Lidstrom vs. Harvey for #2 Dman of all time?

[pappyline]

Listen Scotty Bowman who's Canadian said he could not rate someone above Lidstrom has a better/more skilled opinion than you and Don Cherry. This is the guy who's probably the best "Canadian/Canadien" coach of all time.

With all due respect to Bowman, I would not take his hyperbole as the definitive answer. Taken literally, that would mean he thinks Lidstrom was better than Orr which is highly unlikely. Most people with a knowledge of the game have Orr & Harvey above Lidstrom and many also have Shore, Bourque & Potvin ahead.

 

[Killion]

Listen Scotty Bowman who's Canadian said he could not rate someone above Lidstrom has a better/more skilled opinion than you and Don Cherry. This is the guy who's probably the best "Canadian/Canadien" coach of all time.

I am well aware of Scotty Bowmans pedigree & heritage, the fact that he's a Canadian completely irrelevant to me, as Id listen to & respect the opinion of a Herb Brooks or Anatoli Tarasov with equal deference. As for Don Cherry, he's simply an opinionated individual, more entertainer than astute observer of the game, more wrong than right about things. Very mediocre hockey mind. Just because Jimmy D' or Bowman say something is "so" just as Cherry or anyone else makes statements of opinion, you'll just have to excuse me & others if we beg to differ. Lidstroms a once in a generation player, brilliant, superb, yet again IMO, the comparisons to Harvey off the charts, a whimsical flight. To further suggest Niklas supercedes Orr in the pantheon of defencemen?. Um, dont think so. You may find Im a bit of an oddball 1234, I dont think much of Gretzky either, but thats a whole other topic.

 

[norrisnick]

With all due respect to Bowman, I would not take his hyperbole as the definitive answer. Taken literally, that would mean he thinks Lidstrom was better than Orr which is highly unlikely. Most people with a knowledge of the game have Orr & Harvey above Lidstrom and many also have Shore, Bourque & Potvin ahead.

The way Bowman made that comment (can't find the direct quote atm) it was more of a two part statement. The first part stating that it would be hard to rank people across eras with this person being above that person, etc... And then he followed it up stating he wouldn't rank anyone ahead of Lidstrom. Whether Bowman then considers it a tie at the top, a grouping, whatever. But it's not nearly as hyperbolic as you make it sound.

And in all honesty... it's something we fans worry about far more than those involved. Gives us something to do. I've long maintained that the rankings up there are largely based on preference. No one is right and no one is wrong (unless you have an indefensible opinion).

 

[Rhiessan71]

That's a great character for a movie. The protagonist can be a black, Jewish female cowboy.

The Red Wings have had some great players from Mr. Hockey to Stevie Y, Federov and Lidstrom.

Honestly Dmen, Goalies and Forwards should be rated separately IMO, but I have no problem ranking them Lidstrom,Howe then Stevie Y Federov with both sets being flipflopped by various aspects.

Wait...you have Lidstrom ahead of Howe? Really...like seriously...REALLY???

You must have missed this: Lidstrom's consistency day in and day out is better then anyone else's in history. Day to day means today as well as 15 years ago. Even you can't say Bourque was as effective in his late year as Lidstrom is today. Good vote or bad vote a 40+ year old player just won the Norris over a 25 year old Weber and a 34 year old Chara.

Wait, are you implying that Lidstrom is as effective a player now as he was 10 years ago?
Dude, he's not even close. While he isn't a mere shadow of himself, he is still a shadow none the less.

Loooong before the Norris was actually handed out this year, there were multiple threads detailing how this might be one of the weakest Norris trophy years in history and it most certainly was.

10 years ago, Lidstrom's, Weber's and Chara's performances from this year wouldn't of even merited a top 3 finish. 20 years ago, not even a top 5 finish.
Gimme a break already.

Show me a single year where Bourque won the Norris by only having an average year and everyone else not really showing up.

Oh and as far most consistent and effective year in and year out in the History of the game...there was this one guy that wore #9 for the Wings for 25 years...22 straight years of 20 goals or more and 20 consecutive top 5 scoring finishes.

 

[CC Chiefs*]

Wait...you have Lidstrom ahead of Howe? Really...like seriously...REALLY???




Wait, are you implying that Lidstrom is as effective a player now as he was 10 years ago?
Dude, he's not even close. While he isn't a mere shadow of himself, he is still a shadow none the less.

Loooong before the Norris was actually handed out this year, there were multiple threads detailing how this might be one of the weakest Norris trophy years in history and it most certainly was.

