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

[Rhiessan71]

Like I stated earlier one only has to watch video from Orr in the 70's or the famous Red Army Montreal game of 75 to see how slow the players and pace was back then to the 80's, 90's and to today.

...and once again, as is usually the case in these arguments, you're confusing speed with talent.
Orr was fast AND talented, there really is a difference.
Orr's speed wouldn't be as great of a weapon in today's NHL but his ability to handle, pass and shoot the puck at high speeds wouldn't change.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Oh and the slower pace of the game back in the 80's and early 90's didn't have as much to do with the speed of the players as you're implying either. For the equipment and skates that they wore back then, most were actually a lot faster than you give them credit for.
No, BY FAR the main culprit in slowing the pace of the game was the ref blowing the whistle anytime the puck was even remotely tied up for more than a second, if that, along the boards.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Well...

65 is the era of the original 6 which would last for another 2 years and by 73 the league would have 16 teams and an even further dilution of overall talent with the WHA competing for players. With no increased stream of talent the league was quite diluted from 06 times.

82 is the beginning of the Gretzky era where he scored on average 200 points a year and many other players scored at an incredibly high rate. There was some influx of talent from both Europe and the US college system but both of these streams would not fully take place until the 90's and beyond.

In the late 80's and early 90's there was a considerable effort both in the US and Canada in producing elite players and systems to bring about a better more complete hockey player.

The biggest changes revolve around the increase in the number of teams in the NHL, 1st without increased streams of talent to pick from and later on the additions of non traditional Canadian players to bring on their teams.

At least in North America there was an increased focus on developing elite players, teams and systems in the late 80's and beyond where before there was a "more let the kids play attitude." Ernie "Punch" MacLean from the dominant New Westminster Bruins in the late 70's was quoted as saying that he loved kids with character and he could teach them to skate in 6 months which goes to tell the "level" of talent in the "W" back then.

In fact except for the intimidation factor the top teams in the OHL or WHL could compete with the weaker teams of the early 70's NHL IMO. That is how far the level of play and development of systems has gone since then.

This is especially true with the Canadians embarrassing showing in the late 80's at the world jr tourney, the year 88 from memory.

this is only the numerical changes and the streams of talent never mind all the rule changes and equipment and coaching ones as well.

Like I stated earlier one only has to watch video from Orr in the 70's or the famous Red Army Montreal game of 75 to see how slow the players and pace was back then to the 80's, 90's and to today.

1963 first NHL Amateur draft - started the end of the sponsorship era and prepped hockey for expansion. Also the boom in arena construction produced a growth in NHL caliber hockey talent that carried over well into the 1980's.Formation of the three CHL junior leagues - QMJHL. OHL. WHL followed in short order.

Punch MacLean. The old junior operators would say anything to boost attendance. Trust you can supply a short list of 1 or 2 players that learned to skate within 6 months and were playing on his team. CHL junior kids could not compete with NHL adults at any time. Simply do not have the physical maturity.

!980's and 1990's efforts in Canada and the USA are now being viewed as a lomoted success at best and both are undertaking changes.

Pace in a game based on 60-90 second shifts will be slower than pace in a game with 39-40 second shifts. Just like the pace will differ between a 100M and 1500M race, 100M sprinters do not have to worry about cornering.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Other Factors

Oh and the slower pace of the game back in the 80's and early 90's didn't have as much to do with the speed of the players as you're implying either. For the equipment and skates that they wore back then, most were actually a lot faster than you give them credit for.
No, BY FAR the main culprit in slowing the pace of the game was the ref blowing the whistle anytime the puck was even remotely tied up for more than a second, if that, along the boards.

Add the fact that there were virtually no delayed offsides - play would be called without allowing the offensive players to clear the zone.Lower glass or screening around the rink, 3-3 and 4-4 hockey since coincidental penalties were not part of the rule book.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Gretzky was still on pace for 190+ points at age 27 and his drop afterwards can much more logically be explained by getting traded to the Kings, a much less offensively gifted team.

Mario's best purely statistical season was also at 27, then his 23 year old season, followed by his 30 year old season.

In the end, do you honestly think it's merely a coincidence that scoring started to decline when improved goalie equipment and more importantly, butterfly, percentage playing goalies started replacing the standup, reflex goalies league wide in the late 80's and early 90's?
I certainly don't.

