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
07-21-2009, 02:43 PM
  #76
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Potvin basically had 6 years where he could be considered the best defenseman in the league (top 3 in Norris voting): 75, 76, 77, 78, 79 and 81.

The "competition" argument does not work for Potvin, like it would for Bourque or Chelios, because Potvin was no longer a legitimate threat for the Norris once those guys came around in the 80s. It wasn't just the Hall of Famers beating him out in the 80s, it was Wilson, Hartsburg, Carlysle, Engblom, Becke, Howe, Marsh, Lowe, Larson, Babych, Marois, Green, Samuelsson, Ramsey, Patrick, McCrimmon -- you name it, beating Potvin in Norris voting.
Errr. Potvin's competition when he was winning Norris trophies was still a world better than Pronger Niedermayer.
Aside from his runner up to Orr.

Larry Robinson, Serge Savard, Borje Salming, Brad Park, Guy Lapointe........And yes, Potvin was still among the best in the world in the 80's. He was merely missing time and by default, losing votes.

Quote:
Lidstrom has been in the argument for top defenseman in the NHL for 11 seasons now - and unlike Potvin, who missed large chunks of seasons due to injury, Lidstrom has been a consummate iron-man, unfortunately missing an entire season in his prime due to the lockout. Defensemen are not much good to their teams when they are not playing. Lidstrom is still a Norris contender after 17 seasons -- when Potvin pretty much dropped out of it after only 8 seasons.

Potvin was a better scorer while Lidstrom was a better passer.
Potvin played more physical, but Lidstrom losses nothing on him defensively because of his positioning.

Ultimately, Potvin's best seasons were not that much better than Lidstrom's but Lidstrom has been an elite defender for TWICE as long as Potvin.

A Conn Smythe is just the cherry on top.
I would argue that Potvin's best 5 years easily beats out Lidstrom's best 5 years, and even gives Bourque's best 5 a run for their money.

I rate Lidstrom higher, but just barely, specifically because that while his longevity gives him the win, Potvin's peak was just that much damn better.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 03:19 PM
  #77
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
Errr. Potvin's competition when he was winning Norris trophies was still a world better than Pronger Niedermayer.
Aside from his runner up to Orr.

Larry Robinson, Serge Savard, Borje Salming, Brad Park, Guy Lapointe........And yes, Potvin was still among the best in the world in the 80's. He was merely missing time and by default, losing votes.
Merely? One of the most important attributes for a defenseman is to be healthy - Potvin comes way short of Lidstrom there, and rightfully loses those votes. Defensemen are extremely valuable in games, even when they are not putting up points. Potvin was not even close to amongst the best in the world in the 80s, because he could not remain healthy... and he certainly was not putting up the points he once did. Once the 80s came around, Potvin was losing out to guys who can't hold a candle to the "terrible" competition many of you feel Lidstrom has faced over the past decade.

Quote:
I would argue that Potvin's best 5 years easily beats out Lidstrom's best 5 years, and even gives Bourque's best 5 a run for their money.

I rate Lidstrom higher, but just barely, specifically because that while his longevity gives him the win, Potvin's peak was just that much damn better.
Lidstrom's best seasons in lower-scoring years factor out to 90+ points in the 70s and 100+ pts in the 80s.

Lidstrom has placed 4, 4, 5, 6 and 9th in assists amongst all players in the league which easily beats out Potvin placing 5, 5, 6, and 10th in a watered-down league.

Factor in the incredible advantage Lidstrom has in durability and longevity and Lidstrom over Potvin is not even a head-scratcher.

One or two outstanding years and 4 great years does not compete with 11 (and counting) great years.


Last edited by RabbinsDuck: 07-21-2009 at 03:50 PM.
RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 05:06 PM
  #78
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Merely? One of the most important attributes for a defenseman is to be healthy - Potvin comes way short of Lidstrom there, and rightfully loses those votes. Defensemen are extremely valuable in games, even when they are not putting up points. Potvin was not even close to amongst the best in the world in the 80s, because he could not remain healthy... and he certainly was not putting up the points he once did. Once the 80s came around, Potvin was losing out to guys who can't hold a candle to the "terrible" competition many of you feel Lidstrom has faced over the past decade.


Lidstrom's best seasons in lower-scoring years factor out to 90+ points in the 70s and 100+ pts in the 80s.

Lidstrom has placed 4, 4, 5, 6 and 9th in assists amongst all players in the league which easily beats out Potvin placing 5, 5, 6, and 10th in a watered-down league.

Factor in the incredible advantage Lidstrom has in durability and longevity and Lidstrom over Potvin is not even a head-scratcher.

One or two outstanding years and 4 great years does not compete with 11 (and counting) great years.
Not to mention that lidstrom was the better shutdown defencemen. His 73 point season in 2000 would equal 95 points in the 70s. His 80 point season in 2006 is easily a 95-100 point season in the 80s.

Lidstrom's best season consists of him winning the norris and conn smythe in the same season, I don't recall potvin ever doing this.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 07:08 PM
  #79
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
Errr. Potvin's competition when he was winning Norris trophies was still a world better than Pronger Niedermayer.
Aside from his runner up to Orr.