10 years ago, Lidstrom's, Weber's and Chara's performances from this year wouldn't of even merited a top 3 finish. 20 years ago, not even a top 5 finish.
Gimme a break already.

Show me a single year where Bourque won the Norris by only having an average year and everyone else not really showing up.

Oh and as far most consistent and effective year in and year out in the History of the game...there was this one guy that wore #9 for the Wings for 25 years...22 straight years of 20 goals or more and 20 consecutive top 5 scoring finishes.

There's a really easy way you can win this debate! Explain how Scotty Bowman (as reminder HHOF, 12 SC wins coach or manager, 2146 games in the NHL from 1967 to 2002 and the different defensemen that played for him or that he coached against) still somehow picks Lidstrom?

While I value your opinion Rhiessan71 I'm going with Bowman on this one.

 

[BraveCanadian]

o rly?

Bourque - 1,579 pts in 1,612 games and +542 for his career with 5 Norris

Lidstrom - 1,108 pts in 1,494 games and +429 for his career with 7 Norris

Close but you forgot:

Bourque, 1 Cup, 2 Canada Cups.

Lidstrom, 4 Cups, Gold Medal, Conn Smythe, first European captain of a Stanley Cup winner.

Lidstrom has done. it. all.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Take it one step further and add in that with today's medical knowledge, his 9 years becomes 15 and those 6 of absolute dominance become 9-10...it quickly become a rhetorical question.

Or he stays healthy and Potvin looks better at some point causing some to question his earlier greatness due to team and/or league situation it works both ways.

 

[Hardyvan123]

If you're going to go by "today" then it's easily a no-brainer for Lidstrom. Orr was a great player in his day, the best no doubt. If he tried to play his game in today's NHL he'd get wasted.

Orr wouldn't get wasted but he would be a 6'0" 200lb Dman and wouldn't have the superior skill edge that he had back in the late 60's and early 70's with the ever expanding NHL without the influx of top new talent streams from both Europe and the United States.

It's pure speculation on how much he would regress in statistical terms as team situation and coaching would contribute to it.

 

[SidGenoMario]

Players from 1900 would get eaten alive by today's stars. And today's stars would get eaten alive by the stars of 2100.

To whoever brought up this whole thing: Why is this relevant?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

There's a really easy way you can win this debate! Explain how Scotty Bowman (as reminder HHOF, 12 SC wins coach or manager, 2146 games in the NHL from 1967 to 2002 and the different defensemen that played for him or that he coached against) still somehow picks Lidstrom?

While I value your opinion Rhiessan71 I'm going with Bowman on this one.

Where did Bowman pick Lidstrom?

This is Bowman talking about how similar Lidstrom and Harvey were:

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/2508/scotty-bowman-on-those-lidstrom-harvey-comparisons

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Orr wouldn't get wasted but he would be a 6'0" 200lb Dman and wouldn't have the superior skill edge that he had back in the late 60's and early 70's with the ever expanding NHL without the influx of top new talent streams from both Europe and the United States.

It's pure speculation on how much he would regress in statistical terms as team situation and coaching would contribute to it.

If Orr were born 30 years later, he would be significantly taller. The average height of humans has been increasing due to improved nutrition.

 

[Killion]

To whoever brought up this whole thing: Why is this relevant?

meh. people are entitled to their opinions. scotty bowmans's & jimmy devellanos' is hard currency to refuse or refute if, IF you believe in its bankability, which I dont, which is apparently heretical to many & most.

 

[BlacknGold77*]

Close but you forgot:

Bourque, 1 Cup, 2 Canada Cups.

Lidstrom, 4 Cups, Gold Medal, Conn Smythe, first European captain of a Stanley Cup winner.

Lidstrom's TEAMS has done. it. all.

fixed

last time I checked there are roughly 20 other guys on a team.

Take Federov, Yzerman, Fetisov, Larianov, Vernon and Shanahan off those Red Wings teams and Lidstrom has an empty trophy case.

 

[BraveCanadian]

fixed

last time I checked there are roughly 20 other guys on a team.

Take Federov, Yzerman, Fetisov, Larianov, Vernon and Shanahan off those Red Wings teams and Lidstrom has an empty trophy case.

Sigh. I shouldn't get into this but lucky for you I am bored.

Take off the homer glasses for a moment and have a look at 2008.

None of those guys you mentioned are on the team and Lidstrom captained the Wings to a Stanley cup and picked up the Norris Trophy along the way.

Enjoy.

Hey, how did Bourque do without Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Roy etc?

