1997-98 Norris Trophy Revisit

[Felidae]

Not an award win that is hotly debated in particular, but I have noticed mixed feelings about Blake on this board. So I'm curious what people think

It wasn't anywhere close to a landslide win, but he did have the clear edge in 1st place votes (27) compared to Lidstrom (16) and Pronger (8). No one else got any serious consideration.


As far as surface level stats go, Blake scored 23 goals, leading all defenseman, Finished 8th in points(50), was 4th in SHTOI and 5th in TOI.

Lidstrom had 59 points which led all defenseman in scoring, was 5th in goals(17), 3rd in SHTOI and 4th in TOI

Chris Pronger wasn't top 10 in any of those statistical categories surprisingly. However, he did lead the league in +/- (47). But I think even more impressive, was that the next best on the team was a +20

So did Blake deserve the Norris this year, or should it have gone to someone else? Feel free to make a case for someone other than the finalists

Click to read more...

 

[MarkusNaslund19]

The argument at the time was that it should have gone to Lidstrom or possibly Niedermayer.

Blake perhaps had a Dion Phaneuf season where he got a lot of shots and big hits. It also didn't hurt that the Kings were suddenly relevant again.

I think Blake gets underrated around here and he was a force that season but I can't say I feel strongly one way or another that he 'deserved' that Norris. It is nice that he got one though.

 

[norrisnick]

Lidstrom, IMO, had the strongest argument for the Norris. The Wings had no 2nd pairing that season due to the loss of Konstantinov. It was Lidstrom/Murphy and a rotating mix of depth with no other regular defenseman averaging more than 18:23 in ice time. Fetisov was the oldest player in the league playing his last season and without Vlad it showed.

Led all D in scoring, top 4 in TOI, +22, 18 PIM (should have been the runaway winner of the Byng). It almost feels like if Nick ran around slashing people and taking himself off the ice more the voters would have believed he was playing defense. He was on the ice for fewer goals against than Pronger that year.

 

[MadLuke]

The kings jump mentioned probably helped a lot.

When Blake struggled from 95 to 97 the Kings were in big trouble, jump from bottom 3 in the league to a solid 5th place in the west. He played 500 more minutes than anyone else and would have been seen as the big reason why, fair or not. And that should be more Hart talk than Norris, but everything bleed together (not making the playoff always make it harder to win thoses things for example)

 

[BraveCanadian]

I think it is a bit of a weak year and you could make arguments for a few players.. I don’t think Blake was particularly outstanding from the pack and it feels a bit like a “you haven’t won one yet” kind of thing.

 

[Staniowski]

I don't remember the season well enough to give a definitive answer, but I do remember some, and also remember some of the Olympics.

Blake, Pronger and Bourque were the 3 best Ds on Team Canada. And Niedermayer should've been on the team. MacInnis and Stevens weren't very good.

So probably Blake, Pronger, Niedermayer, and Lidstrom.

 

[Voight]

Blake wasn't the worst pick in the world, but its always been odd to me that some DRW fans will die on the hill that Lidstrom was absolutely robbed in 98.

The media bias thing I dont agree with either. All three Hart nominees were European, so I really dont think the media had a bias towards NA players at that point.

 

[JackSlater]

I went with Lidstrom but there are a few valid options. Not really a strong year. Blake had a sort of flashy power game, Lidstrom was steady and continuing to improve, Pronger I think had the biggest impact looking at goal rates. Pronger probably would have gotten it if he had a normal power play output, but he didn't.

Blake wasn't the worst pick in the world, but its always been odd to me that some DRW fans will die on the hill that Lidstrom was absolutely robbed in 98.

The media bias thing I dont agree with either. All three Hart nominees were European, so I really dont think the media had a bias towards NA players at that point.

The claims of the voters being biased against Lidstrom or the claims that they could not possibly grasp his game are very weak. he came pretty close to winning in a year where no one stood out as the obvious best. I think he should have won in 1998 but it isn't egregious. Certainly after 2011 the complaints should have stopped completely.

 

[MS]

Blake wouldn't even have been one of the 5 names on my ballot if I had one.

The best 3 defenders in the NHL that year were Lidstrom, Numminen, and Pronger. Pronger was probably the best defensively but didn't have the PP/offensive numbers to stack up to the other two guys.

Blake basically won a Norris for being Bryan McCabe/Dion Phaneuf in one of those guys' better years.

 

[MadLuke]

Blake did look good (to me) on a stacked team Canada and could lead a cup winner in minutes like Colorado not that many years laters.

For someone that did not saw a lot of regular season west coast Blake around that time, that do feel a bit harsh, first team rookie in 1991 that still played 24 minutes a night in 2007.

 

[Michael Farkas]

The best 3 defenders in the NHL that year were Lidstrom, Numminen, and Pronger

I can't remember the exact league-wide details from almost 20 years ago. But I do recall Teppo Numminen having a terrific season. Not sure about the Norris, but certainly way up there.

 

[MS]

I can't remember the exact league-wide details from almost 20 years ago. But I do recall Teppo Numminen having a terrific season. Not sure about the Norris, but certainly way up there.