Larry Robinson, Serge Savard, Borje Salming, Brad Park, Guy Lapointe........And yes, Potvin was still among the best in the world in the 80's. He was merely missing time and by default, losing votes.



I would argue that Potvin's best 5 years easily beats out Lidstrom's best 5 years, and even gives Bourque's best 5 a run for their money.

I rate Lidstrom higher, but just barely, specifically because that while his longevity gives him the win, Potvin's peak was just that much damn better
.
This is the crux of so many disagreements here. How much do you count longevity, how much do you count peak?

You rate Lidstrom higher because of his longevity. I would still rate Potvin higher because I agree that his best years were better than Lidstrom's, he was a better player in those years than Lidstrom was in his best. To me, that makes Potvin the better player.

So we both saw the same thing, agree on what we saw, yet still rank the players differently.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 07:30 PM
  #80
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
This is the crux of so many disagreements here. How much do you count longevity, how much do you count peak?

You rate Lidstrom higher because of his longevity. I would still rate Potvin higher because I agree that his best years were better than Lidstrom's, he was a better player in those years than Lidstrom was in his best. To me, that makes Potvin the better player.

So we both saw the same thing, agree on what we saw, yet still rank the players differently.
I personally find that as ridiculous as rating Lindros higher than Sakic.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 07:44 PM
  #81
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Connecticut
Country: United States
Posts: 8,377
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I personally find that as ridiculous as rating Lindros higher than Sakic.
I don't think either way of looking at it is ridiculous.

Do you rank Lidstrom higher than Bobby Orr? You know Orr only played 9 partially full seasons.

Dennis Bonvie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 07:48 PM
  #82
NHLHammerbound*
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 357
vCash: 500
I tend to look at players' peaks too, when assessing them. I'm not NEARLY old enough to have seen Shore live, & have only vague recollections of Harvey. But I watched Orr live, many many times, even as a Junior. Ditto Potvin. The latter was the second Best D-man I ever saw play...Bourque was a close 3rd...


Last edited by NHLHammerbound*: 07-21-2009 at 07:54 PM.
NHLHammerbound* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 07:58 PM
  #83
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
I personally find that as ridiculous as rating Lindros higher than Sakic.
Thats where the judgement call comes in. At what point does the peak value outweigh the many good years is different for everyone.

A player came in and scored 85G 130A as a defender and won the Norris, Hart, Pearson, etc dominating the game more than Orr. And had a Conn Smythe winning cup win with 15G 30A. If he broke his legs during the summer and never played again I'd still rank him as one of the greatest of all time after just 1 season.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 08:47 PM
  #84
Stonefly
Registered User
 
Stonefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
Thats where the judgement call comes in. At what point does the peak value outweigh the many good years is different for everyone.

A player came in and scored 85G 130A as a defender and won the Norris, Hart, Pearson, etc dominating the game more than Orr. And had a Conn Smythe winning cup win with 15G 30A. If he broke his legs during the summer and never played again I'd still rank him as one of the greatest of all time after just 1 season.
As would I, probably even the best if my eyes told me so. Someone that dominant would clearly be head and shoulders above everyone else. As plain as day to see. Wouldn't matter that he only played one season because it would have been obvious that that was the finest player who had ever played the game.
It's funny, what you have described having to happen now is pretty much what Orr did with the defenceman role back then. Granted it took him until his 4th season.

Stonefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 08:52 PM
  #85
Stonefly
Registered User
 
Stonefly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,032
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
This is the crux of so many disagreements here. How much do you count longevity, how much do you count peak?

You rate Lidstrom higher because of his longevity. I would still rate Potvin higher because I agree that his best years were better than Lidstrom's, he was a better player in those years than Lidstrom was in his best. To me, that makes Potvin the better player.

So we both saw the same thing, agree on what we saw, yet still rank the players differently.
I agree with you on how ranking a player should be. Does it really matter that a player had 5 seasons of additional play but at a fraction of what they were capable in their prime? That only matters when ranking careers, not players.

Stonefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-21-2009, 11:01 PM
  #86
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Orr is different - and so is Lemieux, but I would never rank either of them higher than Gretzky or Howe, personally.

Someone like Potvin (or Bure, Lindros, Mogilny, Selanne, Fedorov, etc.) never approached even close to such heights.

You cannot give much weight to extra mediocore seasons, but if a player is still at the top of the league at his position - for years and years over someone who might have a couple seasons of peak play higher - please. To ignore that over a couple years is folly, if you are trying to be objective.

The difference between Potvin's best season and Lidstrom's is what, 10%? That is not enough to ignore twice as many Norrises, a Conn Smythe and twice as many years as a dominant player in the league.

Quote:
A player came in and scored 85G 130A as a defender and won the Norris, Hart, Pearson, etc dominating the game more than Orr. And had a Conn Smythe winning cup win with 15G 30A. If he broke his legs during the summer and never played again I'd still rank him as one of the greatest of all time after just 1 season.
Not going to cut it. That player is ultimately a disappointment and woefully outmatched by someone who leads his peers for a decade and plays a large role in bringing multiple Cups to his team - it's not even close. As a GM, which player would you want?

