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.

Top 10 All-time Defensemen

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-05-2010, 02:51 AM
  #251
Axxellien
Registered User
 
Axxellien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Sherbrooke, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,456
vCash: 500
yawnin somemore

..Bob 2nd Goalie Goldham & Doug Diesel Mohns should have been inducted ages ago & i can most certainly make a strong case for all of the above

Axxellien is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 05:02 AM
  #252
pluppe
Registered User
 
pluppe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axxellien View Post
..Bob 2nd Goalie Goldham & Doug Diesel Mohns should have been inducted ages ago & i can most certainly make a strong case for all of the above
and as TDMM said, what does that have to do with the top 10 defencemen of all time list?

pluppe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 06:02 AM
  #253
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JackSlater View Post
Other than the possibility of Lidstrom over Blake, a year that he did finish as first team all star at least, there is no year that Lidstrom should have won the Norris that he didn't. Your edit had little to do with Lidstrom's main competition being Bourque's earlier competition except generally past their peaks. That said Lidstrom definitely could have made second team in either 96 or 97.
Not saying he should've won more Norrises or ASTs just saying he would've got more consideration and possibly votes if he was recognised for what he did earlier.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 11:52 AM
  #254
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,906
vCash: 72
Lidstrom has always been one of my favorite players, but some of these comparisons to Orr are making me not even want to get into this thread.

Anyways, I do not have time to read and respond to everything, but I will jump in on the end here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Not saying he should've won more Norrises or ASTs just saying he would've got more consideration and possibly votes if he was recognised for what he did earlier.
He was recognized early. This romanticizing of how Lidstrom was overlooked early is a bit misleading. Lidstrom was immediately noticed when he entered the league.

Lidstrom was not yet the perfect machine he would later become on defense early in his career. He made more mistakes and was not as good offensively. His passive "Bend, don't break" style was less effective before pads became much larger and goaltending styles changed. Konstantinov on the other hand always was a bit more solid defensively during that first score of years before the game evolved.

I have been in this argument countless times, and watched him evolve over the years, and nobody is ever going to convince me he was as good in his first 5 years as he became in the late 90's.

In his first season, 80 games, 60 points, he was ranked 8th among all defensemen in voting and was runner up for the Calder to Pavel Bure(Whom many argued he should have beaten). But who was beating him in voted that he should have been considered over in voting?

Leetch and Bourque hit #1 and #2. Housley was #3 and granted, he was sad defensively, but he lead his team in scoring that year by over 20 points, and outscored a not so perfect defensively Lidstrom by 26 points. Stevens scored 59 points in 11 less games than lidstrom, and while Stevens was not yet the defensive beast he would later become, he was still more of a force in that department. Macinnis also was a great two way player and scored 77 points. Murphy less so, but still very good and scored 77 points and Chelios was in his prime. A beast defensively with near the same amount of points.

In his second year, Lidstrom regressed a bit.

In 93-94, Lidstrom scored 56 points and was improving defensively and got his first Norris vote. But again, who should he be getting votes over? Top 3 for the norris were Bourque, Stevens and Macinnis, all who deserved to be there. Following them were Zubov, Leetch and Chelios. Zubov is the weakest of the 3, but he outscored Lidstrom by 33 points.

In 94-95, Lidstrom did not have a noteworthy regular season.

In 95-96, the top 3 were solid(Chelios, Bourque, Leetch), and he had no case to be above them although he had a great year and was ever improving. The 4th spot was split between Lidstrom and 2 of his teammates. Again, Konstantinov was a beast and this argument will go on forever, but I think he was the better Dman that year(I made a post once detailing how Konstantinov's points were severely limited by his lack of PP time due to Coffey/Lidstrom). You can make a case for Lidstrom over Coffey I suppose.

