Bourque vs Lidstrom: Who's better and why

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Quite good actually, placing high on coach polls as early as 1980 if I recall right.

Based on the stickied thread on this board:

Bourque did not finish top 3 in either "best offensive defenseman" or "best defensive defenseman" in the 1981 player's poll. He was 2nd to Gretzky as "best young player."

He did not place in the "best defensive defenseman" category in the 1984 coach's poll either, though he did finish 3rd to Reed Larson and Doug Wilson in the "hardest shot" category.

Yes, he was. Being a standout for Canada at the '81 Canada Cup at age 20 seems to speak for itself.

Was Bourque better in the 1981 Canada Cup than Lidstrom was in the 2011 playoffs?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah, forget Chaison, Howe, Marsh and for sure Coffey didn't teach him anything offensively right


Either way, gimme a break Devil. I'm even willing to delay Bourque's prime to 82/83 but there is no way in hell you're getting '09-'11 tacked on to Lidstroms', no chance dude, sorry, that's ridiculous!

Do you have any proof that Paul Coffey was considered a good teacher for young defensemen? Someone, I doubt that was the case. Intuitively, he seems like just the kind of defenseman to put pressure on his young partner, not take it off. I'm pretty sure that Lidstrom never partnered with the aging Mark Howe, but I could be wrong.

I'm not even going to bother with Chiason and Marsh.

I mean, it's a very valid point that Lidstrom had much more help around him for the majority of his career. But in his formative years? Sounds like revisionist history by Bourque fans.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Based on the stickied thread on this board:

Bourque did not finish top 3 in either "best offensive defenseman" or "best defensive defenseman" in the 1981 player's poll. He was 2nd to Gretzky as "best young player."

He did not place in the "best defensive defenseman" category in the 1984 coach's poll either, though he did finish 3rd to Reed Larson and Doug Wilson in the "hardest shot" category.

My bad, guess I'll just have to rely on his all-star nominations

Was Bourque better in the 1981 Canada Cup than Lidstrom was in the 2011 playoffs?

Have to say yes to that. Standing out vs the world's best against being good vs Phoenix and the Sharks. Not a real tough choice there.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Have to say yes to that. Standing out vs the world's best against being good vs Phoenix and the Sharks. Not a real tough choice there.

Well if we're relying on All Star teams, I'll just point out that Bourque wasn't an All Star at the Canada Cup until 1987.

Anyway, my issue isn't with Bourque's greatness in the early 80s. I'm sure he was great. Very great. But there is no way he was as great as he was in the late 80s/early 90s. And I highly doubt he was significantly better (if better at all) in the early 80s than Lidstrom has been for the last few years.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Well if we're relying on All Star teams, I'll just point out that Bourque wasn't an All Star at the Canada Cup until 1987.

Anyway, my issue isn't with Bourque's greatness in the early 80s. I'm sure he was great. But there is no way he was as great as he was in the late 80s/early 90s. And I highly doubt he was any better (in the early 80s) than Lidstrom has been for the last few years.

Well lets turn that around.
Was Lidstrom better in his first few years than Bourque was in his last few? No, he was not.

So lets eliminate both Bourque's first 3 and last 3 years. We'll do the same with Lidstrom.
Where are we now?
We have Bourque's middle 16 seasons against Lidstrom's middle 14 seasons going head to head and who wins that confrontation rather easily?
Not only does Lidstrom lose that battle by 2 seasons right off the top but his 14 can't even match up to Bourque's best 14 to begin with.

Again, pick your poison my friend, you have to sooner or later, it really is inevitable.
There is at minimum a 4 year advantage for Bourque and arguably at most as high as 7. No amount of spinning is going to change that.
Math always wins

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Well lets turn that around.
Was Lidstrom better in his first few years than Bourque was in his last few? No, he was not.

So lets eliminate both Bourque's first 3 and last 3 years. We'll do the same with Lidstrom.
Where are we now?
We have Bourque's middle 16 seasons against Lidstrom's middle 14 seasons going head to head and who wins that confrontation rather easily?
Not only does Lidstrom lose that battle by 2 seasons right off the top but his 14 can't even match up to Bourque's best 14 to begin with.

