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.

Lidstrom's place in history - ALL DISCUSSIONS OF LIDSTROM'S "ALL TIME RANKING" HERE

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2012, 09:49 PM
  #351
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,293
vCash: 500
I'm going to keep the comp to the NHL.

Sure Ray is younger in each year but he also started in the weaker 80 (compared to 92) and didn't have to adjust to the North American game.

No doubt people will argue over this stuff as well but it's kinda pointless, if Ray was good enough to make the all-star team in his 1st season age really doesn't matter when we are doing 20 seasons here IMO.

I want to do an in depth as possible look so sometime next week 80-92 will be out.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 09:51 PM
  #352
TheDevilMadeMe
Global Moderator
 
TheDevilMadeMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Brooklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 43,212
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Not taking anything away from Lidstrom. I didn't pick it by season, Hardy did with preview of '92 vs '80. I just ran with it.
You want to do it by age instead, go for it.
There's a 5-7 year gap either way.

I said it before and I'll say it again, just pick your poison. I'm good to go with either.
Oh sorry, I didn't see that. Agree that if you do it year by year starting in their rookie years that everything Bourque did after the age of 36 is a "bonus."

TheDevilMadeMe is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:19 PM
  #353
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
Obligatory note that Lidstrom did not shut down Lindros all by himself.
No, that's true. He had the help of Steve Yzerman.

Stevens had the help of an entire system designed specifically to clog up the neutral zone and trap puck carriers at the blue line; a system Stevens used to lay many blindside hits on players such as Lindros.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDevilMadeMe View Post
The Devils and Flyers were in the same division, and Lindros scored at a significantly lower rate against the Devils, with Scott Stevens being the primary reason. No, Lindros wasn't embarrassed like he was in the 1997 finals, but he consistently took a hit to his production against Stevens, including the 1995 ECFs.
Lindros scoring less, or scoring none? Which is the better defensive performance? I find it hard to tell.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
I'm not even sure what you're trying to say here to be honest.

I'll try and answer what I think you're trying to say.
First off, I have never said anything remotely bad about Lidstrom's defense ever. I just said I'm sick of the ultra conservative play, playing not to lose crap that's been the norm in the NHL for more than a decade now.
Second, Lidstrom did not shut down Lindros by himself, he had a lot of help. It was a full line effort and that's a fact!
It was focused line-matching, combined with Lidstrom passively shadowing Lindros. Yzerman was often on the ice as well, but not directly involved with Lindros/Lidstrom. It wasn't the same as Zetterberg vs. Crosby, but it wasn't as if the Wings just put any line out and Lindros simply didn't score.

Quote:
Fourth, no IMO, Lidstrom was not capable of playing Karlsson's or Bourque's style. He didn't have puck possession skills that those two guys have/had and Lidstrom NEVER showed in 20 years that he was capable of producing offense at even strength at that kind of level.
First, puck possession is not the same as points. Example: Mike Modano was a great point producer but a terrible puck possession player.

Puck possession is about controlling the puck to both prevent the opposing team from scoring and create scoring chances. It relies on acquisition and retention of the puck as the primary skills, and a high hockey IQ is desired for a puck possession game more than for other styles.


Lidstrom was excellent at puck possession because he was a skilled passer, a smooth skater, had good puckhandling skills and had an incredibly high hockey IQ.

Quote:
You're welcome to try and prove otherwise.
Hmm. Well, let's start with the fact that Lidstrom played a defensive style. That's been established. Now let's look at Lidstrom's 2007-08 season. He posted 35 ES points and 70 total points. If we take those ES points, and project them out to Karlsson's ESTOI, they become 43 points. Karlsson had 50 ESP.

Now it's not such a gap, is it?

Going further, what if Lidstrom were to play Karlsson's offense-first game? Do you think he could have managed a mere 16% increase in his offense by changing his style from a defensive defenseman to one who pushes the bill offensively? I think 16% is a conservative estimate in what the change would have been.

