), Flaman (27/28) and Goldham (32)
1955-56 Harvey (30/31): before 21 Gadsby (28), 7 Kelly (28) and 52 Johnson (27/28)
1956-57 Harvey (31/32): before 7 Kelly (29), Flaman (29/30) and 21 Gadsby (29)
1957-58 Harvey (32/33): before 21 Gadsby (30), Flaman (30/31) and Stewart (25)
1958-59 Harvey (33/34): behind 52 Johnson (30/31), 21 Gadsby (31) and 34 Pronovost (28)
1959-60 Harvey (34/35): before Stanley (33/34), 34 Pronovost (29) and 14 Pilote (27/28)
1960-61 Harvey (35/36): before 34 Pronovost (30), Stanley (34/35) and 14 Pilote (28/29)
1961-62 Harvey (36/37): before 14 Pilote (29/30), Talbot (29) and 46 Brewer (23)


Lidström's closest competitors:
3 Bourque aged 39/40, 41/42
10 Chelios aged 39/40
18 MacInnis aged 35, 39
19 Stevens aged 34, 37
20 Pronger aged 25, 26, 27, 32
32 Chára aged 28/29, 30/31, 31/32 and 33/34
33 Niedermayer aged 32 and 33
44 Blake aged 29, 31, 32 and 33
Gonchar aged 27, 28 and 32
Desjardins aged 30
Hatcher aged 30
Zubov aged 35
Boyle aged 30
Phaneuf aged 22
Green aged 23 and 24
Weber aged 23 and 25
Keith aged 26
Doughty aged 19/20
Višňovský aged 34

Potvin's closest competitors::
1 Orr aged 26
3 Bourque aged 20/21 and 21/22
9 Robinson aged 25, 26, 27, 29
11 Park aged 27, 29
13 Coffey aged 22
22 Salming aged 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
28 Savard aged 32/33
29 Langway aged 26
32 Lapointe aged 26, 27, 28
Carlyle aged 24

Orr's closest competitors:
6 Potvin aged 21
11 Park aged 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25
14 Pilote aged 34/35
17 Horton aged 36/37, 37/38, 38/39
22 Salming aged 22
32 Lapointe aged 24 and 26
38 Laperrière aged 27/28
40 Tremblay aged 28/29, 31/32
46 Brewer aged 31
Howell aged 33/34
Neilson aged 25/26
Green aged 28
Harris aged 32
Stapleton aged 30, 31
White aged 32, 33 and 34
Ashbee aged 34

Harvey's closest competitors:
7 Kelly aged 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29
14 Pilote aged 27/28, 28/29, 29/30
17 Horton aged 23/24
21 Gadsby aged 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31
26 Quackenbush aged 30
34 Pronovost aged 28, 29, 30
46 Brewer aged 23
52 Johnson aged 27/28, 30/31
Buller aged 25
Thomson aged 24/25
Flaman aged 27/28, 29/30, 30/31
Goldham aged 32
Stewart aged 25
Stanley aged 33/34, 34/35
Talbot aged 29

Theokritos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:19 PM
  #108
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,044
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ArGarBarGar View Post
I understand that it is easier, but every defenseman in the history of the league that has had offensive talent has had time on the powerplay and the ability to put up those easier points.

This isn't an advantage that is allowed to one player.
Yes and a D-man's ability to produce at equal to and an even greater rate while NOT on the PP is what separates good and very good offense from great offense.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:20 PM
  #109
Stansfield*
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theokritos View Post
Competition (Top 4 in Norris voting / AS voting before the Norris era) by age:
*Based on the HOH Top 60 Defencemen ranking*
I was beginning to do this but you beat me to it, great job.

Stansfield* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 02:40 PM
  #110
The Zetterberg Era
Moderator
Nyquist Explosion!
 
The Zetterberg Era's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ft. Myers, FL
Country: United States
Posts: 17,664
vCash: 515
Only two defenseman have won the Hart Trophy since WWII. One of them is the greatest D-man ever, the other spent almost his entire prime as second banana to Lidstrom. Pronger and Lidstrom's primes overlap. Scott Niedermayer, Rob Blake and the beginning of Weber and Chara. I am sorry those are not crummy prime players, it speaks to Lidstrom's dominance and his ridiculously long prime of 15 years. The reason for lack of quality is he was just that much better, they all said it in the articles after he retired. He helped damage the resumes of the guys around him.

I am too biased to see him anywhere but the second greatest d-man of all-time. But I do believe he has the edge but it is a toss up and I at least see the Bourque angles.