Again, pick your poison my friend, you have to sooner or later.

I already said I'd take Bourque by a little bit.

My issues are with the misleading and often logically inconsistent arguments against Lidstrom that are currently running rampant on the history forum.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I already said I'd take Bourque by a little bit.

My issues are with the misleading and often logically inconsistent arguments against Lidstrom that are currently running rampant on the history forum.

Inconsistent?
I thought the vast majority of us have him #4 all-time.
Sounds pretty consistent to me.

Remember, the arguments presented here are in relation to Bourque. Not Orr or Harvey or Chelios or Stevens ect ect.

You want inconsistent, go back and read the Lidstrom vs Potvin thread again my friend.


Every argument I just made for Bourque over Lidstrom can be turned around and used for Lidstrom over Potvin.
The only difference being that even though Lidstrom, in this case, has the longer and more sustained peak, Potvin has the higher one.

Lidstrom wins the "math" over Potvin by about the same as Bourque wins over Lidstrom.

 

[Fredrik_71]

My bad, guess I'll just have to rely on his all-star nominations



Have to say yes to that. Standing out vs the world's best against being good vs Phoenix and the Sharks. Not a real tough choice there.

Lids has an olympic gold (2006) which is similar to Canada Cup in form of competition.

 

[lazerbullet]

Do you have any proof that Paul Coffey was considered a good teacher for young defensemen? Someone, I doubt that was the case. Intuitively, he seems like just the kind of defenseman to put pressure on his young partner, not take it off. I'm pretty sure that Lidstrom never partnered with the aging Mark Howe, but I could be wrong.

I'm not even going to bother with Chiason and Marsh.

I mean, it's a very valid point that Lidstrom had much more help around him for the majority of his career. But in his formative years? Sounds like revisionist history by Bourque fans.

Lidstrom has said that Brad McCrimmon helped him tremendously off and on the ice during his first years. Roommates on the road and played on the same defensive pairing during his first year.
I have never heard that Lidstrom credited Coffey or anybody else. Probably indeed revisionist history.

 

[Hobnobs]

Bourques offense is highly overrated. Regular season he is stand out ofcourse as I cant bother looking up agianst which opponent he got most points against. If we take a look at playoffs he usually scored most points in the first and 3rd round. Which is the easiest opponents. 2nd rounds were often against Montreal. Funny by the way that the team that needed Bourque to create offense took out Habs with Bourque providing 2 assists in one game.

 

[Hobnobs]

My bad, guess I'll just have to rely on his all-star nominations



Have to say yes to that. Standing out vs the world's best against being good vs Phoenix and the Sharks. Not a real tough choice there.

Because we all know how bad the sharks were. your "eyes" seems to be a bit biased.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Bourques offense is highly overrated. Regular season he is stand out ofcourse as I cant bother looking up agianst which opponent he got most points against. If we take a look at playoffs he usually scored most points in the first and 3rd round. Which is the easiest opponents. 2nd rounds were often against Montreal. Funny by the way that the team that needed Bourque to create offense took out Habs with Bourque providing 2 assists in one game.

You are talking to the wrong person here. I know intimately just how dangerous Bourque was or wasn't vs the Habs over the years. I haven't missed a single Habs playoff game since 1978.
When the Habs had the Bruins number in the 80's, Bourque was still their most dangerous player. Even when Neely was lighting the Habs up bad in the early 90's, Bourque was still by far the toughest obstacle for those Habs teams to overcome both offensively and defensively.

Bourque was the B's best player for almost 2 decades. Everything ran through him and those teams lived or died through him. I have some Habs/B's playoff games from '92 on tape and I swear to god Bourque plays a minimum of 40 minutes per game.
NHL.com only goes back to 97/98 but it lists Bourque averaging 35 minutes a game in the playoffs that year.
Looking up Lidstrom, his average is closer to 28 minutes per playoff game over the last 14 years with only 3-4 years where he even broke 30 minutes.