As for Bourque's impressive ES numbers...

Ray Bourque was outscored at ES by Nicklas Lidstrom in Bourque's Norris-winning 1993-94 season. I think that's really all that needs to be said about who the PP point-grabber is.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:45 PM
  #354
Guru Meditation
Service Unavailable
 
Guru Meditation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redbull View Post
eye test in how a player can dominate a game, break up plays and generate offense, especially 5on5, Lidstrom isn't close to some of the all time greats IMO.
Quote:
dominate a game, break up plays and generate offense, especially 5on5
Quote:
break up plays
Are you sure about this one? I think there's an argument to be made that there has never been anybody better. He would often intentionally put the entire play offside at the blue line with a pokecheck. He would do it every game against some of the best stickhandlers in the world. Every game. When the time came and his partner was out of position, Lidstrom would flawlessly break up 2 on 1s.

Lidstrom was so solid defensively that he intimidated offensive players. They didn't want to look like idiots. They would have entire shifts trying to get basic plays done because he would just be everywhere, covering two guys, stick always in the lanes, etc. He would take away everything for a forward.

Guru Meditation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 10:51 PM
  #355
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eerie Hurdler View Post
Are you sure about this one? I think there's an argument to be made that there has never been anybody better. He would often intentionally put the entire play offside at the blue line with a pokecheck. He would do it every game against some of the best stickhandlers in the world. Every game. When the time came and his partner was out of position, Lidstrom would flawlessly break up 2 on 1s.

Lidstrom was so solid defensively that he intimidated offensive players. They didn't want to look like idiots. They would have entire shifts trying to get basic plays done because he would just be everywhere, covering two guys, stick always in the lanes, etc. He would take away everything for a forward.
But he's Nick Lidstrom, so he's automatically not that good because they have declared it to be so and have to fight to the death to defend their opinions.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-30-2012, 11:09 PM
  #356
Guru Meditation
Service Unavailable
 
Guru Meditation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,622
vCash: 500
Some videos showing some of the more subtle elements of his game.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNXZPWf9OSU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-87rmV5jDc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--9Xa7PjCD4


Last edited by Guru Meditation: 11-30-2012 at 11:15 PM.
Guru Meditation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:08 AM
  #357
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
No, that's true. He had the help of Steve Yzerman.
He had more than just Yzerman. They either played Yzerman's line against Lindros or Draper's line and Kostaninov with either Fetisov or Rouse also took shifts against #88. Murphy was just out there looking pretty either.
It WAS a team effort to shut down Lindros and the LoD line.
Again, that's a fact!

Quote:
Stevens had the help of an entire system designed specifically to clog up the neutral zone and trap puck carriers at the blue line; a system Stevens used to lay many blindside hits on players such as Lindros.
I got news for ya bud...EVERY team was playing some version of the trap or the LWL by the mid 90's.

Quote:
Lindros scoring less, or scoring none? Which is the better defensive performance? I find it hard to tell.
Lindros was scoring none after Stevens knocked him into next week


Quote:
First, puck possession is not the same as points. Example: Mike Modano was a great point producer but a terrible puck possession player.

Puck possession is about controlling the puck to both prevent the opposing team from scoring and create scoring chances. It relies on acquisition and retention of the puck as the primary skills, and a high hockey IQ is desired for a puck possession game more than for other styles.
Thanks, now just show me where Lidstrom does that on a level close to Bourque or even Karlsson.


Quote:
Lidstrom was excellent at puck possession because he was a skilled passer, a smooth skater, had good puckhandling skills and had an incredibly high hockey IQ.
Yes, Lidstrom made a very good first pass. Yes, he was a smooth skater. Yes, he was a good puckhandler and yes, he had a high DEFENSIVE hockey IQ.
He still didn't play a very high puck possession game. I'm sorry but he didn't!