For those that use the Wings overall talent, since 95 if you listened to anyone, Bowman, Yzerman, later Holland Lidstrom was listed as the most important and talented player on the team. On pure talent a lot would trot out Fedorov, but Lidstrom was the key and all the Wings said that and much earlier than when the trophies started rolling in. They started complaining about that when some of the guys listed were still at their heights.

The Norris has always been a little too much of a past achievement award for the most part. If it is close the established old guard wins it. Did Lidstrom deserve his last one? Probably not, but he easily could have won in the mid to late 90's when he was getting locked out for the same ideas.

By the way if Chara and Weber real off the next bunch of Norris trophies, instead of young guns, guys you remember playing against Lidstrom help him on the backend after he retired as far as how people remember them right or wrong.

The Zetterberg Era is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 03:09 PM
  #111
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Lidstrom wasn't competing against Niedermayer's career, he was competing against Niedermayer's individual seasons. And Niedermayer's best seasons were all-time great seasons, great enough to cause the "what have you done lately" media to talk about him like a top 10 or top 15 all-time defenseman. Was prime Niedermayer prime Chelios? Probably not. But he was as good as everyone else Bourque competed against IMO. He just didn't maintain that level for very long.


Last edited by TheDevilMadeMe: 10-31-2012 at 03:30 PM.
TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 03:54 PM
  #112
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,550
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
Well, yes I agree that for example Datsyuk being not 100% in the playoffs have been a factor not having any playoff success. But we can't forget that Wings lost twice to a pretty good San Jose. Those are not exactly upsets. Same thing with Nashville last year. Nashville was a good team and they were on mission to beat the Wings. Plus, Wings were not good themselves due to various reasons.
The Wings owned the Sharks right after the lockout, although they were/are certainly a formidable team.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
But you can't also deny that Lidstrom slowing down (playing less minutes, not killing penalties, making more mistakes than usually) must had a pretty big impact. Lidstrom in his prime was your top PKer, top shutdown and offensive dman at ES, effective on the PP. Rarely making a wrong play. And that's for 30+ minutes per game if necessary. You simply don't replace that. Even with the top5 dman in the league. Difference is huge.
It may have been a significant difference, but the difference in the quality of the team as a whole seems to be much more important IMO.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
If we count only years since the first Cup, then Lidstrom peaked higher (had a better single season) than Yzerman or Fedorov. Without any doubt. Not so sure about Datsyuk, because his 2009 season was truly amazing. Although I still probably take Lidstrom in 2002.
I was starting from the point where the Wings became one of the premier teams in the league, which would probably be '92 or '95, depending on the definition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lazerbullet View Post
And frankly... all this talk about talent. Well every all-time great had success with talented teams.

How many Cups won Gretzky after leaving Edmonton dynasty?
Howe after Detroit dynasty?
Many would agree that Bruins with Orr underachieved and should have won more.
Mario and the Pens should have won one more.

And these four are treated by many as some demigods who were winning games by themselves. Well... that was not clearly the case.

Or how about other defenseman.

Potvin. All the success with the Islanders dynasty.
Harvey. Do I really have to comment.
Robinson.
Coffee.
Red Kelly.

So besides Ray Bourque pretty much every single true all-time great played for a dynasty in one form or another. Everyone had plenty of help on their team. So drumming all the time about stacked Wings teams and Lidstrom is somewhat pointless.
In fact, that is my exact point, that it's a team game and playing for one of the few teams with legitimate expectations of contending for the Cup, year in and year out, is obviously a huge advantage in terms of team success.

Since the end of the Oilers' dynasty, winning even a single Cup is a tremendous accomplishment, but my other point was that based on Detroit's regular season success, winning 4 Cups in 20 seasons was nothing like an over-achievement on their part.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:00 PM
  #113
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,550
vCash: 50
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'm skeptical as well. Of course it's hard to separate the defense from the offense for players that are skilled at the transition game, but assume that we are not factoring in a player's passing (except to clear the zone) or shooting, but only the defensive side of the game. Was Lidstrom's peak/prime defensively significantly better than Bourque, Chelios, Stevens, Pronger... and before that, Robinson, Potvin, Langway, etc.? I see statements that he was the best defensive d-man of all-time or something, and I'm quite skeptical of these assertions. Did players like Bourque and Pronger have the supporting cast (goalie, other d-men, checking lines, coaching, etc.) that Lidstrom had? Defense is often as good as its weakest link, and many others may not have been able to simply play a positionally sound game to make their team's defense most effective... having to take more risks, play more physical, etc.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:03 PM
  #114
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,550
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
Potvin vs. Lidstrom is always a very interesting one.