Bourque couldn't quite do it all but he was the closest to Orr as anyone I have ever seen and that's still a fair sized gap.

Because we all know how bad the sharks were. your "eyes" seems to be a bit biased.

Who said they were bad? I didn't. We were talking about the difference between Olympic caliber teams and a good NHL team like the Sharks.
It's no contest, try and follow the context please.

 

[toob]

Do you have any proof that Paul Coffey was considered a good teacher for young defensemen? Someone, I doubt that was the case. Intuitively, he seems like just the kind of defenseman to put pressure on his young partner, not take it off. I'm pretty sure that Lidstrom never partnered with the aging Mark Howe, but I could be wrong.

Lidstrom's own words in his entry What it Means to be a Red Wing in terms of both honing his defensive game and learning all sorts of things about the offensive game by watching Coffey.

There's also huge improvement in Lidstrom's play after Coffey came to Detroit in 93.

During the 97 finals it was said Coffey was a huge help as a mentor to the rookie Niinimaa.

Honestly cant see why this is being doubted. It isnt like Coffey would corrupt Lids defensively and make him sucky like he was.

 

[Dark Shadows]

..and it helped Bourque to have one of the best playmakers and goalscorers ever. It didnt help Lidströms offensive game to be paired up with Coffey and try to be the safety net for Coffeys defensive short comings.

One of the Best playermakers ever in Oates I agree with. However, who was one of the greatest goalscorers ever to play with the Bruins while Bourque was there?
Regarding Coffey not helping Lidstrom's offensive game.....ha. Sorry. Lidstrom's largest strength has always been his transition game and ability to make the right play to get the puck to the right place going the other way, while Coffey's was his ability to skate the puck into the offensive zone. They complemented each other quite well. Do I have a lot of respect for Coffey's defensive game? No. But he was playing his best defensive Hockey ever under Bowman and was a hell of a lot better to have as a defensive partner than most Bourque played with.

Furthermore, under Bowman's left wing lock, you would almost always see a Wings forward move to cover Coffey's vacancy when he did take the puck deep until he got back into position.

Team strength is not only measured in skill otherwise we would know who would win the cup every season. Besides, is the 08 red wings really better than the '90 Bruins?

Yes, the 08 Wings were a better team than the 1990 Bruins. Is that really in doubt? 2 Selke finalists, both in the top 6 in scoring overall. Scoring depth, defensive depth. Easily better.

The big difference being what happened on the ice when they were not on the ice. Both teams are weaker when neither of those players are on the ice, but the Wings would not and did not get demolished the 30 or so minutes a game Lidstrom was not playing. The Bruins in the 30 minutes or so a game Bourque was not on the ice, well, let's just say were scoring far less and giving up quite a few more goals than the wings when Lidstrom was not on the ice

This thing about being relied upon to create offense is also something that applies to Lidström as he is the one creating just that for the Wings or do you honestly believe Rafalski and Kronwall would have led Wings to the cup in '08. I do understand why you keep focusing on the late '90s red wings as the basis of your argument of team strenght but he has shown time and time again after that, that he didnt rely on Yzerman/Fedorov.

Lidstrom plays a supporting offense game as opposed to a creating offense game. This I already covered. I don"t see any team leading offensive finishes on Lidstrom's resume. Nor can I remember a time I saw an opposing coach double cover Lidstrom the way coaches double covered Bourque simply because he was the largest threat to score and create offense on the ice.

Lidstrom's transition game and ability to make the first pass after retrieving the puck is amazing. It does create offense in amazing ways. But it it not what I am getting at when I say "creating offense". And playing that particular style requires, well, teammates and options to pass to that will lead to offense.

For example, In 1990 the Oilers strategy was fairly simple and well documented.

