Bourque vs Lidstrom: Who's better and why

[danincanada]

There's a lot more to it with Harvey than just stats, Norris's and Cups.

He is the pioneer of the modern day D-man.
He wrote the book that Lidstrom and every other D-man for the last 40 years has been trained by.

That gets juuuuuust a little bit of credit.

I figured that would be your answer.

You don't have any real reasons do you? You know, ones that don't simply involve who came first and instead focused on who was the better player?

Lidstrom and Harvey have extremely similar career paths and careers and this is all you can come up with to separate the two players. Now I know how much to value your opinions and arguments in these debates. It's obvious you have one standard for Bourque and Harvey and another one for Lidstrom.

 

[Hobnobs]

Yeah...lets just forget about that thing we had before professional athletes were allowed to go to the Olympics called the Canada and World Cup.
And as horrible as Canada finished by our standards in 1998, it was still ahead of Lidstrom and the Swedes.
We lost to Team Hasek just like everyone else did.

Oh and hey Niedermayer has 4 Cups and TWO gold medals...intangibles my friend

You really like to pretend you don't understand what he's saying because it would harm your argument. Yes, Niedermeyer has 4 cups and two medals and that is an edge for him against bourque but Bourque has the edge in Norris trophies and ASTs. So stop pretending and get real.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I figured that would be your answer.

You don't have any real reasons do you? You know, ones that don't simply involve who came first and instead focused on who was the better player?

Lidstrom and Harvey have extremely similar career paths and careers and this is all you can come up with to separate the two players. Now I know how much to value your opinions and arguments in these debates. It's obvious you have one standard for Bourque and Harvey and another one for Lidstrom.

Not hard to predict an answer when it's the truth.
I have the same standard I have always had. 5 years ago I and most others didn't even have Lidstrom ahead of Potvin, Kelly or Robinson.
And I like most others have moved Lidstrom ahead of those guys because he deserved it.
He does not deserve it over Bourque.
Bourque just has too many dominant years over Lidstrom. Years that he is simply not going to make up at 41.

Look, if Lidstrom had of come over at 19 and not only peaked higher but also peaked much earlier, say at 21/22 and was still doing what he's doing now, THEN we have different story.
But we don't, we have Lidstrom coming over at 21 and not peaking till he was 27.

Bourque is just too far ahead in both peak height, peak length and career length.
Lidstrom makes up some ground with his Cups and Conn Smythe and I DO give him credit for those but IMO Bourque and apparently most others, Bourque still comes out ahead.

As far as Harvey goes, I pretty much agree 100% with everything Devil says here http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1084719

You really like to pretend you don't understand what he's saying because it would harm your argument. Yes, Niedermeyer has 4 cups and two medals and that is an edge for him against bourque but Bourque has the edge in Norris trophies and ASTs. So stop pretending and get real.

I know exactly what he's saying and it's nothing new. If the poster in question had of read the whole thread instead of skimming the last few pages, he would of seen that every single criteria between these two players has been addressed already.

He's trying to use Cup rings, a Gold Medal and raw Norris trophies as be end all when it has all been weighed and measured at length earlier in this thread.
You don't win 4 Cups or a Gold medal without a very good-great team around you and Lidstrom doesn't win half of his Norris's pre-2000's.


I've explained at length why I have Bourque over Lidstrom. I have backed it up with data at every turn.
So you'll excuse me if I'm not going to take someone seriously who simply counts trophies over and over again in every single post and provides nothing else.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Just want to jump in quickly and say this. Had Lidstrom led his team in scoring he would have had to have an all time great season offensively rivaling any other offensive season by a defenseman. How could he possibly be expected to lead a team in scoring from the blue line that has had the depth and offensive talent the Wings have had? I don't think it is fair to use that as an argument. That is a circumstancial accomplishment.

It's also a bit of double dipping when comparing the two guys.

Bourque didn't win any cups in Boston because the teams weren't as good as Lidstrom's and Bourque lead his team in scoring while Lidstrom didn't.

It's a lazy way to prop up one guy and put down another.