Quote:
Hmm. Well, let's start with the fact that Lidstrom played a defensive style. That's been established. Now let's look at Lidstrom's 2007-08 season. He posted 35 ES points and 70 total points. If we take those ES points, and project them out to Karlsson's ESTOI, they become 43 points. Karlsson had 50 ESP.

Now it's not such a gap, is it?

Going further, what if Lidstrom were to play Karlsson's offense-first game? Do you think he could have managed a mere 16% increase in his offense by changing his style from a defensive defenseman to one who pushes the bill offensively? I think 16% is a conservative estimate in what the change would have been.
First off, Karlsson does NOT play an offensive first game! He plays a balanced puck possession game. Again, not something Lidstrom ever played or showed he was capable of playing on that kind of level.
Second, way to cherry pick one year that is miles ahead of any of his other years in ES scoring/TOI.
Third and furthermore, of Lidstrom's less time on at ES, almost half of it was spent on the PP that Karlsson didn't play.

Using your projected p/ToI argument, Karlsson would have had 41PP points instead of 28. Which is a whole lot better than Lidstrom's 33 that year


Quote:
As for Bourque's impressive ES numbers...

Ray Bourque was outscored at ES by Nicklas Lidstrom in Bourque's Norris-winning 1993-94 season. I think that's really all that needs to be said about who the PP point-grabber is.
Nice try but unfortunately you failed to notice that Bourque missed 12 games that season and was actually on pace for 106 points and 40 ES points

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:18 AM
  #358
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
But he's Nick Lidstrom, so he's automatically not that good because they have declared it to be so and have to fight to the death to defend their opinions.
Enough already!

NO ONE HAS SAID THAT LIDSTROM WAS NOT GREAT DEFENSIVELY!!!

In fact, all I have seen from any poster in this thread are compliments about his defense.

I'm sorry but offensively, he just simply doesn't stack up very well against most of the all-time top 20. He's clearly in the bottom half of that list.
He gets ranked where he is for his great defense, he great longevity, his team success and his good, definitely not great, offense.

Or or you playing the Canadian bias card? Oops, I better stop talking so highly of Karlsson then


Listen, let me ask you a question. Do you consider Chara to be a great or even a very good offensive D-man?


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 12-01-2012 at 12:25 AM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:53 AM
  #359
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Do you consider Chara to be a great or even a very good offensive D-man?
Chara has topped 44 points three times. Career high of 52.
His career average per-82 is 37. His career adjusted point average per-82 is 40.

Lidstrom has topped 52 15 times, career high 80.
Career average per-82 is 60, Adjusted average per-82 is 63.

Bourque has beaten or tied 52 19 times, and gone over 80 10 times.
Career average per-82 is 80, Adjusted average per-82 is 73.

For reference, Karlsson comes out of last season with 86 adjusted points, better than any single year Bourque had.

I don't like using adjusted stats heavily, but within context they are reasonable and as we are comparing across a span of over 30 seasons.

So Bourque was ~15% more productive than Lidstrom. This again goes back to my earlier post during the ES/PP scoring discussion. Lidstrom could capably increase his ES output by 15% by changing his play style to mimic that of Bourque or Karlsson. He might not be as speedy as Karlsson or as physical as Bourque, but he certainly has the offensive skill. Which you continually fail to recognize.

As for Chara, he is a good offensive defenseman.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:29 AM
  #360
Gobias Industries
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gobias Industries's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
As for Chara, he is a good offensive defenseman.
Chara is at least very good, or a lot of NHL defenseman must be terrible...

Gobias Industries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 01:50 AM
  #361
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Chara has topped 44 points three times. Career high of 52.
His career average per-82 is 37. His career adjusted point average per-82 is 40.

Lidstrom has topped 52 15 times, career high 80.
Career average per-82 is 60, Adjusted average per-82 is 63.

Bourque has beaten or tied 52 19 times, and gone over 80 10 times.
Career average per-82 is 80, Adjusted average per-82 is 73.