#1 Dump the puck into Bourque's corner and then forecheck on him hard forcing him to pass the puck to his partner. Their reasoning was anyone else but Bourque carrying the puck = the Bruins won"t have many options to create offense and because, well, we are better off with anyone else carrying the puck.
#2 Once you force Bourque to pass the puck, DO NOT LET HIM BACK INTO THE PLAY. Get in front of him, and backcheck on him like he was a forward. To the point of 2 men on Bourque.
#3 Tikkanen covers Janney. With Bourque and Janney out of the picture, nobody can pass to Neely. To the point of nobody covering Neely at all.
#4 Run and gun Hockey when Bourque is on the bench. No need to think of defense.

Selke caliber forwards? At which point did he play with many Selke forwards? If you are going to name them please dont put the players in a bunch from different time periods to try to assert some false sense of team strength like Rhiessan do everytime.

? I am confused. The wings almost always had some presence in the Selke voting when compared to the bruins who had very little.

 

[Hobnobs]

One of the Best playermakers ever in Oates I agree with. However, who was one of the greatest goalscorers ever to play with the Bruins while Bourque was there?
Regarding Coffey not helping Lidstrom's offensive game.....ha. Sorry. Lidstrom's largest strength has always been his transition game and ability to make the right play to get the puck to the right place going the other way, while Coffey's was his ability to skate the puck into the offensive zone. They complemented each other quite well. Do I have a lot of respect for Coffey's defensive game? No. But he was playing his best defensive Hockey ever under Bowman and was a hell of a lot better to have as a defensive partner than most Bourque played with.

Neely, one of the best scorers during this time frame. Bruins also had nice scoring depth. So please stop making them weaker than they really are just because they couldnt upset the Oilers or the Penguins.

Furthermore, under Bowman's left wing lock, you would almost always see a Wings forward move to cover Coffey's vacancy when he did take the puck deep until he got back into position.

Quality of those forwards? I give you Burr but then they werent that defensively good. Errey, Grimson and Kozlov. In 96 they did get Brown and the grind line.

Yes, the 08 Wings were a better team than the 1990 Bruins. Is that really in doubt? 2 Selke finalists, both in the top 6 in scoring overall. Scoring depth, defensive depth. Easily better.

The big difference being what happened on the ice when they were not on the ice. Both teams are weaker when neither of those players are on the ice, but the Wings would not and did not get demolished the 30 or so minutes a game Lidstrom was not playing. The Bruins in the 30 minutes or so a game Bourque was not on the ice, well, let's just say were scoring far less and giving up quite a few more goals than the wings when Lidstrom was not on the ice

Funny, as the habs series in 88 contradicts your statement. They held Bourque back and Bruins still demolished them. But I guess thats some sort of conspiracy right?

? I am confused. The wings almost always had some presence in the Selke voting when compared to the bruins who had very little.

Ok, I'll give you that Red Wings had some selke winners, no doubt, but you made it sound like their forward corps consisted of 12 selke winners. Bruins had strong defensive forwards on their team that helped Bourque alot.

and I still like to know what makes 08 red wings the stronger team and not just that they had "Zäta" and "Dats". They were more clutch, sure.

 

[overpass]

Good post Dark Shadows. There were definitely qualitative differences in Bourque and Lidstrom's offensive game. Offence isn't all about stats.

Regarding the beginning of Bourque's prime, I read an article some time ago from the middle of the 81-82 season about Bourque. It said he was having a breakthrough season, driving the play, seemed to be getting better every night and had become Boston's best player. No source, so take it for what it's worth, but I've always figured that Bourque hit that level as an elite d-man during that season. While he missed too many games to figure in awards voting, he was right there with Langway and Howe in 82-83. Of course Bourque continued to develop his game over the rest of the decade.

 

[Dark Shadows]

Neely, one of the best scorers during this time frame. Bruins also had nice scoring depth. So please stop making them weaker than they really are just because they couldnt upset the Oilers or the Penguins.

I am sorry but Neely is not one of the greatest goalscorers of all time. One of my favorite players of all time to be sure, but certainly not among the best goalscorers ever as the poster posted.

And the Bruins were a team with little scoring Depth. So please, stop with this "Stop trying to make them look weaker than they are" when offensively, they were in fact a weak team most years.

Quality of those forwards? I give you Burr but then they werent that defensively good. Errey, Grimson and Kozlov. In 96 they did get Brown and the grind line.