Konstantinov is one of my favorite players, and I personally think he was "better" than Stevens.... but I would never "rank" him higher than Stevens. Not even close. He simply never brought as much value, despite a couple unbelievable seasons.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 12:18 AM
  #87
Dark Shadows
Registered User
 
Dark Shadows's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Canada
Country: Japan
Posts: 7,970
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Merely? One of the most important attributes for a defenseman is to be healthy - Potvin comes way short of Lidstrom there, and rightfully loses those votes. Defensemen are extremely valuable in games, even when they are not putting up points. Potvin was not even close to amongst the best in the world in the 80s, because he could not remain healthy... and he certainly was not putting up the points he once did. Once the 80s came around, Potvin was losing out to guys who can't hold a candle to the "terrible" competition many of you feel Lidstrom has faced over the past decade.
Of course its an important attribute for a defenseman to stay healthy, which is exactly why lidstrom rates slightly higher in my book.

However, pound for pound, minute per minute on the ice, Potvin was a more valuable player as far as I am concerned. His best 5 years are much better than Lidstrom's best 5 and i would take him for those 69-73 game season over Lidstrom for 82 much of the time.

Potvin losing out to guys who can't hold a candle to Lidstrom's competition? Ill assume you are talking about Wilson and Carlyle. Wilson is better than Rob Blake, and is running very very close with Pronger/Niedermayer. Carlyle was nothing special careerwise, but for one season, was stellar(And him winning over Potvin was highway robbery). Larry Robinson was still a top Norris candidate during this period, as was a younger Ray Bourque and Paul Coffey, not to mention Rod Langway.

Potvin's injuries during this time kept him out of enough games to damage his norris voting, but on a per game basis, was still more valuable than Lidstrom.

Quote:
Lidstrom's best seasons in lower-scoring years factor out to 90+ points in the 70s and 100+ pts in the 80s.

Lidstrom has placed 4, 4, 5, 6 and 9th in assists amongst all players in the league which easily beats out Potvin placing 5, 5, 6, and 10th in a watered-down league.

Factor in the incredible advantage Lidstrom has in durability and longevity and Lidstrom over Potvin is not even a head-scratcher.
Lidstrom's very style would prohibit him from scoring 100 point seasons. Unless he changed his game and started gambling up front instead of playing his safe stay at home passive offensive game, then his point totals would not change that much. You can list Lidstrom's assist finishes all you want. Potvin was top 5 and top 7 in points scoring and was also better on a per game basis.

And several of Potvin's playoff runs were better than Lidstrom's smythe year, no question in my eyes.
Quote:
One or two outstanding years and 4 great years does not compete with 11 (and counting) great years.
Underselling Potvin in the worst way. Potvin had 5, yes 5 years that I would put up against Lidstrom best year, and then several more that were in the same area.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ushvinder View Post
Not to mention that lidstrom was the better shutdown defencemen. His 73 point season in 2000 would equal 95 points in the 70s. His 80 point season in 2006 is easily a 95-100 point season in the 80s.

Lidstrom's best season consists of him winning the norris and conn smythe in the same season, I don't recall potvin ever doing this.
Lidstrom's edge defensively over Potvin is very small. Potvin was a phenomenal defensive defenseman, and put the fear of god into opponents more than Scott Stevens because when he was on the ice, you knew Denis Potvin hates you and wants to hit you at every chance.

Besides which, Lidstrom's defensive style would not have worked as well in the 70's/80's anyways for reasons I have pointed out more than once.

http://hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=1...1&postcount=60

In any case, Lidstrom just barely edges out Potvin in my book.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dennis Bonvie View Post
This is the crux of so many disagreements here. How much do you count longevity, how much do you count peak?

You rate Lidstrom higher because of his longevity. I would still rate Potvin higher because I agree that his best years were better than Lidstrom's, he was a better player in those years than Lidstrom was in his best. To me, that makes Potvin the better player.

So we both saw the same thing, agree on what we saw, yet still rank the players differently.
Some people just look at it like that, peak/Prime only. Its different with everyone. If we are judging by peak/prime or best 5 years, then Potvin wins by no small margin.


Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Orr is different - and so is Lemieux, but I would never rank either of them higher than Gretzky or Howe, personally.

Someone like Potvin (or Bure, Lindros, Mogilny, Selanne, Fedorov, etc.) never approached even close to such heights.
errrr, why are you mentioning Potvin with guys that are not even top 100 all time?(Except Fedorov, who just sneaks in). Potvin is a lock for top 20 all time.

Quote:
You cannot give much weight to extra mediocore seasons, but if a player is still at the top of the league at his position - for years and years over someone who might have a couple seasons of peak play higher - please. To ignore that over a couple years is folly, if you are trying to be objective.
Potvin, even in years where he missed 20 games was still on a per game basis more valuable than just about anyone in the league.