For reference, Karlsson comes out of last season with 86 adjusted points, better than any single year Bourque had.

I don't like using adjusted stats heavily, but within context they are reasonable and as we are comparing across a span of over 30 seasons.

So Bourque was ~15% more productive than Lidstrom. This again goes back to my earlier post during the ES/PP scoring discussion. Lidstrom could capably increase his ES output by 15% by changing his play style to mimic that of Bourque or Karlsson. He might not be as speedy as Karlsson or as physical as Bourque, but he certainly has the offensive skill. Which you continually fail to recognize.
Never said he didn't have offensive skill.
Can't play the coulda, shoulda, woulda card here. Bourque could have played more like Coffey or Housley and increased his offense even more too.
Thing is though, I doubt very much that Lidstrom could have matched Bourque offensively without dropping his defensive game below that of Bourque's.


Quote:
As for Chara, he is a good offensive defenseman.
So when I tell you that Lidstrom has only outscored Chara at even strength by a mere 16 whole points in the 7 seasons since the lockout...

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 06:10 AM
  #362
sparr0w
Registered User
 
sparr0w's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 16,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
So when I tell you that Lidstrom has only outscored Chara at even strength by a mere 16 whole points in the 7 seasons since the lockout...
You're really going to try and prove a point by comparing the even strength offensive production of defensemen when one is aged 28 to 35 and the other 35 to 42?

sparr0w is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 08:46 AM
  #363
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
It's a tough one a lot of factors involved in where to position a player.You could be right I don't know.Maybe a coach would like a more physical player and would have to decide if Lidstrom has other qualities that would help instead.Again its tough for me not to put him high because of his 7 norris trophy's.System of play is also a factor some coaches want their players to have a set of skills that will fit the coaches style of play
I think we can agree that any coach who had Lidstrom as a player wouldn't have to be thinking about what he would rather have in a player.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 09:01 AM
  #364
thom
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,266
vCash: 500
Well Scotty Bowman prefers Serge Savard and Brad Park instead of Larry Robinson?Neither won a norris and have had as long career.Maybe the coach likes to have physical defenceman you think Lidstrom is that type of player I think not

thom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 09:22 AM
  #365
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobias Industries View Post
Chara is at least very good, or a lot of NHL defenseman must be terrible...
Lidstrom led the league in offense more times than Bourque did, and adjusted stats during their long primes put him right on par or only with Bourque for production.

So if we're going with "Chara is very good" then we have to go with "Lidstrom is comparable/just barely behind Bourque" as far as offense is concerned.

And that argument pretty much ends any hope for Bourque to be better than Lidstrom, unless you want to push the "physical play is better than effective defense" angle, because Lidstrom held a significant defensive edge.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 09:30 AM
  #366
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 9,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thom View Post
Well Scotty Bowman prefers Serge Savard and Brad Park instead of Larry Robinson?Neither won a norris and have had as long career.Maybe the coach likes to have physical defenceman you think Lidstrom is that type of player I think not
Are you saying Savard & Park were more physical than Larry Robinson?

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 10:02 AM
  #367
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 37,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eerie Hurdler View Post
Thanks for finding and posting these.

I think the content of these videos pretty clearly shows Lidstrom's ability to change the game defensively. Sort of a black hole who swallows up offense any time it comes near. Chara has a similar effect on opponents, but more as a result of his reach and his ability to just snuff skaters out physically, as opposed to Lidstrom's positioning and incredible athletic coordination.

On the other hand, the limited offensive style R71 is talking about is also evident, particularly in the second video. Lidstrom has a really high hockey IQ and rarely makes a bad pass, and that is demonstrated clearly by a variety of smart, subtle passes. He plays extremely well within the system, and you see that on nearly every single highlight. We also see that there's a well positioned teammate at the end of those passes, ready to receive the puck on the tape and transition to the next step. The plays are effective not just because of Lidstrom, but also because of a high level of team support and coordination. You can see it right there in the video... none of those plays end with a scrub fumbling the puck and turning it over, which would be a common sight on most teams. And as a result of that style, we really don't see Lidstrom making the creative skill plays which characterize the offensive games of not just Bourque, but also Potvin and Leetch and Zubov among others.