Uh oh!

 

[Killion]

Uh oh!

Very amusing BraveCanadian. Care to explain that post?.... in english preferably.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Orr wouldn't get wasted but he would be a 6'0" 200lb Dman and wouldn't have the superior skill edge that he had back in the late 60's and early 70's with the ever expanding NHL without the influx of top new talent streams from both Europe and the United States.

It's pure speculation on how much he would regress in statistical terms as team situation and coaching would contribute to it.

Well...when Orr can out score a premier FORWARD like Dionne with a total that Dionne couldn't even surpass in the high flying 80's...that says something.

Like, we're not talking about out scoring other d-men here, we're talking about blowing away premier forwards.
We're also not talking about a Paul Coffey, playing at the height of the highest scoring time in league History, playing with Gretzky on a team with a wide open offense first mentality.

We're talking about Orr out scoring everyone, in a lower scoring league on what was actually a conservative team. We're talking about a guy that also played hard nosed defense, that hit, fought and blocked shots.

BTW...the height/weight thing....wtf does that have to do with anything. Bourque was only 5'11 and while both Chelios and Lidstrom are like 6'1 and 6'2, neither ever even cracked 200lbs.
Orr would just be another 6' 200lbs d-man my ass, only 1 out of the best 3 D-men in the last 20 years was even 200lbs or more and not a single one of them can skate, hit, pass or came with the kind of vision that Orr did.


Oh and as long as we're putting so much stock in what Bowman says....

Q: Mr. Bowman, as Gordie Howe turned 80 last week, there were lots of people trying to compare and figure out where he ranks now in the all time greats. How would you rank him next to Gretzky? Lemieux? Richard? — mike ward

SB: I’d put Bobby Orr in that group, too. He only played 10 seasons but he had a big impact on the game. I’ve always felt that if you were ever going to make a mold for a hockey player with five strengths — offense, defense, durability, toughness and versatility — you wouldn’t look past Gordie Howe. In my estimation, he was the best ever. It’s so hard to rank players from different eras, but to think that he got 100 points when he was 40 years old, he made 20 straight All-Star teams and was in the top five in scoring for 20 seasons and most of it in the six-team league. I have a hard time thinking you can get a better hockey player than Gordie Howe.

Bowman is being asked about the best players ever and he goes out of his way to include Orr.
Get that into ya's!
That should just about end that argument me thinks.
(Also note how much stock Bowman puts in the competition level of the 6 team league, just thought I would point that out...can you say opps )


So how about we just get back to where this discussion should be, talking about the #2-#6 spots and just leave good ole #1 alone like it should be.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Rhiessan, do you have a link to that interview with Bowman? I'd like to read the whole thing.

 

[Killion]

Well... played hard nosed defense, that hit, fought and blocked shots.

Did any one of you voters/posters ever play hockey yourselves?. These actual facts Rhiessan are apparently a "cause celebre" non?. That such a player as a Les Binkley could be compared to Dryden, Esposito or Hall is a good thing oui?. I still dont get it. Lidstrom or Harvey?. WTF is wrong with you people?.

 

[Hardyvan123]

If Orr were born 30 years later, he would be significantly taller. The average height of humans has been increasing due to improved nutrition.

His size was the least important part of my statement but I will grant you that he might be taller and larger. That might make him slower but lets say that it doesn't, his skillset advantage would not be as great as both the overall talent has risen greatly as has the ability of opposition teams to stop the other teams offensive players from scoring has increased as well for various reasons like coaching, systems and better players to use in defensive situations.

It's possible that he is consistently the best scoring forward in the NHL today but it is by no means a given, given the above noted changes in the NHL and others listed before.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Well...when Orr can out score a premier FORWARD like Dionne with a total that Dionne couldn't even surpass in the high flying 80's...that says something.

Like, we're not talking about out scoring other d-men here, we're talking about blowing away premier forwards.
We're also not talking about a Paul Coffey, playing at the height of the highest scoring time in league History, playing with Gretzky on a team with a wide open offense first mentality.

We're talking about Orr out scoring everyone, in a lower scoring league on what was actually a conservative team.[B/] We're talking about a guy that also played hard nosed defense, that hit, fought and blocked shots.

BTW...the height/weight thing....wtf does that have to do with anything. Bourque was only 5'11 and while both Chelios and Lidstrom are like 6'1 and 6'2, neither ever even cracked 200lbs.
Orr would just be another 6' 200lbs d-man my ass, only 1 out of the best 3 D-men in the last 20 years was even 200lbs or more and not a single one of them can skate, hit, pass or came with the kind of vision that Orr did.