? Are you saying having an Yzerman or Fedorov backchecking when Coffey pinched in was nothing?
You do realize that the left wing lock does not mean only LW's backcheck right?

Funny, as the habs series in 88 contradicts your statement. They held Bourque back and Bruins still demolished them. But I guess thats some sort of conspiracy right?

What does one series they won have to do with the body of work? The Habs did not exactly have the offensive depth of the Oilers and penguins. Bourque may not have lit the scoresheet on fire that series, but he was a key player.

Ok, I'll give you that Red Wings had some selke winners, no doubt, but you made it sound like their forward corps consisted of 12 selke winners. Bruins had strong defensive forwards on their team that helped Bourque alot.

and I still like to know what makes 08 red wings the stronger team and not just that they had "Zäta" and "Dats". They were more clutch, sure.

Certainly the bruins had a few strong defense first forwards. However, who were their great two way players who also contributed to the transition game and offense while being solid defensively?

And uh, if you cannot tell why the 08 wings were a better team, this conversation is relatively pointless. More forward depth. Better coaching. More defensive depth......Other than goaltending can you explain exactly how you think the 90 Bruins compare favorably to the 08 wings? At all

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Lidstrom's own words in his entry What it Means to be a Red Wing in terms of both honing his defensive game and learning all sorts of things about the offensive game by watching Coffey.

There's also huge improvement in Lidstrom's play after Coffey came to Detroit in 93.

During the 97 finals it was said Coffey was a huge help as a mentor to the rookie Niinimaa.

Honestly cant see why this is being doubted. It isnt like Coffey would corrupt Lids defensively and make him sucky like he was.

Thanks.

Not sure if Lidstrom actually got better in 1993 though. Offensively at least, he regressed for a few years from his almost-Calder-winning form.

 

[toob]

Thanks.

Not sure if Lidstrom actually got better in 1993 though. Offensively at least, he regressed for a few years from his almost-Calder-winning form.

i meant that he was having a terrible ssn until Coffey came aboard (obv there are other reasons such as the Red Wings exploding offensively behind Yzerman late in the ssn as well but Coffey is a huge part of all of that)

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

i meant that he was having a terrible ssn until Coffey came aboard (obv there are other reasons such as the Red Wings exploding offensively behind Yzerman late in the ssn as well but Coffey is a huge part of all of that)

Out of curiosity, did you used to live in Detroit? You know an awful lot about the late 80s/early 90s Wings but seem to be a Tampa Bay fan now.

 

[toob]

this should explain it

one of the big reasons im a Tampa fan now is Yzerman anyway...

 

[tarheelhockey]

I can't believe we're even arguing which player had more team support. The Red Wings are easily the best overall organization of the past 20 years, by pretty much any measure you could come up with.

But, for the sake of argument...

Top-10 scoring finishes by Bourque's teammates during his career:
1982-83 - Barry Pederson (t-5)
1983-84 - Barry Pederson (6), Rick Middleton (10)
1986-87 - Raymond Bourque (t-9)
1992-93 - Adam Oates (3)
1993-94 - Adam Oates (3)
1997-98 - Jason Allison (9)
2000-01 - Joe Sakic (2), Peter Forsberg (9)


Top-10 scoring finishes by Lidstrom's teammates during his career:
1991-92 - Steve Yzerman (8)
1992-93 - Steve Yzerman (3)
1993-94 - Sergei Fedorov (2)
1994-95 - Paul Coffey (7)
1995-96 - Sergei Fedorov (9)
1996-97 - Brendan Shanahan (10)
1999-00 - Steve Yzerman (10)
2007-08 - Pavel Datsyuk (4), Henrik Zetterberg (8)
2008-09 - Pavel Datsyuk (4)
2010-11 - Henrik Zetterberg (9)
2011-12 - Pavel Datsyuk (t-6) as of 1/19/12

Team scoring finishes for Bourque:
Season finishes - 5, 9, 9, 5, 7, 12, 12, 6, 7, 14, 11, 5, 13, 8, 8, 9, 4, 15, 12, 13, 23/11, 4
Average & Median are both 9*

Team scoring finishes for Lidstrom:
Season finishes - 4, 1, 1, 3, 3, 6, 2, 3, 1, 5, 2, 1, 2, 2, 10, 3, 1, 14, 2, 4 as of 1/19/12
Average is 3, Median is 2*

*Not counting Bourque's Boston/Colorado season or Lidstrom's incomplete 2012, for the sake of simplicity. This is a slight advantage to Lidstrom.