Now, there's an argument to be made that Lidstrom doesn't make those types of plays because he doesn't have to, end of story. Fair enough. But it still leaves an offensive gap between him and others, not unlike the players who were cogs in the Soviet machine.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 10:10 AM
  #368
Gobias Industries
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Gobias Industries's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Lidstrom led the league in offense more times than Bourque did, and adjusted stats during their long primes put him right on par or only with Bourque for production.

So if we're going with "Chara is very good" then we have to go with "Lidstrom is comparable/just barely behind Bourque" as far as offense is concerned.

And that argument pretty much ends any hope for Bourque to be better than Lidstrom, unless you want to push the "physical play is better than effective defense" angle, because Lidstrom held a significant defensive edge.
Well that would start with me saying adjusted stats are more meaningful than any other measure, I don't think I'll say that given that we all know it's flaws.

And you speak of them like hockey is a one-on-one competition, nowhere in your comparison do you include things as simple as quality of defensive partner for example, which I would say is definitely worthy of a mention if you're looking to come to solid conclusions about the two.

Gobias Industries is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 10:25 AM
  #369
pdd
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 5,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gobias Industries View Post
Well that would start with me saying adjusted stats are more meaningful than any other measure, I don't think I'll say that given that we all know it's flaws.

And you speak of them like hockey is a one-on-one competition, nowhere in your comparison do you include things as simple as quality of defensive partner for example, which I would say is definitely worthy of a mention if you're looking to come to solid conclusions about the two.
We've already discussed defensive partners, where R71 seemed to try and make the argument that Bourque was effectively playing with third-pairing partners while Lidstrom's partners were always top-level defensemen, and that Bourque playing with such talented forwards as Barry Pederson, Rick Middleton, Craig Janney, Jozef Stumpel, Adam Oates, Cam Neely, Joe Juneau, and Jason Allison had zero bearing on his offensive totals.

And adjusted stats are flawed. But combined with the fact that Lidstrom led all defensemen more often than Bourque did, and poted quite significant totals while playing a far more defensive game, shows that he was definitely an offensively capable defenseman. And if that's not enough, 1993-94 where Lidstrom actually outscored a NORRIS-WINNING Bourque at ES should make it clear.

pdd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 11:43 AM
  #370
tarheelhockey
Global Moderator
 
tarheelhockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Triangle
Country: United States
Posts: 37,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
And if that's not enough, 1993-94 where Lidstrom actually outscored a NORRIS-WINNING Bourque at ES should make it clear.
I don't have the ES numbers at hand (where do you get those, anyway?) but Lidstrom played 12 more games than Bourque that season. So unless it's a significant gap, playing up the "he outscored Bourque at ES" card is a bit deceptive.

tarheelhockey is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:02 PM
  #371
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
Never said he didn't have offensive skill.
Can't play the coulda, shoulda, woulda card here. Bourque could have played more like Coffey or Housley and increased his offense even more too.
Thing is though, I doubt very much that Lidstrom could have matched Bourque offensively without dropping his defensive game below that of Bourque's.

Exactly how much more offensive could ray have played really?

He led the NHL Dmen 11 times in shots per game during his playing career, including 6 of the top 10 seasons.

Put together Rays skills and that opportunity, not to mention some decent players he played with one would expect excellent offensive results.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...order_by=shots


Quote:
So when I tell you that Lidstrom has only outscored Chara at even strength by a mere 16 whole points in the 7 seasons since the lockout...
This sudden obsession with PP versus ES points, didn't see any comments on it with the chart that CzechyourMath presented.