Some guys just prefer one guy over the other and most people aren't going to change their minds on that subject, that's the only thing that's clear here.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Oh I almost forgot....if anyone holds different standards between the two players it's the people that constantly detract from Bourque's offense because he played in an offensive league while completely giving Lidstrom's defense a pass despite playing in a defensive league.

That is by far the most hypocritical thing throughout this entire thread.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I figured that would be your answer.

You don't have any real reasons do you? You know, ones that don't simply involve who came first and instead focused on who was the better player?

Lidstrom and Harvey have extremely similar career paths and careers and this is all you can come up with to separate the two players. Now I know how much to value your opinions and arguments in these debates. It's obvious you have one standard for Bourque and Harvey and another one for Lidstrom.

Dan you have to understand that R71 does things a little bit differently, when asked a question, about players he likes, he already has the answer then tries to fit the facts and information to fit his answer.

Unfortunately this was often the case when I was in university as well, instead of actually trying to learn something when doing a thesis, Profs were more interested in conveying a point of view and then spending the rest of their lives defending their staked out position.

You should have asked him about the stacked teams Harvey played on that would ahve been very interesting.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Dan you have to understand that R71 does things a little bit differently, when asked a question, about players he likes, he already has the answer then tries to fit the facts and information to fit his answer. Unfortunately this was often the case when I was in university as well, instead of actually trying to learn something when doing a thesis, Profs were more interested in conveying a point of view and then spending the rest of their lives defending their staked out position.

You should have asked him about the stacked teams Harvey played on that would ahve been very interesting.

You seriously believe that is different from what everyone else is doing here?

 

[Hardyvan123]

Oh I almost forgot....if anyone holds different standards between the two players it's the people that constantly detract from Bourque's offense because he played in an offensive league while completely giving Lidstrom's defense a pass despite playing in a defensive league.

That is by far the most hypocritical thing throughout this entire thread.

No one is detracting form Bourque's offense, he was clearly the better offensive Dman, it's your failure to directly compare the different area and not recognize the differences that's in question.

who is giving Lidstrom defense a pass, most of us on here know how great he is defensively by watching him. We have have statistical data in the link below.

Or do you want to double dip again and use raw stats and pump up Bourque's scoring and say that well Lidstrom played in a defensive time....

You should go to this site which breaks down some of Lidstrom's seasons, independent of his teammates if you are actually interested in learning something.

http://hockeyanalytics.com/2010/11/a-regression-based-adjusted-plus-minus-statistic-for-nhl-players/

 

[Pear Juice]

No one is detracting form Bourque's offense, he was clearly the better offensive Dman, it's your failure to directly compare the different area and not recognize the differences that's in question.

who is giving Lidstrom defense a pass, most of us on here know how great he is defensively by watching him. We have have statistical data in the link below.

Or do you want to double dip again and use raw stats and pump up Bourque's scoring and say that well Lidstrom played in a defensive time....

You should go to this site which breaks down some of Lidstrom's seasons, independent of his teammates if you are actually interested in learning something.

http://hockeyanalytics.com/2010/11/a-regression-based-adjusted-plus-minus-statistic-for-nhl-players/

That's probably the first time I've seen some real statistics being employed in a hockey context (I'm just not looking for it). I'll add that paper to my reading list.

 

[Dreakmur]

gimmie Coffey over both

He's all yours.

Bourque and Lidstrom are both top-5 all time. Coffey doesn't even challenge for thet top 10.

 

[danincanada]

Oh I almost forgot....if anyone holds different standards between the two players it's the people that constantly detract from Bourque's offense because he played in an offensive league while completely giving Lidstrom's defense a pass despite playing in a defensive league.

That is by far the most hypocritical thing throughout this entire thread.

No, the most hypocritical thing is how Harvey and Lidstrom are treated differently in these debates. You can't argue Lidstrom started being dominant too late and didn't produce enough offensively to overcome Bourque yet rank Harvey above both. It lacks any type of consistency. Of course on top of that is the fact that Lidstrom played in an international NHL while Harvey played when only Canadians were elite...check that...the only players in the NHL were Canadian with a few Americans sprinkled in over the years. Which one is a bigger feat? If we are talking about "greatest ever" how can we ignore the strength of the league?