Objectively, statistically, contextually, Lidstrom appears to have the edge. But more subjectively, I lean towards Potvin. His physicality and legendary stretch passes give him that kind of niche skillset.
I think Potvin at least holds his own objectively, statistically on a peak/prime basis. His offense was fantastic, and he had some high ranking placements (albeit in a less competitive environment). Both players played for teams that were usually very strong, but Potvin's adjusted plus-minus data is significantly stronger (Robinson's is as well on very strong teams).

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:06 PM
  #115
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
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.
That is fair if it also taints Harvey's reputation. I've never seen it brought up about Harvey save for now.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:11 PM
  #116
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czech Your Math View Post
I think Potvin at least holds his own objectively, statistically on a peak/prime basis. His offense was fantastic, and he had some high ranking placements (albeit in a less competitive environment). Both players played for teams that were usually very strong, but Potvin's adjusted plus-minus data is significantly stronger (Robinson's is as well on very strong teams).
I feel that the statistical comparisons show that they have equivalent primes, but Lidstrom's prime just lasted a lot longer. The length of his career is truly remarkable, and even if one thinks Potvin was slightly better for a 5-6 subsection of their careers, Lidstrom has the longetivity.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:18 PM
  #117
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,378
vCash: 500
If we use the point shares system off hockey-reference.com, here's how Lidstrom stacks up.

1995-96 - 2nd behind Bourque (35)

1996-97 - 3rd behind Leetch (28) and Ozolinsh (24), and 0.1 ahead of Sydor

1997-98 - 1st, 0.3 ahead of Murphy (36), 0.6 ahead of Zubov (27, and missed 9 games), and 0.8 ahead of Niedermayer (24)

1998-99 - 3rd, 3.3 behind MacInnis (35) and 0.5 behind Olausson, who missed 8 games

1999-00 - 2nd, 1.8 behind Pronger (25) and 1.0 ahead of Desjardins (30)

2000-01 - 1st, 1.5 ahead of Zubov (30), 1.6 ahead of Gonchar (26), 1.7 ahead of MacInnis (37)

2001-02 - 2nd, 1.7 behind Blake (32), and 0.1 ahead of both Gonchar (27) and Pronger (27)

2002-03 - 1st, 0.9 ahead of MacInnis (39) and 1.7 ahead of Gonchar (28)

2003-04 - 14th, obviously behind 13 other players

2005-06 - 1st, 0.7 ahead of Zubov (35) and 1.0 ahead of Schneider (36)

2006-07 - 1st, 1.4 ahead of Niedermayer (33) and Pronger (32)

2007-08 - 1st, 2.7 ahead of Rafalski (34) and 3.2 ahead of Phaneuf (22)

2008-09 - 2nd, 2.7 behind Mike Green (23), who played 10 fewer games

2009-10 - 5th, 2.3 behind leader Mike Green (24)

2010-11 - 10th, 3.3 behind leader Lubomir Visnovsky (34)

2011-12 - 20th, 5.2 behind leader Erik Karlsson (21)

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:30 PM
  #118
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 14,378
vCash: 500
For comparison's sake on Lidstrom and his competition as compared to Orr versus his competition...

Orr was first every year that he was active and healthy with the exception of 1967-68 (when he was 7th, with Mike McMahon leading the way). Orr's totals:

1967-68 - 7th with 6.9; leader McMahon had 9.2
1968-69 - 1st with 13.0, Gary Bergman had 9.2
1969-70 - 1st with 19.6, Carl Brewer had 9.2
1970-71 - 1st with 22.9, Pat Stapleton had 10.5
1971-72 - 1st with 20.3, Brad Park had 13.8
1972-73 - 1st with 15.6, Guy Lapointe had 11.0
1973-74 - 1st with 19.4, Brad Park had 12.2
1974-75 - 1st with 21.5, Guy Lapointe had 12.5

It's not even a question of Orr having weak competition; several of his HOF contemporaries (or near-contemporaries) never came close to these totals in their best years. Orr has the 5 highest single-season totals in history, followed by Larry Robinson's +120 season, Coffey's 138-point season, and Potvin's 101-point season...then another one of his own.

Mayor Bee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:31 PM
  #119
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayor Bee View Post
If we use the point shares system off hockey-reference.com,
Why would we use such a thing?