Points are points, they don't throw out random guys on the PP, teams tend to put their best offensive players and decision makers out on the PP.

Just to note Nick was age 35-41 in the 7 seasons since the lockout, Chara was age 28-34 for what it is worth.

Hardyvan123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:11 PM
  #372
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by norrisnick View Post
You're really going to try and prove a point by comparing the even strength offensive production of defensemen when one is aged 28 to 35 and the other 35 to 42?
When the last 7 years are actually higher than Lidstrom's career average, yes.
Last 7 seasons = 25.9 ES/season
Career = 25.6 ES/season

Quote:
Originally Posted by eva unit zero View Post
Lidstrom led the league in offense more times than Bourque did, and adjusted stats during their long primes put him right on par or only with Bourque for production.
Context!
First off, why don't you go ahead and list the D-men that beat Boruque in scoring by season. Then name the ones that Lidstrom beat by season.
One list is very much NOT like the other
Lidstrom's highest league point finish was 17th. 26th is his next highest. Bourque has multiple top 10 finishes and even more top 20 finishes.

Second, Adjusted Stats are especially flawed and inflated for determining the value of points during the DPE.
Even so, Lidstrom is STILL no where close to being "on par" with Bourque



This is like the argument someone tried to pull that said that Lidstrom has finished with a greater share of points per season relative to the second leading scorer in the league than Bourque.
Of course forgetting to mention that Bourque's list consists of Gretzky, Lemieux, Yzerman, Bossy and <insert random teammate of Gretzky>
It was a joke!

Quote:
So if we're going with "Chara is very good" then we have to go with "Lidstrom is comparable/just barely behind Bourque" as far as offense is concerned.
No, we are not because Lidstrom isn't!

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:16 PM
  #373
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I don't have the ES numbers at hand (where do you get those, anyway?) but Lidstrom played 12 more games than Bourque that season. So unless it's a significant gap, playing up the "he outscored Bourque at ES" card is a bit deceptive.
Espn .com or NHL .com

And yeah I already showed the error of that one.
Bourque actually missed 12 games and was on pace for 106 points and 40 ES points that season.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:28 PM
  #374
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hardyvan123 View Post
Exactly how much more offensive could ray have played really?

He led the NHL Dmen 11 times in shots per game during his playing career, including 6 of the top 10 seasons.

Put together Rays skills and that opportunity, not to mention some decent players he played with one would expect excellent offensive results.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/play...order_by=shots
Did Bourque abandon defense to produce offense like Coffey or Housley? No, he did not!
If he did, you don't think he would have scored even more points? (That's a rhetorical question btw.)



Quote:
This sudden obsession with PP versus ES points, didn't see any comments on it with the chart that CzechyourMath presented.

Points are points, they don't throw out random guys on the PP, teams tend to put their best offensive players and decision makers out on the PP.
It's not a sudden obsession.
What's harder? Scoring when playing against an equal amount of opposing players while playing with any combination of players from lines 1-4 or scoring when you have more players on the ice than the opposition and you are playing predominantly with the best offensive players from your team?
(Again, that's a rhetorical question.)


Quote:
Just to note Nick was age 35-41 in the 7 seasons since the lockout, Chara was age 28-34 for what it is worth.
And again, Lidstrom's ES production is higher during the last 7 seasons than his career average.


Last edited by Rhiessan71: 12-01-2012 at 12:39 PM.
Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-01-2012, 12:32 PM
  #375
Hardyvan123
tweet@HardyintheWack
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,293
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by tarheelhockey View Post
I don't have the ES numbers at hand (where do you get those, anyway?) but Lidstrom played 12 more games than Bourque that season. So unless it's a significant gap, playing up the "he outscored Bourque at ES" card is a bit deceptive.
Bourque did outscore Nick by 35 points that year and that matter more than ES/PP.

Darn points are points aren't they?

Hardyvan123 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 03:25 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.