In the same manner that Lemieux did not get Hart votes in 1989-90. He missed 21 games and that killed his Hart chances. But he was still the best player in the league for 59 games(4th overall in scoring and 1st overall in PPG), and would have likely been a top hart candidate. No, he did not get any votes, but on a per game basis, he was still more valuable than Messier.

Quote:
The difference between Potvin's best season and Lidstrom's is what, 10%? That is not enough to ignore twice as many Norrises, a Conn Smythe and twice as many years as a dominant player in the league.
Its certainly more than 10%. Potvin has 5 seasons better than Lidstrom's best.


Quote:
Not going to cut it. That player is ultimately a disappointment and woefully outmatched by someone who leads his peers for a decade and plays a large role in bringing multiple Cups to his team - it's not even close. As a GM, which player would you want?
Potvin was more valuable than any Isles player on that Dynasty.

Quote:
Konstantinov is one of my favorite players, and I personally think he was "better" than Stevens.... but I would never "rank" him higher than Stevens. Not even close. He simply never brought as much value, despite a couple unbelievable seasons.
That is not even remotely a close comparison.

Dark Shadows is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 04:09 AM
  #88
Fredrik_71
Registered User
 
Fredrik_71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
Errr. Potvin's competition when he was winning Norris trophies was still a world better than Pronger Niedermayer.
Aside from his runner up to Orr.

Larry Robinson, Serge Savard, Borje Salming, Brad Park, Guy Lapointe........
I have problems with this kind of statement. If you put a guy from one age and drop him into another I do think he would have big problems adjusting. The game changes and so do the competition. Those guys are great but I don not think the skill level overall is that must different.

//Cheers

Fredrik_71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 04:22 AM
  #89
Fredrik_71
Registered User
 
Fredrik_71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,021
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Lidstrom has placed 4, 4, 5, 6 and 9th in assists amongst all players in the league which easily beats out Potvin placing 5, 5, 6, and 10th in a watered-down league.
Thanks for the insight. Hadn't looked that comparison up myself.

//Cheers

Fredrik_71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 10:52 AM
  #91
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jekyll View Post
Of course its an important attribute for a defenseman to stay healthy, which is exactly why lidstrom rates slightly higher in my book.

However, pound for pound, minute per minute on the ice, Potvin was a more valuable player as far as I am concerned. His best 5 years are much better than Lidstrom's best 5 and i would take him for those 69-73 game season over Lidstrom for 82 much of the time.
Lidstrom was better defensively and puts up a heck of a lot more points than Potvin did in the 80s -- add on the fact Potvin was often injured for more than 10% of the season and I see no reason asides from your preference for hitting and physical play. Physical play is nice, but it is not any more effective in keeping pucks out of the net than Lidstrom being in the perfect place at the perfect time and essentially serving as a black hole in the defensive end.

Quote:
Potvin losing out to guys who can't hold a candle to Lidstrom's competition? Ill assume you are talking about Wilson and Carlyle. Wilson is better than Rob Blake, and is running very very close with Pronger/Niedermayer. Carlyle was nothing special careerwise, but for one season, was stellar(And him winning over Potvin was highway robbery). Larry Robinson was still a top Norris candidate during this period, as was a younger Ray Bourque and Paul Coffey, not to mention Rod Langway.
Wilson, Hartsburg, Carlysle, Engblom, Becke, Howe, Marsh, Lowe, Larson, Babych, Marois, Green, Samuelsson, Ramsey, Patrick, McCrimmon were all beating Potvin in Norris votes in the 80s -- are all of them better than Lidstrom's competition as well?

Quote:
Potvin's injuries during this time kept him out of enough games to damage his norris voting, but on a per game basis, was still more valuable than Lidstrom.
Potvin's injuries kept him from contributing squat to his team while he was injured and largely contributed to an early retirement. That's a liability; though sure -- it helped him produce more on a per game basis. Though I bet if I adjust for era Lidstrom on a point per game basis is very comparable to Potvin.

Quote:
Lidstrom's very style would prohibit him from scoring 100 point seasons. Unless he changed his game and started gambling up front instead of playing his safe stay at home passive offensive game, then his point totals would not change that much. You can list Lidstrom's assist finishes all you want. Potvin was top 5 and top 7 in points scoring and was also better on a per game basis.
Hogwash. Lidstrom's style would prevent him from scoring 35+ goals, but increased overall scoring makes 55 assists in the clutch and grab period into 75 assists in the 80s. 60 assists post-lockout is well over 80 in the 80s. Lidstrom would be scoring 90+ points in the 70s and 100+ points in the 80s.

Lidstrom outperformed Potvin in assists in a much deeper league (and finished as high as 17th overall) than the league Potvin was in during the 70s. Potvin jumped up more often to score more goals, but Lidstrom makes up for that with better defense.

Quote:
And several of Potvin's playoff runs were better than Lidstrom's smythe year, no question in my eyes.
There is no doubt in my mind Potvin could easily have a couple Conn Smythes to his name. But Lidstrom could have more than his one, as well.

Over his career Potvin had 164 points in 185 games. .89 PPG
Lidstrom has had 165 points in 235 games. .70 PPG

It does not take much wizardry to realize Lidstrom's numbers and PPG would look a heck of a lot better in the 70s and 80s.