Postseason recognition given to Bourque's teammates:
1981-82 - Kasper (Selke), Middleton (Byng), Middleton (2nd AS)
1982-83 - Peeters (Vezina), Peeters (1st AS)
1987-88 - Neely (2nd AS)
1989-90 - Neely (2nd AS)
1990-91 - Neely (2nd AS)
1993-94 - Neely (2nd AS)
1997-98 - Samsonov (Calder)
1998-99 - Dafoe (2nd AS)
2000-01 - Joe Sakic (1st AS), Rob Blake (1st AS, only 14 games w/ Colorado)

Postseason recognition given to Lidstrom's teammates:
1993-94 - Fedorov (Hart), Fedorov (Pearson/Lindsay), Fedorov (Selke), Fedorov (1st AS)
1994-95 - Coffey (Norris), Coffey (1st AS)
1995-96 - Fedorov (Selke), Konstantinov (2nd AS), Osgood (2nd AS)
1996-97 - Vernon (Smythe)
1997-98 - Yzerman (Smythe)
1999-00 - Yzerman (Selke), Yzerman (1st AS), Shanahan (1st AS)
2001-02 - Shanahan (2nd AS)
2003-04 - Draper (Selke)
2005-06 - Datsyuk (Byng)
2006-07 - Datsyuk (Byng)
2007-08 - Zetterberg (Smythe), Zetterberg (2nd AS), Datsyuk (Selke), Datsyuk (Byng)
2008-09 - Datsyuk (Selke), Datsyuk (Byng), Datsyuk (2nd AS)
2009-10 - Datsyuk (Selke)


Top-3 Hart finishes by teammates

Bourque
1982-83 - Peeters (2)
1986-97 - Bourque (2)
1989-90 - Bourque (2)

Listrom
1993-94 - Fedorov (1)
2008-09 - Datsyuk (3)



The gap isn't night-and-day enormous, but it is very noticeable. Lidstrom's teams were much more prolific offensively. Look at both the team and individual scoring finishes. Lidstrom has a definite and unquestionable advantage in team scoring support.

There's also an obvious difference in postseason accolades. Bourque basically had one good year of Kaspar and Middleton, one year in Colorado, and a nice run of 2nd AS's from Neely. Aside from that, his teammate recognition was extremely limited. Lidstrom enjoyed dominant seasons from three different forward teammates (Fedorov, Yzerman and Datsyuk), and had 8 different teammates win recognition not counting goalies.

Earlier in the thread, it was pretty conclusively shown that Bourque had an advantage in offensive production no matter how we distorted the stats. Here, it's pretty conclusive that Bourque was at a clear team-related disadvantage. It's impossible to make a coherent, objective argument other than Bourque having done more with less help in the offensive end than Lidstrom. Maybe you could qualify it with era-related adjustments to say the gap wasn't as large as it appears, but the gap is definitely there.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Is there anyone who honestly believes Lidstrom didn't have more help over the course of their careers?

 

[Hobnobs]

I am sorry but Neely is not one of the greatest goalscorers of all time. One of my favorite players of all time to be sure, but certainly not among the best goalscorers ever as the poster posted.

13th best between 87-94 while missing 100+ games compared to the players above him. 4th in GPG. All-time might have been a bit hyperbole.

And the Bruins were a team with little scoring Depth. So please, stop with this "Stop trying to make them look weaker than they are" when offensively, they were in fact a weak team most years.

