its easier to see the gems when they are surrounded by sand.I think you have it backwards. I think Lidstrom competed against and was in a league with every bit as good of a defensive pool as any other era. Who exactly did Bourque compete against for his Norris's? Is competing against the likes of Coffey, Chelios, Leetch, etc a drastic upgrade from Pronger, Niedermeyer, Chara, Keith, Blake etc? It's also hard to make "generational" arguments lessening Lidstrom's peers when his closest competition for #2 all time is Bourque, and their NHL careers overlapped for over a decade.
Lidstrom was so far and away ahead of his peers during his peak that his complete lack of a good-ol-boys defensive "physical" game (something Pronger, Stevens, and such got IMO quite overrated from having) completely changed the way the position is valued. I think Lidstrom, by virtue of his level of play and consistency, "lessened" the value of his peers in the same way Bourque probably did for the likes of Leetch, MacInnis, etc. Before Lidstrom, if you're not crushing bodies or leading the league in points, you weren't winning a Norris. For me, his play was so consistent, so efficient, so effective, and so sustained, that there is no defenseman I've ever seen play that I would take over him.
its easier to see the gems when they are surrounded by sand.
As a league gets better and deeper, there are more gems and it is much more difficult to pick the shiniest one out.
picking the best athlete at your highschool is easier than your college, and so forth.
If you look at a typical top 10 dmen ever list, as that poster provided, you will see that Lidstrom is the only one to have been prime in the 2000s. Bourque and chelios were great in the 90s, but Bourque made his mark in the 80s and Chelly in the early 90s. In 30 years of high paid, full world hockey, Lidstrom is the only guy on anyone’s top 10. I think that speaks volumes about the improvement of the overall product, and also of how impressive it was to win seven norrises in that period.
overlapExcept Lidstrom's runners up were frequently players from the past era. 40 year old Bourque was the runner up in Lidstrom's first Norris win. 40 year old Chelios was runner up in Lidstrom's 2nd win. 39 year old MacInnis was runner up in his 3rd. So if the old guard was still the top competition for much of Lidstrom's career, where was all this new young talent that made it harder to stand out?
The only thing Lidstrom did right was be lucky enought to play his whole career with Detroit, who had elite hall of fame players or very good players that Lidstrom could leetch off of. If Lidtrom had played his whole career in Edmonton instead, he wouldn't have been half the player he is considered to be today...
Dude Lidtrom was picked 53rd overall in the 1989 draft and he was the 19th defenseman taken overall: 1989 NHL Entry Draft - WikipediaThis might be the worst post I’ve ever seen on this board which is quite the accomplishment. Bravo.
Dude Lidtrom was picked 53rd overall in the 1989 draft and he was the 19th defenseman taken overall: 1989 NHL Entry Draft - Wikipedia
The fact is Lidstrom could've ended up anywere and it was just pure luck he ended up in Detroit. Hell he was even the Red Wings 3rd pick that draft. And he wasn't even their first defenseman as the Red Wings selected defenseman Bob Boughner with the 32nd pick overall. And yeah it's that Bob Boughner who's the head coach of the San Jose Sharks right now! Imagine that! You might want to educate yourself before you try and make a dumbass comment like this.
Now if we want to speculate a bit we can see that Calgary picked the 18th defenseman with number 50th all time and that Chicago picked the 17th defenseman with the 48th pick overall. We also have Washington picking the 20th and 21st defenseman with the 59th and 61st picks overall. So if Lidstrom was rated in this bunch of players at the draft his most likely other destination would've been Calgary, Chicago or Washington.
Now if we say Lidstrom doesn't change anything he would probably have the most success in Washington at the end of his career getting to enjoy prime Ovechkin and also leetching off of prime Bondra earlier. Chicago would be pretty depressing for Lidstrom until the end when Kane, Toews, Keith and Hossa would win Lidstrom a cup. And Calgary would have been a pretty meh career for Lidstrom as well, but at least he would've had Iginla picking up assists for him. Plus Calgary fans will probably argue that Calgary wins their cup in 2003-04 with Lidstrom on their roster. Oh but wait, Lidstrom was absolutely terrible in 2003-04 as he had his worst season of his prime then. Now if Lidstrom was so amazing as most here say he is, it would probably lead to Chicago missing out on Kane and Washington missing out on Ovechkin if Lidstrom was there, so that would mean Lidstrom would just dig an even bigger hole for himself career wise...
He’s generally considered one of the 10 best to ever play the position, and that’s an accurate assessment.
Correctly rated.
….I will say, his final Norris was a joke.
The only thing Lidstrom did right was be lucky enought to play his whole career with Detroit, who had elite hall of fame players or very good players that Lidstrom could leetch off of. If Lidtrom had played his whole career in Edmonton instead, he wouldn't have been half the player he is considered to be today...
So is Marian hossaNeither, he’s a hall of famer lol