Scoring averaged 7.34 GPG from 1975 to 1988 (when Potvin was in the playoffs)
Scoring averaged 5.85 GPG from 1992 to 2009 (when Lidstrom was in the playoffs)

Normalizing that gives Lidstrom 207 pts in 235 games or .88 PPG --> virtually identical to Potvin.

If I wasn't lazy, and actually factored in that the majority of Potvin's playoff games took place in the higher scoring 80s, and the majority of Lidstrom's playoff games came in the much lower scoring dead puck era and post-lockout (as opposed to the early 90s) -- Lidstrom would easily get the edge in the playoffs.

Quote:
Underselling Potvin in the worst way. Potvin had 5, yes 5 years that I would put up against Lidstrom best year, and then several more that were in the same area.

Lidstrom's edge defensively over Potvin is very small. Potvin was a phenomenal defensive defenseman, and put the fear of god into opponents more than Scott Stevens because when he was on the ice, you knew Denis Potvin hates you and wants to hit you at every chance.
I don't buy it. You admit Lidstrom was better defensively, and I have shown Potvin barely outproduced Lidstrom offensively in their best years.

Your assertion of 5 years has nothing to back it up but your own waxing nostalgic eyes.

Lidstrom's 73 points in 2000 was good for 93 pts the year Potvin scored 101. His 80 pts in 2006 is good for 90 pts in 1979.

I'll give you 3 years (76, 78 and 79) where Potvin offensively outproduced Lidstrom's best, but the margin is barely 10%. That does not blow me away -- and Lidstrom has at least 3-4 seasons better than Potvin's 4th best.

Quote:
Besides which, Lidstrom's defensive style would not have worked as well in the 70's/80's anyways for reasons I have pointed out more than once.
Because non-physical defensemen in the 70s were utterly ineffective? Like Salming?
I had no idea forwards were so much larger and faster back then than they are today.

Quote:
In any case, Lidstrom just barely edges out Potvin in my book.
It's a lot more than "barely".
Potvin may have 2-3 years slightly better than Lidstrom's best, but then he follows it up with only 3 more seasons anywhere in the ballpark of Lidstrom's consistent excellence, and then Lidstrom tacks on a good 5+ years of Norris caliber years on top of it, which Potvin cannot compare to.

Quote:
Some people just look at it like that, peak/Prime only. Its different with everyone. If we are judging by peak/prime or best 5 years, then Potvin wins by no small margin.
Lidstrom's peak/prime is literally twice as long as Potvin's.

Quote:
errrr, why are you mentioning Potvin with guys that are not even top 100 all time?(Except Fedorov, who just sneaks in). Potvin is a lock for top 20 all time.
Because all those guys had incredibly high peaks -- why are they not in the top 100 if that is what is most important? I would guess someone like Potvin distinguishes himself with many more years of sustained excellence - just as Lidstrom distinguishes himself from Potvin.

Quote:
Potvin, even in years where he missed 20 games was still on a per game basis more valuable than just about anyone in the league.

In the same manner that Lemieux did not get Hart votes in 1989-90. He missed 21 games and that killed his Hart chances. But he was still the best player in the league for 59 games(4th overall in scoring and 1st overall in PPG), and would have likely been a top hart candidate. No, he did not get any votes, but on a per game basis, he was still more valuable than Messier.
And I do not award any bonus points for missed games to injury.

In 1984 Gretzky scored 100 pts in only 34 games. Unfortunately for him he ended up playing most of those remaining games and only ended up scoring 205 pts -- if he was lucky enough to get injured at that time, people like you would never let us hear the end of how "Gretzky was on pace to score 272 points in 1984, if it weren't for his injury".


Last edited by RabbinsDuck: 07-22-2009 at 11:50 AM.
RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 11:12 AM
  #92
Howe Elbows 9
Registered User
 
Howe Elbows 9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Gävle, Sweden
Posts: 2,576
vCash: 476
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremeHockeyFan View Post
Doesn't the competition argument work against Lidstrom very effectively, as well? Lidstrom wasn't exactly reeling in Norris's when he had actual competition during his first 9 seasons. While everyone likes to rank Lidstrom ahead of the likes of Chelios and Leetch, both of those guys beat Lidstrom twice in the 90s. Sure, Lidstrom looks great reeling in the hardware now, but where was he when his competition wasn't guys like Pronger and Neidermayer? In looking at the years Potvin did win his Norris's, he was beating the likes of Park, Salming and Robinson to do so. I am not trying to knock Lidstrom, but you can easily play devil's advocate and twist this 'competition' argument just as easily against him. Because when Lidstrom was going against actual competition, not a single Norris.