I respect Devil's opinion a lot but if you are going to defer to him then I will just defer to one Scotty Bowman:

"Pre-expansion, nobody was as good as Doug Harvey,'' says Scotty Bowman, who coached Harvey, Larry Robinson, Coffey and Lidstrom during his unparalleled career. "Then Orr came along in '66 and changed the game. But Nick . . . look at all the trophies. He's been at the top for so long."

"As to who's the best ever . . . it's tough to rate this guy here and that guy there. I will say I don't rate anyone AHEAD of Lidstrom, though.''

Pierre Lebrun also had some interesting views on this topic:

The question is, where does he rank all time? As Lidstrom's career draws to a close, whether that's next season or five years from now, his body of work is complete enough now to make proper comparisons.

Bobby Orr remains No. 1 for most, including this writer, but you get a pretty good argument after him between Lidstrom and seven-time Norris winner Doug Harvey. There's no question that Denis Potvin, Larry Robinson, Ray Bourque, Paul Coffey and Scott Niedermayer are among the others who have a pretty good case, but when you talk to people in the game, they usually go with either Lidstrom or Harvey at No. 2.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=lebrun_pierre&id=5918807

...and this was written in December 2010 before Lidstrom won his 7th Norris. # 2 all-time works for me.

 

[Rhiessan71]

No one is detracting form Bourque's offense, he was clearly the better offensive Dman, it's your failure to directly compare the different area and not recognize the differences that's in question.

What are you even trying to say? What area am I not understanding exactly?

who is giving Lidstrom defense a pass, most of us on here know how great he is defensively by watching him. We have have statistical data in the link below.

Oh ok, so you have data from one year and against today's competition. Data that shows us vs this years D-men, Lidstrom has the best defensive metric while at the same time it shows Lidstrom way down in 15th offensively or did you miss that part? Now THAT is interesting.
So how does that help you exactly when, first off, it's only a 1 year sample size and secondly, there is no comparable metric done for Bourque.

Or do you want to double dip again and use raw stats and pump up Bourque's scoring and say that well Lidstrom played in a defensive time....

Double dip? I have never said to use raw stats a face value except for the 10 years they were in the league together.
You think because I refuse to use normalized, projected estimates at face value, that I'm double dipping. Give your head a shake, seriously.
I have clearly explained on numerous occasions how Adjusted stats become less accurate the further away from the average you go and clearly you do not understand it or adjusted stats in general, just like I am 100% sure you didn't understand a single equation in article you linked.

Find a similar breakdown for Bourque and we'll talk...wait a minute, we do have similar data thanks to Overpass here: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=591548&highlight=adjusted++

Tell me, how does Lidstrom make out against Bourque in that data?

 

[canucksfan]

No, the most hypocritical thing is how Harvey and Lidstrom are treated differently in these debates. You can't argue Lidstrom started being dominant too late and didn't produce enough offensively to overcome Bourque yet rank Harvey above both. It lacks any type of consistency. Of course on top of that is the fact that Lidstrom played in an international NHL while Harvey played when only Canadians were elite...check that...the only players in the NHL were Canadian with a few Americans sprinkled in over the years. Which one is a bigger feat? If we are talking about "greatest ever" how can we ignore the strength of the league?

I respect Devil's opinion a lot but if you are going to defer to him then I will just defer to one Scotty Bowman:



Pierre Lebrun also had some interesting views on this topic:



http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?columnist=lebrun_pierre&id=5918807

...and this was written in December 2010 before Lidstrom won his 7th Norris. # 2 all-time works for me.

Lebrun's credibility should be very low considering he mentions Scott Niedermeyer near the top.

 

[danincanada]

Dan you have to understand that R71 does things a little bit differently, when asked a question, about players he likes, he already has the answer then tries to fit the facts and information to fit his answer.

Unfortunately this was often the case when I was in university as well, instead of actually trying to learn something when doing a thesis, Profs were more interested in conveying a point of view and then spending the rest of their lives defending their staked out position.