Oh and as long as we're putting so much stock in what Bowman says....



Bowman is being asked about the best players ever and he goes out of his way to include Orr.
Get that into ya's!
That should just about end that argument me thinks.
(Also note how much stock Bowman puts in the competition level of the 6 team league, just thought I would point that out...can you say opps )


So how about we just get back to where this discussion should be, talking about the #2-#6 spots and just leave good ole #1 alone like it should be.

To say that Orr played on a conservative team is absurd, he had the green light anytime he wanted. I'm fully aware of how many points he scored and if we want to follow this faulty logic we can list the number of players that Coffey outscored in his career that are considered better than him as well.

Context does matter, Orr was a great generational talent that played for a team that gave him the green light and also surrounded him with the players he needed to succeed. To overstate his scoring that it would cross time, like you and others do way too often, is to pretend that the league has changed very little since the late 60's and early 70's.

Great players like Orr and Gretzky also had the advantage of both changing the way the game was played and being in the midst of great transition of the league during their playing days. I don't pretend to know which of these 2 affects were greater but often supporters only see what they want to and don't consider the other possibilities or even the likelihood of them being relevant.

the bottom line is that Orr and Lidstrom and even Bourque to a lesser extent played in a different landscape inn the NHL and to base comparisons mainly on stats and how they did against their peers is to punish the later players who play in increasingly more competitive circumstances on so many different levels.

Maybe after time some of the naysayers will see this as it will be reflected in the lack of sheer dominance of any players in the stats, or in real time viewing but too many people once stating a position just can't open their mind to other possibilities which is not very helpful in the quest for knowledge IMO.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Did any one of you voters/posters ever play hockey yourselves?. These actual facts Rhiessan are apparently a "cause celebre" non?. That such a player as a Les Binkley could be compared to Dryden, Esposito or Hall is a good thing oui?. I still dont get it. Lidstrom or Harvey?. WTF is wrong with you people?.

Well we all get that part which is odd given your large vocabulary one would think that your reasoning skills would be reasonably developed as well.

Maybe I missed it but I still haven't seen the argument putting Park ahead of Lidstrom or of Nick's double digit ranking of all time.

Please do enlighten us.

 

[Rhiessan71]

To say that Orr played on a conservative team is absurd, he had the green light anytime he wanted. I'm fully aware of how many points he scored and if we want to follow this faulty logic we can list the number of players that Coffey outscored in his career that are considered better than him as well.

Context does matter, Orr was a great generational talent that played for a team that gave him the green light and also surrounded him with the players he needed to succeed. To overstate his scoring that it would cross time, like you and others do way too often, is to pretend that the league has changed very little since the late 60's and early 70's.

Great players like Orr and Gretzky also had the advantage of both changing the way the game was played and being in the midst of great transition of the league during their playing days. I don't pretend to know which of these 2 affects were greater but often supporters only see what they want to and don't consider the other possibilities or even the likelihood of them being relevant.

the bottom line is that Orr and Lidstrom and even Bourque to a lesser extent played in a different landscape inn the NHL and to base comparisons mainly on stats and how they did against their peers is to punish the later players who play in increasingly more competitive circumstances on so many different levels.

Maybe after time some of the naysayers will see this as it will be reflected in the lack of sheer dominance of any players in the stats, or in real time viewing but too many people once stating a position just can't open their mind to other possibilities which is not very helpful in the quest for knowledge IMO.

Ohhhhhh ok I get it now.
Orr's perceived dominance was a product of lesser competition at the time.
Hmmmmmm...now where O where have we heard that before...wait a minute, it'll come to me...hold on....oh, that's right, it comes up whenever there's a Bourque vs Lidstrom comparison.
Lidstrom's dominance while facing lesser competition is celebrated but Orr's should be ground into dust...gotcha!

Trying to have your cake and eat it too eh

Oh and no comment on what Bowman said?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Rhiessan, do you have a link to that interview with Bowman? I'd like to read the whole thing.

Yeah man, NY Times interview here
http://slapshot.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/08/scotty-bowman-answers-your-questions-2/

 

[FiveForDrawingBlood]

So by this thought process Lidstrom gets 3 more SC vote than Bourque.

Lidstrom be better than Bourque....not sure what you mean "3 more SC vote than Bourque"?

 

[RorschachWJK]

Lidstrom be better than Bourque....not sure what you mean "3 more SC vote than Bourque"?

I wouldn't put Lidström ahead of Bourque.