In 96-97, yes I agree you can make a case for Lidstrom over a few of those who were voted in above him as Lidstrom was coming into his own defensively. But those players had compelling cases that year as well. At this point, the game was evolving in a way that perfectly complimented Lidstrom's game.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 12:08 PM
  #255
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 35,800
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axxellien View Post
..Not a word or mention of Fern Flaman, Leo Boivin, Bob Goldham, Marcel Pronovost. Doug Mohns, Allan Stanley...Bill Quackenbush..
Because this isn't a Top 100 All-time Defensemen thread.

Epsilon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 12:56 PM
  #256
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Shadows View Post
Lidstrom has always been one of my favorite players, but some of these comparisons to Orr are making me not even want to get into this thread.

Anyways, I do not have time to read and respond to everything, but I will jump in on the end here.



He was recognized early. This romanticizing of how Lidstrom was overlooked early is a bit misleading. Lidstrom was immediately noticed when he entered the league.

Lidstrom was not yet the perfect machine he would later become on defense early in his career. He made more mistakes and was not as good offensively. His passive "Bend, don't break" style was less effective before pads became much larger and goaltending styles changed. Konstantinov on the other hand always was a bit more solid defensively during that first score of years before the game evolved.

I have been in this argument countless times, and watched him evolve over the years, and nobody is ever going to convince me he was as good in his first 5 years as he became in the late 90's.

In his first season, 80 games, 60 points, he was ranked 8th among all defensemen in voting and was runner up for the Calder to Pavel Bure(Whom many argued he should have beaten). But who was beating him in voted that he should have been considered over in voting?

Leetch and Bourque hit #1 and #2. Housley was #3 and granted, he was sad defensively, but he lead his team in scoring that year by over 20 points, and outscored a not so perfect defensively Lidstrom by 26 points. Stevens scored 59 points in 11 less games than lidstrom, and while Stevens was not yet the defensive beast he would later become, he was still more of a force in that department. Macinnis also was a great two way player and scored 77 points. Murphy less so, but still very good and scored 77 points and Chelios was in his prime. A beast defensively with near the same amount of points.

In his second year, Lidstrom regressed a bit.

In 93-94, Lidstrom scored 56 points and was improving defensively and got his first Norris vote. But again, who should he be getting votes over? Top 3 for the norris were Bourque, Stevens and Macinnis, all who deserved to be there. Following them were Zubov, Leetch and Chelios. Zubov is the weakest of the 3, but he outscored Lidstrom by 33 points.

In 94-95, Lidstrom did not have a noteworthy regular season.

In 95-96, the top 3 were solid(Chelios, Bourque, Leetch), and he had no case to be above them although he had a great year and was ever improving. The 4th spot was split between Lidstrom and 2 of his teammates. Again, Konstantinov was a beast and this argument will go on forever, but I think he was the better Dman that year(I made a post once detailing how Konstantinov's points were severely limited by his lack of PP time due to Coffey/Lidstrom). You can make a case for Lidstrom over Coffey I suppose.

In 96-97, yes I agree you can make a case for Lidstrom over a few of those who were voted in above him as Lidstrom was coming into his own defensively. But those players had compelling cases that year as well. At this point, the game was evolving in a way that perfectly complimented Lidstrom's game.
Yes, I agree that Konstantinov was better defensively and Coffey offensively but who of them were better all-around? Lidström.

You can make a case for Lidström from the '96 season.

Only arguement from me is that Leetch wasn't solid in the top 3 in '96. Sure he produced very well offensively but his defensive skills were lacking.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 01:06 PM
  #257
Fredrik_71
Registered User
 
Fredrik_71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,011
vCash: 500
It often takes time for a swedish player to adjust to the NHL. Our system at home with bigger rinks and a more static less physical game produces players that are solid but needs acclimatization. There are lots of examples of this. I think Lids is a prime example of a player that needed this time to find his style in the NHL.

The finns on the other hand as a group are much more NHL ready (but are in a slump on a national level).