Ultimately, I think Potvin's best seasons, and the competition he was against, was that much better. If you want to do an interesting comparison, try this one on for size. Put Lidstrom starting in the league in 1973 when Potvin did, where during his career Lidstrom is competing for Norris's against guys like Robinson, Park, Langway, Bourque, MacInnis and Coffey. I'm not sure he sniffs Potvin's three Norris's, I'm not so sure he notches more than one. He certainly didn't fare too well his first 9 seasons where he was competing with Leetch, Chelios, Coffey and Bourque and didn't win one. Potvin won three against Hall of Famers, Lidstrom won a load of them after all the Hall of Famers were done for or had retired.
Let's be fair. Just because some of the best defensemen ever happened to be at the end of their careers, it doesn't mean their performances weren't still at an elite level. In 1999 MacInnis was far from finished. In 2001 Bourque got to finish not only with a Cup, but also with a great year after four somewhat troubled seasons. In 2002 Chelios, playing alongside Lidström, was still elite defensively.

In 1998 Nicklas missed the Norris by 9% of the votes, and two years later by 41% - and in 2000 it was to the first defensemen to win the Hart in a very long time. So it's not like Nicklas was an anonymous player until he first won the Norris.

The thing is, Nicklas has been playing his game pretty much since his rookie season. The basis is a defensively sound game, and that just doesn't raise as much attention as someone who you have to be apprehensive with every time you step on the ice for fear of serious bodily harm.

In the 70s, serious grit and a physical edge was pretty much required of any skater. Salming is unequaled among swedes in that aspect (although if you twist my arm, I might mention another swede who played much later who fits that definition pretty well).

Park is a great example of trophies not telling the entire story. Just like Lidström's Norris seasons means that we should keep quiet about his less favored seasons.

Even so, a lot people (including me) rank Lidström and Potvin fairly close to each other.

I understand that no part of your post was meant to knock Lidström, and that you just wanted other arguments brought into the discussion.

Howe Elbows 9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 11:31 AM
  #93
lextune
I'm too old for this
 
lextune's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Massachusetts
Country: United States
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
1. Bobby Orr
2. Eddie Shore
3. Doug Harvey
4. Raymond Bourque
5. Nicklas Lidstrom
6. Denis Potvin
7. Red Kelly
8. Viacheslav Fetisov
9. Larry Robinson
10. Chris Chelios

lextune is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 11:31 AM
  #94
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremeHockeyFan View Post
I mean no disrespect, but your homer goggles are a little ridiculous, to be dead honest. I am not a Red Wing or Islander fan, so I will endeavor to address my response objectively. Regarding your above statement, do you really think he had just six good seasons and was done for in '81 because of something idiotic like the PHWA's Norris voting? Between 80 and 83, he Captained the Islanders to 4 consecutive Cups, scored 244 points in 234 regular season games and 85 points in 78 playoff games. Do you think he retired the all-time leading scoring defenseman in NHL history -- the first to ever reach 1,000 points -- and only had 6 solid seasons? Seriously?
Potvin has placed 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10 in Norris voting -- 6 great seasons with a couple more good seasons.
Lidstrom has placed 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 8

Eliminating the redundancy and it becomes:
Potvin = 4, 10
Lidstrom = 1, 1, 1, 2, 6, 6, 6, 8

Yes, Lidstrom has a hell of a lot more great, as well as good, seasons than Potvin.

Quote:
Doesn't the competition argument work against Lidstrom very effectively, as well? Lidstrom wasn't exactly reeling in Norris's when he had actual competition during his first 9 seasons. While everyone likes to rank Lidstrom ahead of the likes of Chelios and Leetch, both of those guys beat Lidstrom twice in the 90s. Sure, Lidstrom looks great reeling in the hardware now, but where was he when his competition wasn't guys like Pronger and Neidermayer? In looking at the years Potvin did win his Norris's, he was beating the likes of Park, Salming and Robinson to do so. I am not trying to knock Lidstrom, but you can easily play devil's advocate and twist this 'competition' argument just as easily against him. Because when Lidstrom was going against actual competition, not a single Norris.
Competition was better for top defensemen in the 80s and 90s than it was in the 70s and 00s -- Potvin lost to a lot of great defensemen in the 80s as well as a lot of not-so-great defensemen. Admittedly he was not as good of a player as he was in the 70s.

Lidstrom did much better in the 90s (2, 2, 2, 6, 6, 8), than Potvin did in the 80s (2, 4, 8, 10) -- and Lidstrom's game improved a lot in the 00s.

Quote:
Also, why even mention some of those names? McCrimmon beat Potvin in Norris voting in Potvin's 15th and final season. Ramsey finished 7th after Potvin retired. And is it really a knock that Carlyle and Wilson beat Potvin out for a Norris, because they both beat Ray Bourque those seasons, as well.
And Lidstrom was still winning Norrises in his 15th season.

Quote:
Potvin dropped out of it after 8 seasons? In his 9th, 10th and 11th seasons, he Captained his team to the Finals three times, won two Cups, and scored 212 points in 207 games. In his 11th season, he was 2nd Team All Star, had 85 points and was plus-55.
Potvin never again had performances similar to what he did in the 70s.
He had some incredible playoff runs on a dynasty team, absolutely.