You should have asked him about the stacked teams Harvey played on that would ahve been very interesting.

Understood. I'm a Red Wings fan so I am not void of bias here but I would at least like some consistency in these comparisons. Obviously strength of the league is going to continue to be ignored so I guess that's how the parameters have been set up. I don't agree and think it flaws the whole comparison process but that's life.

It still doesn't explain how Bourque gets sandwhiched in between Harvey and Lidstrom who have extremely similar careers, accomplishments and career paths.

 

[danincanada]

Lebrun's credibility should be very low considering he mentions Scott Niedermeyer near the top.

I found that odd as well but the main point is that he talks to people in the hockey (NHL) community a lot and claims most have either Lidstrom or Harvey at #2, and this is from December 2010.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I respect Devil's opinion a lot but if you are going to defer to him then I will just defer to one Scotty Bowman:

Wait, wait, wait. Let me get this straight, you respect Devil's opinion on this but not mine.
Even though we both have Harvey ahead of Bourque, ahead of Lidstrom. The only difference being that Devil has Lidstrom closer to Bourque than I do by a little bit.

As for Bowman, he has said a lot of contradictory things over the years and they have been detailed at length in previous threads.
Sometimes you have to wonder if the metal plate in his head is loose.
Just ask Crawford

As for LeBrun...by all means, hang your hat on his opinion. I won't stop ya.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I found that odd as well but the main point is that he talks to people in the hockey (NHL) community a lot and claims most have either Lidstrom or Harvey at #2, and this is from December 2010.

Would these be the same kind of hockey people that in 1998 ranked Harvey as the 6th best PLAYER of all-time and Bourque the 14th best PLAYER of all-time. Bourque, who at the time still had another 3 years to play and a Cup to add to his resume?


Lidstrom is a great player but when does the over-hyping end?
I have seen people actually set Lidstrom ahead of Howe as the greatest Red Wing ever...it's ridiculous!

 

[SChan*]

Lidstrom is a great player but when does the over-hyping end?
I have seen people actually set Lidstrom ahead of Howe as the greatest Red Wing ever...it's ridiculous!

how is winning seven norris trophies overhyped? It is 2nd only to Bobby Orr, one of the best players that ever played.

I am getting tired of your act against Nick. Give it up.

 

[SChan*]

Team accomplishments should never be used to judge individual players.

it's easy to say, but on this board it hasn't been true.

 

[canucksfan]

it's easy to say, but on this board it hasn't been true.

I don't visit this board often anymore. However, the best posters don't using 'winning' to separate individual players. Maybe the odd person that knows very little does.

 

[Rhiessan71]

it's easy to say, but on this board it hasn't been true.

Prove it!

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Argue Lidstrom vs Bourque, please don't make it personal towards other posters.

I'm about ready to start handing out thread bans.

 

[Hardyvan123]

You seriously believe that is different from what everyone else is doing here?

I always look at the data and eye test ect, if fact I've changed my mind about Larry Murphy quite a bit lately, just to provide an example.

Tarheel supports Bourque but he doesn't get all tricky with his stats and selective either and that's to be respected.

 

[lazerbullet]

Opening Bourque vs Lidstrom thread should be banned for at least 5 years. This matter gets argued at least once a year and it ends up always with the same exact result. With no new ideas and evidence why one was better. Same old ideas, biases and stats get recycled over and over again. And in the end both sides stick to their opinion and blame the other side for various sins.

 

[alanschu]

Oh I almost forgot....if anyone holds different standards between the two players it's the people that constantly detract from Bourque's offense because he played in an offensive league while completely giving Lidstrom's defense a pass despite playing in a defensive league.

That is by far the most hypocritical thing throughout this entire thread.

Is Lidstrom's defense that poor? I don't follow Detroit too closely, but I do remember being floored as an Oilers fan when he stopped an easy rebound goal by Ryan Smyth with the puck in the blue paint as he reached over from behind the net and effectively blocked Smyth's stick inches away from the puck. Then Legace covered it and I was just like RAAAAAWR.

Just one point, but I have usually heard that Lidstrom is a pretty solid two-way defenseman.