/Cheers

Fredrik_71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 01:11 PM
  #258
kmad
Riot Survivor
 
kmad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 31,970
vCash: 500
A bit late to the party, but here's my list anyways:

1. Bobby Orr
2. Doug Harvey
3. Eddie Shore
4. Raymond Bourque
5. Nicklas Lidstrom
6. Denis Potvin
7. Red Kelly
8. Larry Robinson
9. Brad Park
10a. Chris Chelios
10b. Viacheslav Fetisov

kmad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 01:16 PM
  #259
Rhiessan71
Just a Fool
 
Rhiessan71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Guelph, Ont
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,981
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jkrx View Post
Yes, I agree that Konstantinov was better defensively and Coffey offensively but who of them were better all-around? Lidström.

You can make a case for Lidström from the '96 season.

Only arguement from me is that Leetch wasn't solid in the top 3 in '96. Sure he produced very well offensively but his defensive skills were lacking.
You're trying to give the impression that Leetch was poor defensively and that quite simply was not the case.
His offensive abilities were obviously greater than his defensive but he was no slouch either, he was still above average.
He was also more physical than he gets credit for, even had a penchant for delivering a big hit from time to time.
We're not talking about a Coffey here and especially not a Housley.

People can scream bias and crap all they want imo but the reality is imo that Lidstrom got recognized and rewarded pretty close to what he deserved.
Trying to make his competition look worse than they were makes you no better than the people that do the same for Lidstrom.

Rhiessan71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-05-2010, 06:04 PM
  #260
jkrx
Registered User
 
jkrx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,203
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rhiessan71 View Post
You're trying to give the impression that Leetch was poor defensively and that quite simply was not the case.
His offensive abilities were obviously greater than his defensive but he was no slouch either, he was still above average.
He was also more physical than he gets credit for, even had a penchant for delivering a big hit from time to time.
We're not talking about a Coffey here and especially not a Housley.

People can scream bias and crap all they want imo but the reality is imo that Lidstrom got recognized and rewarded pretty close to what he deserved.
Trying to make his competition look worse than they were makes you no better than the people that do the same for Lidstrom.
All I said is that he wasn't a solid top 3. Not that he was worthless. I know he could play physically and throw a big hit. In '96 Leetch werent far above average defensively.

jkrx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2010, 06:06 AM
  #261
lazerbullet
Registered User
 
lazerbullet's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Europe
Posts: 684
vCash: 500
I don't want to start a new thread. So here we go.

After seeing such a strong start from Lidström... I wonder how would some extra hardware impact his ranking in all-time list.
Another Norris?
Maybe another Cup?
Another Conn Smythe?
All three?

Most of the people slot Lidström between Bourque and Potvin. There are people, who consider Potvin to be better. In my eyes another strong season (even without any hardware) should put Lidström easily ahead of Potvin. To pass Bourque is bit trickier. But if he wins them all? Is it enough? I have feeling... yes!

lazerbullet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-22-2010, 08:36 PM
  #262
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,422
vCash: 500
king clancy and earl siebert always get shafted in these lists, thier credentials would suggest they are just as good as chelios.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2010, 06:47 AM
  #263
overg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Indianapolis, IN
Posts: 859
vCash: 500
Any of those things is probably going to get him the majority of votes over Potvin, to the extent he doesn't already have them. As for Bourque, here's how I would predict things would wash out:

A Hart would bump him over Bourque for most.

Another Conn Smythe would do it for some, and might get him neck and neck with Bourque.

Another Norris would pick him up some more support, but he'd still be behind Bourque for the majority.

Another Cup would pick him up a smattering of votes.

A Lady Byng probably wouldn't change anything.

A combination Norris and Conn Smythe and he probably goes slightly ahead of Bourque.


Once again, just predicting what would happen to his ranking around here. It's obviously highly unlikely he wins a Hart, and I wouldn't dream of calling a Stanley Cup winner or Conn Smythe recipient in November. So if I had to guess based on where we stand today, I'd say Nik might pull in one more Norris and firmly establish himself between Bourque and Potvin on most lists. So I don't expect a lot of opinions to change.

The one other thing that could move him would be to be in Norris contention for another few years.

overg 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 08:28 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.