Quote:
Ultimately, I think Potvin's best seasons, and the competition he was against, was that much better. If you want to do an interesting comparison, try this one on for size. Put Lidstrom starting in the league in 1973 when Potvin did, where during his career Lidstrom is competing for Norris's against guys like Robinson, Park, Langway, Bourque, MacInnis and Coffey. I'm not sure he sniffs Potvin's three Norris's, I'm not so sure he notches more than one. He certainly didn't fare too well his first 9 seasons where he was competing with Leetch, Chelios, Coffey and Bourque and didn't win one. Potvin won three against Hall of Famers, Lidstrom won a load of them after all the Hall of Famers were done for or had retired.
Lidstrom fared much better in the 90s than Potvin did in the 80s.
Their best seasons are also very comparable, except Lidstrom maintained that high level for much, much longer than Potvin... and Lidstrom is not done yet.

Quote:
For the record, take everything I'm saying with a grain of salt. Lidstrom is a phenomenal hockey player. His hockey sense and tactical ability to control the ebb and flow of a hockey game is almost an art form and an amazing thing to watch. I am mainly playing a bit of devil's advocate. But I am doing so because I personally feel you're severely devaluing what Potvin did in his career. I was watching it in the 70s when Potvin hit the league. The Islanders were a joke. The season Potvin came in, the entire complexion of the team changed dramatically. They were a lot meaner in front of their net, a lot harder to score on, and in his rookie season they reduced their goals against by 100 from the season before, which is flat out staggering. Potvin's impact was immediate, it was immense, and you knew who this guy was. His first 10 or 11 seasons, the guy was flat out amazing.
The year Potvin came into the islanders also happens to be the year Al Arbour came. Detroit experienced a similar drop over the first 5 years Lidstrom played for the team -- but I hesitate to single out one player as the main reason.

Potvin started out with a bang but did not maintain that level for long, while Lidstrom slowly built up steam and is still rolling at the top of a much better league for a much longer period than Potvin.

Quote:
There's certainly a lot to be said for Lidstrom's longevity and his remarkable ability to stay healthy. But it's not like Potvin played 6 seasons and was done. Potvin played 15 seasons, won 4 Cups, was excellent in his own end, and retired the all-time leading scoring defenseman. That's a damn solid resume.
It is. I'd say it is the 6th or 7th best resume of all-time for defenseman.
Lidstrom's is better though, and by no small margin.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 12:32 PM
  #95
NOTENOUGHBREWER
Registered User
 
NOTENOUGHBREWER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 8,682
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RabbinsDuck View Post
Not going to cut it. That player is ultimately a disappointment and woefully outmatched by someone who leads his peers for a decade and plays a large role in bringing multiple Cups to his team - it's not even close. As a GM, which player would you want?

Konstantinov is one of my favorite players, and I personally think he was "better" than Stevens.... but I would never "rank" him higher than Stevens. Not even close. He simply never brought as much value, despite a couple unbelievable seasons.
If you want to say having a career ending injury after one season is a "disappointment" go ahead. I call it a tragedy that the game lost one of its all time special talents. In your eyes is Konstantinov a disappointment because he had the misfortune of his limo driver being drunk? Was Lemieux a disappointment because he got cancer?


For the record I do have Lidstrom above Potvin, but I generally rank players on how well did they did at their best. Not only compared to players of similar position, but to the entire league. Both were able to be cornerstones of highly successful franchises for years. The reason I have Bourque higher is that I feel at his best he was the best player in the league. I cannot say the same for Lidstrom.

NOTENOUGHBREWER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 12:58 PM
  #96
sidewayzLEAFS
 
sidewayzLEAFS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ontario, canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 155
vCash: 500
well, potvin> lidstrom even though lidstrom has longevity because potvin's prime was ridiculous and included winning 4 cups and being part of one of the best dynasties ever...he did it all and was very physical..



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SLB3DujcTg

sidewayzLEAFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 01:01 PM
  #97
sidewayzLEAFS
 
sidewayzLEAFS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: ontario, canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 155
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=RabbinsDuck;20514666]Potvin has placed 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10 in Norris voting -- 6 great seasons with a couple more good seasons.
Lidstrom has placed 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 8


i believe potvin played against tougher competition in order to win the norris than lidstrom has..they justdont make 'em the way they used to

sidewayzLEAFS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 01:25 PM
  #98
ushvinder
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExtremeHockeyFan View Post
I mean no disrespect, but your homer goggles are a little ridiculous, to be dead honest. I am not a Red Wing or Islander fan, so I will endeavor to address my response objectively. Regarding your above statement, do you really think he had just six good seasons and was done for in '81 because of something idiotic like the PHWA's Norris voting? Between 80 and 83, he Captained the Islanders to 4 consecutive Cups, scored 244 points in 234 regular season games and 85 points in 78 playoff games. Do you think he retired the all-time leading scoring defenseman in NHL history -- the first to ever reach 1,000 points -- and only had 6 solid seasons? Seriously?