He finished 9th in voting, which was a joke.

He outscored Blake and was MILES better defensively than Blake.

Numminen really suffered because his playstyle/footprint was so similar to Lidstrom, except with fewer points on worse teams so it was easy just to write him off and vote for Lidstrom and then some big tough Canadian guys.

But I'd be absolutely fascinated to see how Lidstrom's career would look playing for Arizona vs. Numminen's career playing for Detroit. I don't think those players were nearly as far apart as conventional wisdom would have it.

 

[Michael Farkas]

But I'd be absolutely fascinated to see how Lidstrom's career would look playing for Arizona vs. Numminen's career playing for Detroit.

Take it to the goalie project, bud...

 

[Gorskyontario]

Lidstrom or maybe Pronger. I think those two were head and shoulders above anyone else at that time. Bourque, even in his old age would be my third choice.

Blake had a big shot and threw big hits but wasn't particularly good in his own end.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i don’t think rob blake was any worse than shea weber, they were remarkably similar, right down to being especially good in international competition which you wouldn’t necessarily expect from a big bruising dman.

but i think what’s happened is phaneuf became a thing and created this stereotype of the big physical pylon-y dman with a ridiculous point shot and blake has retroactively been tarred with that. i mean you now have people acting like blake was kevin hatcher. he wasn’t larry robinson either but he wasn’t kevin hatcher by a longshot.

 

[JackSlater]

i don’t think rob blake was any worse than shea weber, they were remarkably similar, right down to being especially good in international competition which you wouldn’t necessarily expect from a big bruising dman.

but i think what’s happened is phaneuf became a thing and created this stereotype of the big physical pylon-y dman with a ridiculous point shot and blake has retroactively been tarred with that. i mean you now have people acting like blake was kevin hatcher. he wasn’t larry robinson either but he wasn’t kevin hatcher by a longshot.

I've made that comparison too. I remember people questioning Weber going in the 2014 Olympics. On paper Weber (and Blake) sound like classic guys who are very effective in the NHL but flounder internationally. Yet they were consistently very good to excellent internationally. I can't even really explain why. Pronger usually disappointed internationally, and he's a generally smarter player than they were.

 

[Janvonpobben]

Wasnt blake minus hench the controversery of him winning. Why did OP leave that out?

 

[MS]

i don’t think rob blake was any worse than shea weber, they were remarkably similar, right down to being especially good in international competition which you wouldn’t necessarily expect from a big bruising dman.

but i think what’s happened is phaneuf became a thing and created this stereotype of the big physical pylon-y dman with a ridiculous point shot and blake has retroactively been tarred with that. i mean you now have people acting like blake was kevin hatcher. he wasn’t larry robinson either but he wasn’t kevin hatcher by a longshot.

I spent years pre-Phaneuf absolutely loving when the WCE got on the ice against Blake and hating when they were on the ice against Foote. And Blake spent most of his career eating soft 2nd pairing matchups while the Norstrom or Foote pairing soaked up the high-leverage minutes for him.

Blake was a marginally better version of McCabe/Phaneuf who escaped a lot of criticism because he spent his entire career playing at 10:30 PM ET.

Multiple times every game the guy would get caught out of position when he tried for a giant ass-check at his own blueline.

 

[Video Nasty]

Not that difficult to wrap one’s head around. He also finished higher in Hart voting, which points to voters being swayed by the Kings finishing 5th in the West, after having a bottom 3 record in 1996-1997. That clearly bled into Norris voting.

 

[Felidae]

Wasnt blake minus hench the controversery of him winning. Why did OP leave that out?

I only wanted to go into the positives for each player but fair point, I do think his +/- situation deserves a closer look.

The LA kings this year weren't particularly good defensively. They ranked 17th in GA out of 26 teams.

Furthermore, Blake averaged nearly 6 minutes more than the closest player on the team, with an ATOI of 26 minutes. (Led the team in SHTOI) So he was basically heavily relied on in all situations while playing for one of the weaker defensive teams in the league.

Of course, this is not to say his +/- wasn't also a result of his own deficiencies as a player, but I do think some of the above explains his subpar +/- not just for this specific season, but for a lot of his career. Just a quick skim of all his negative +/- seasons and they were all on bottom 5-10 (sometimes bottom 3) defensive teams.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Lidstrom, IMO, had the strongest argument for the Norris. The Wings had no 2nd pairing that season due to the loss of Konstantinov. It was Lidstrom/Murphy and a rotating mix of depth with no other regular defenseman averaging more than 18:23 in ice time. Fetisov was the oldest player in the league playing his last season and without Vlad it showed.

Led all D in scoring, top 4 in TOI, +22, 18 PIM (should have been the runaway winner of the Byng). It almost feels like if Nick ran around slashing people and taking himself off the ice more the voters would have believed he was playing defense. He was on the ice for fewer goals against than Pronger that year.

The argument against Lidstrom by the media at the time was he needed to be more physical. THAT'S why guys like Cherry were railing against him for much of his career as a "soft Swede".