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:32 PM
  #120
Czech Your Math
Registered User
 
Czech Your Math's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: bohemia
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,550
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
I feel that the statistical comparisons show that they have equivalent primes, but Lidstrom's prime just lasted a lot longer. The length of his career is truly remarkable, and even if one thinks Potvin was slightly better for a 5-6 subsection of their careers, Lidstrom has the longetivity.
I'm just saying that there's objective, statistical evidence that indicates Potvin may have been even more dominant in his peak/prime years. I certainly see the argument for Lidstrom having a substantially longer prime/career.

Some other factors:

- Lidstrom played in a more competitive league which had a higher level of overall and per-team talent

- Careers tended not to last quite as long back in Potvin's day

- Potvin played a more physical style and probably could have played Lidstrom's style more easily than Lidstrom could effectively play Potvin's style. This could be important on lesser teams (and the vast majority of teams are lesser than the teams of these two players), where one player playing positionally sound defense may not be as effective as on a team with a great team defense.

Czech Your Math is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 04:37 PM
  #121
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,026
vCash: 500
How is it that Robinson never had 1 season with 90 points only scored over 20g a couple of times.Check Coffey Potvin Orr they are far superior to Robinson in terms of offence its scary

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 05:31 PM
  #122
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,728
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by superroyain10 View Post
That is fair if it also taints Harvey's reputation. I've never seen it brought up about Harvey save for now.
I don't think it taints Harvey, or Lidstrom - defensemen are simply more valuable focusing on defense and the transitional game at even strength - they're not forwards where a greater percentage of points on the PP might be considered a weakness. The fact Harvey and Lidstrom could run a power play so well to still produce with the top offensive Dmen in the league is a rare quality. Ultimately, even the best all-offense-all-the-time Dmen in history have been handily outproduced by the best forwards. Harvey and Lidstrom had the skill to take calculated risks at even strength at times, but mainly focused on defense, which simply made them more valuable.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 05:42 PM
  #123
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 39,116
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I don't think it taints Harvey, or Lidstrom - defensemen are simply more valuable focusing on defense and the transitional game at even strength - they're not forwards where a greater percentage of points on the PP might be considered a weakness. The fact Harvey and Lidstrom could run a power play so well to still produce with the top offensive Dmen in the league is a rare quality. Ultimately, even the best all-offense-all-the-time Dmen in history have been handily outproduced by the best forwards. Harvey and Lidstrom had the skill to take calculated risks at even strength at times, but mainly focused on defense, which simply made them more valuable.
I agree with this. I just think that if "scoring a lot on the powerplay" is somehow a criticism of Lidstrom, it affects Harvey just as much.

TheDevilMadeMe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 05:42 PM
  #124
OrrNumber4
Registered User
 
OrrNumber4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 7,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I don't think it taints Harvey, or Lidstrom - defensemen are simply more valuable focusing on defense and the transitional game at even strength - they're not forwards where a greater percentage of points on the PP might be considered a weakness. The fact Harvey and Lidstrom could run a power play so well to still produce with the top offensive Dmen in the league is a rare quality. Ultimately, even the best all-offense-all-the-time Dmen in history have been handily outproduced by the best forwards. Harvey and Lidstrom had the skill to take calculated risks at even strength at times, but mainly focused on defense, which simply made them more valuable.
The use of the word value is very interesting. For example. I am sure that the 80s Oilers teams would want no one but Coffey or Bobby Orr on their blueline.

I think there is some validity to the assumption that an ES point is worth more than a PP point. Simply, because it is easier to get a PP point due to "presence/luck" than it is to get an ES point the same way. And, of course, the success of a PP largely depends on the quality of the team's powerplay.

OrrNumber4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-31-2012, 05:46 PM
  #125
Ohashi_Jouzu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Halifax
Country: Japan
Posts: 21,730
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
I don't think Bourque was as effective defensively, only because he was more likely to cheat to put up points at even strength.
Meh, conversely, I rate him positively for being absolutely one of the best at cheating, and pinching, and stepping up to keep a puck in the zone. I think a lot of that benefited his team defensively, too, as a result (kind of that "good offense is the best defense" argument). I mean, it's an instinct/talent that is expected of defensemen, so credit where credit is due if he's one of the best ever at it. It's not like anyone's lingering impression of Bourque is the number of odd man rushes any gaffes resulted in compared to other defensemen we were watching at the time.

Ohashi_Jouzu 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 04:17 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.