Doesn't the competition argument work against Lidstrom very effectively, as well? Lidstrom wasn't exactly reeling in Norris's when he had actual competition during his first 9 seasons. While everyone likes to rank Lidstrom ahead of the likes of Chelios and Leetch, both of those guys beat Lidstrom twice in the 90s. Sure, Lidstrom looks great reeling in the hardware now, but where was he when his competition wasn't guys like Pronger and Neidermayer? In looking at the years Potvin did win his Norris's, he was beating the likes of Park, Salming and Robinson to do so. I am not trying to knock Lidstrom, but you can easily play devil's advocate and twist this 'competition' argument just as easily against him. Because when Lidstrom was going against actual competition, not a single Norris.

Also, why even mention some of those names? McCrimmon beat Potvin in Norris voting in Potvin's 15th and final season. Ramsey finished 7th after Potvin retired. And is it really a knock that Carlyle and Wilson beat Potvin out for a Norris, because they both beat Ray Bourque those seasons, as well.



Potvin dropped out of it after 8 seasons? In his 9th, 10th and 11th seasons, he Captained his team to the Finals three times, won two Cups, and scored 212 points in 207 games. In his 11th season, he was 2nd Team All Star, had 85 points and was plus-55.



Ultimately, I think Potvin's best seasons, and the competition he was against, was that much better. If you want to do an interesting comparison, try this one on for size. Put Lidstrom starting in the league in 1973 when Potvin did, where during his career Lidstrom is competing for Norris's against guys like Robinson, Park, Langway, Bourque, MacInnis and Coffey. I'm not sure he sniffs Potvin's three Norris's, I'm not so sure he notches more than one. He certainly didn't fare too well his first 9 seasons where he was competing with Leetch, Chelios, Coffey and Bourque and didn't win one. Potvin won three against Hall of Famers, Lidstrom won a load of them after all the Hall of Famers were done for or had retired.

For the record, take everything I'm saying with a grain of salt. Lidstrom is a phenomenal hockey player. His hockey sense and tactical ability to control the ebb and flow of a hockey game is almost an art form and an amazing thing to watch. I am mainly playing a bit of devil's advocate. But I am doing so because I personally feel you're severely devaluing what Potvin did in his career. I was watching it in the 70s when Potvin hit the league. The Islanders were a joke. The season Potvin came in, the entire complexion of the team changed dramatically. They were a lot meaner in front of their net, a lot harder to score on, and in his rookie season they reduced their goals against by 100 from the season before, which is flat out staggering. Potvin's impact was immediate, it was immense, and you knew who this guy was. His first 10 or 11 seasons, the guy was flat out amazing.

There's certainly a lot to be said for Lidstrom's longevity and his remarkable ability to stay healthy. But it's not like Potvin played 6 seasons and was done. Potvin played 15 seasons, won 4 Cups, was excellent in his own end, and retired the all-time leading scoring defenseman. That's a damn solid resume.
He was runner up 3 different times during the 1990s and many people believe the 1998 trophy should have been his.

ushvinder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 01:36 PM
  #99
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOTENOUGHBREWER View Post
If you want to say having a career ending injury after one season is a "disappointment" go ahead. I call it a tragedy that the game lost one of its all time special talents. In your eyes is Konstantinov a disappointment because he had the misfortune of his limo driver being drunk? Was Lemieux a disappointment because he got cancer?
I was being facetious. Of course those injuries were tragedies - but it was not in any way a guarantee those players would maintain whatever PPG they had going into their injuries, just like Gretzky was not able to maintain his 3.4 PPG average in 1984.

It is a "disappointment" because those players are much more valuable to their teams on the ice, than they are off the ice. The ability to remain healthy and playing is an important aspect to ranking players "all-time".

Quote:
For the record I do have Lidstrom above Potvin, but I generally rank players on how well did they did at their best. Not only compared to players of similar position, but to the entire league. Both were able to be cornerstones of highly successful franchises for years. The reason I have Bourque higher is that I feel at his best he was the best player in the league. I cannot say the same for Lidstrom.
There have been a number of years where I believe Lidstrom has been the best in the league -- 2008 being the most recent example. He outscored the nearest defenseman by a larger margin than the forwards ahead of him for the Hart did compared to their nearest competition and Lidstrom was even more valuable defensively than he was offensively.

RabbinsDuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-22-2009, 01:56 PM
  #100
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
 
RabbinsDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Brighton, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 4,736
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sidewayzLEAFS View Post
i believe potvin played against tougher competition in order to win the norris than lidstrom has..they justdont make 'em the way they used to
Potvin has also lost to much worse competition for the Norris than Lidstrom has.

Are Robinson, Carlysle, Wilson, Langway, Coffey, Chelios and Leetch better than Lidstrom as well? Because they won a Norris against "much tougher competition"?

The league is currently approaching the deepest (talent-wise) it has ever been since the Original 6. The 70s was quite simply a watered-down era with very little parity, and teams nowadays do not get to enjoy consistently beating up on teams like the Canucks, Blues, Rockies, Capitals, North Stars and Barons -- and then the Nordiques, Whalers and Jets in the early 80s -- all of whom were lucky to get more than 20 wins back then. Even the Red Wings at that time would register less than 10 wins in a season.

Top teams (like the Islanders) kicked the crap out of these teams and boosted their stats into the stratosphere.

The "competition" argument works both ways.

RabbinsDuck 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 01:10 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.