They usually had 10-12 guys chipping in offensively. Agreed that they might not have had the scoring punch of the Oilers, Penguins or the late 90s Red wings but reading you and Rhiessan describing them makes them sound like an AHL team with Bourque leading the charge which is nonsense.

? Are you saying having an Yzerman or Fedorov backchecking when Coffey pinched in was nothing?
You do realize that the left wing lock does not mean only LW's backcheck right?

Are you saying that these two were on the ice at all time. Back checking at all time?

What does one series they won have to do with the body of work? The Habs did not exactly have the offensive depth of the Oilers and penguins. Bourque may not have lit the scoresheet on fire that series, but he was a key player.

we could bring up more series if you want? '92 Bruins vs Habs. Bourque scores 2 points in the first game, is a - player in the second and misses the last two. Boston sweeps the series. Same playoff and and Bruins lose a tight game vs. Pens, Bourque comes back to the second game and Pens crushes Bruins. Bourque is -3 and -2 in the next two games.

'91 they have a series edge against Pens. They lose Neely to that nasty knee injury and they already missing Poulin. They dont stand a chance vs Pens even though this miraculous offensive god who carried the team so far is playing.

Certainly the bruins had a few strong defense first forwards. However, who were their great two way players who also contributed to the transition game and offense while being solid defensively?

Poulin, Propp and Christian.

And uh, if you cannot tell why the 08 wings were a better team, this conversation is relatively pointless. More forward depth. Better coaching. More defensive depth......Other than goaltending can you explain exactly how you think the 90 Bruins compare favorably to the 08 wings? At all

I never said Bruins were better. I said they werent that far apart. I'll give you that they had a better top-4 on defense but whats great about Hudler, Filppula, Samuelsson and Holmström compared to Poulin, Burridge, Propp and Carpenter? The edge being Franzen which must be what you mean.

 

[danincanada]

I can't believe we're even arguing which player had more team support. The Red Wings are easily the best overall organization of the past 20 years, by pretty much any measure you could come up with.

But, for the sake of argument...

Top-10 scoring finishes by Bourque's teammates during his career:
1982-83 - Barry Pederson (t-5)
1983-84 - Barry Pederson (6), Rick Middleton (10)
1986-87 - Raymond Bourque (t-9)
1992-93 - Adam Oates (3)
1993-94 - Adam Oates (3)
1997-98 - Jason Allison (9)
2000-01 - Joe Sakic (2), Peter Forsberg (9)


Top-10 scoring finishes by Lidstrom's teammates during his career:
1991-92 - Steve Yzerman (8)
1992-93 - Steve Yzerman (3)
1993-94 - Sergei Fedorov (2)
1994-95 - Paul Coffey (7)
1995-96 - Sergei Fedorov (9)
1996-97 - Brendan Shanahan (10)
1999-00 - Steve Yzerman (10)
2007-08 - Pavel Datsyuk (4), Henrik Zetterberg (8)
2008-09 - Pavel Datsyuk (4)
2010-11 - Henrik Zetterberg (9)
2011-12 - Pavel Datsyuk (t-6) as of 1/19/12

Team scoring finishes for Bourque:
Season finishes - 5, 9, 9, 5, 7, 12, 12, 6, 7, 14, 11, 5, 13, 8, 8, 9, 4, 15, 12, 13, 23/11, 4
Average & Median are both 9*

Team scoring finishes for Lidstrom:
Season finishes - 4, 1, 1, 3, 3, 6, 2, 3, 1, 5, 2, 1, 2, 2, 10, 3, 1, 14, 2, 4 as of 1/19/12
Average is 3, Median is 2*

*Not counting Bourque's Boston/Colorado season or Lidstrom's incomplete 2012, for the sake of simplicity. This is a slight advantage to Lidstrom.


Postseason recognition given to Bourque's teammates:
1981-82 - Kasper (Selke), Middleton (Byng), Middleton (2nd AS)
1982-83 - Peeters (Vezina), Peeters (1st AS)
1987-88 - Neely (2nd AS)
1989-90 - Neely (2nd AS)
1990-91 - Neely (2nd AS)
1993-94 - Neely (2nd AS)
1997-98 - Samsonov (Calder)
1998-99 - Dafoe (2nd AS)
2000-01 - Joe Sakic (1st AS), Rob Blake (1st AS, only 14 games w/ Colorado)

Postseason recognition given to Lidstrom's teammates:
1993-94 - Fedorov (Hart), Fedorov (Pearson/Lindsay), Fedorov (Selke), Fedorov (1st AS)
1994-95 - Coffey (Norris), Coffey (1st AS)
1995-96 - Fedorov (Selke), Konstantinov (2nd AS), Osgood (2nd AS)
1996-97 - Vernon (Smythe)
1997-98 - Yzerman (Smythe)
1999-00 - Yzerman (Selke), Yzerman (1st AS), Shanahan (1st AS)
2001-02 - Shanahan (2nd AS)
2003-04 - Draper (Selke)
2005-06 - Datsyuk (Byng)
2006-07 - Datsyuk (Byng)
2007-08 - Zetterberg (Smythe), Zetterberg (2nd AS), Datsyuk (Selke), Datsyuk (Byng)
2008-09 - Datsyuk (Selke), Datsyuk (Byng), Datsyuk (2nd AS)
2009-10 - Datsyuk (Selke)


Top-3 Hart finishes by teammates

Bourque
1982-83 - Peeters (2)
1986-97 - Bourque (2)
1989-90 - Bourque (2)

Listrom
1993-94 - Fedorov (1)
2008-09 - Datsyuk (3)



The gap isn't night-and-day enormous, but it is very noticeable. Lidstrom's teams were much more prolific offensively. Look at both the team and individual scoring finishes. Lidstrom has a definite and unquestionable advantage in team scoring support.

There's also an obvious difference in postseason accolades. Bourque basically had one good year of Kaspar and Middleton, one year in Colorado, and a nice run of 2nd AS's from Neely. Aside from that, his teammate recognition was extremely limited. Lidstrom enjoyed dominant seasons from three different forward teammates (Fedorov, Yzerman and Datsyuk), and had 8 different teammates win recognition not counting goalies.

Earlier in the thread, it was pretty conclusively shown that Bourque had an advantage in offensive production no matter how we distorted the stats. Here, it's pretty conclusive that Bourque was at a clear team-related disadvantage. It's impossible to make a coherent, objective argument other than Bourque having done more with less help in the offensive end than Lidstrom. Maybe you could qualify it with era-related adjustments to say the gap wasn't as large as it appears, but the gap is definitely there.

This is all good stuff and helps add perspective but it always comes back to the fact that Lidstrom did win Cups with his group 4 times and has enjoyed regular season success (making the playoffs with a good to great record) every seasons since he joined the Red Wings. Overall Bourque enjoyed less regular season success and no Cups until his last season with a different team. Somehow people want to make this a negative for Lidstrom - which is ridiculous because I don't know how you punish an athlete for being a winner.

You can say that this is how things should have happened knowing the teams they played on but we can't just assume Bourque would have had the success Lidstrom had if placed in the same situation because it's a slippery slope to make this kind of assumption for any player. We have all seen many stacked teams fall apart come playoff time and some players just can't get it done even when they reach the finals. Actually winning and hoisting that Cup is what it's all about and that is being downplayed here in this comparison.

What the Bourque crowd wants to do is give him bonus points for being on a worse team and not winning. The bonus points should go to Lidstrom because he was a huge part of a quasi dynasty and 4 time Cup winner and it took place over the span of 11 years, which so happens to coincide with his prime.

Hockey is a team game and the purpose is to win and Lidstrom has done as much of that as anyone - maybe not in Cups but the regular season success his teams have had is up there with anyone. When you factor in that he was the Red Wings # 1 defenseman since they started winning Cups and he has 7 Norris trophies and it's a lofty resume to overcome. I don't think Bourque has the hardware or amount of overall success to overcome it no matter how much better he was offensively or how many end of the season all-star nominations he received. Winning is the trump card in sports and the rest is just coulda/shoulda/woulda speculation.