Yes changes in goalie equipment and technique have lead to decreased scoring among other things.

The changing nature of goalies might be the biggest reason as well.

 

[Hardyvan123]

...and once again, as is usually the case in these arguments, you're confusing speed with talent.
Orr was fast AND talented, there really is a difference.
Orr's speed wouldn't be as great of a weapon in today's NHL but his ability to handle, pass and shoot the puck at high speeds wouldn't change.

There is no confusion with speed and talent on this end.

It is quite simply more easy to dominate against inferior talent during Orr's time than it it today when the players trying to stop the talented ones are so much better in every sense to do so.

Ask any player who is a top scorer in Jr or anywhere outside of the NHL the difference between where they came from is the speed and time and space allotted to them that is so much less and thus makes it harder to dominate.

The level and skill of Orr's opposition and it's ability to prevent any skilled players or teams from scoring was simply closer to Jr level than what Lidstrom has seen in his career, especially post lockout.

Go back and watch the tapes and games available, the defensive effort and skill in the late 60's and early 70's wasn't even close to what skill players have to go through in the post lockout era period.

Orr was the best player during his time in the NHL but it was a much weaker league and this is what needs to be taken into consideration when we compare players IMO.

Along with many other factors as well.
.

 

[Hardyvan123]

1963 first NHL Amateur draft - started the end of the sponsorship era and prepped hockey for expansion. Also the boom in arena construction produced a growth in NHL caliber hockey talent that carried over well into the 1980's.Formation of the three CHL junior leagues - QMJHL. OHL. WHL followed in short order.

Punch MacLean. The old junior operators would say anything to boost attendance. Trust you can supply a short list of 1 or 2 players that learned to skate within 6 months and were playing on his team. CHL junior kids could not compete with NHL adults at any time. Simply do not have the physical maturity.

!980's and 1990's efforts in Canada and the USA are now being viewed as a lomoted success at best and both are undertaking changes.

Pace in a game based on 60-90 second shifts will be slower than pace in a game with 39-40 second shifts. Just like the pace will differ between a 100M and 1500M race, 100M sprinters do not have to worry about cornering.

New Westminster didn't have a ton of great skaters, Stan Smyl was a character player whose skating wouldn't make it in the AHL these days (I love Stan Smyl his heart and desire where off the charts).

Bottom line is that i will stand by what I said, the top Jr teams would compete quite well with the weaker NHL teams from the early 70's. Paul Reinhart even said as much on a radio interview during training camp in 2010 which i thought was interesting because players often shy away from making such comparisons.

This long versus short shift change still doesn't explain the lack of pace during peaks times in the game back in the day and players and play simply wasn't as fast or intense in the terms of time and space given to opposition players.

I know that I'm going out on a limb here but maybe players are better conditioned and actually better skaters than in the past thus making the pace faster and time and space for more skilled players less.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yes changes in goalie equipment and technique have lead to decreased scoring among other things.

The changing nature of goalies might be the biggest reason as well.

At least we half way agree on something.

Goaltending is by far, bar none, THE greatest culprit in reduced scoring out of anything. More than all other factors combined IMO.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

At least we half way agree on something.

Goaltending is by far, bar none, THE greatest culprit in reduced scoring out of anything. More than all other factors combined IMO.

I'm inclined to agree.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Stan Smyl

New Westminster didn't have a ton of great skaters, Stan Smyl was a character player whose skating wouldn't make it in the AHL these days (I love Stan Smyl his heart and desire where off the charts).

Bottom line is that i will stand by what I said, the top Jr teams would compete quite well with the weaker NHL teams from the early 70's. Paul Reinhart even said as much on a radio interview during training camp in 2010 which i thought was interesting because players often shy away from making such comparisons.

This long versus short shift change still doesn't explain the lack of pace during peaks times in the game back in the day and players and play simply wasn't as fast or intense in the terms of time and space given to opposition players.

I know that I'm going out on a limb here but maybe players are better conditioned and actually better skaters than in the past thus making the pace faster and time and space for more skilled players less.

Stan Smyl is an interesting comparison. True he was not a great skater, neither was Tiger Williams or others that could be listed but when they got into the offensive zone they knew how to position their body correctly to make the right plays and take advantage of scoring chances.

Today you have the Ryan White, Ben Maxwell, Kyle Chipchura, types who were products of the WHL like Stan Smyl but in the offensive zone have little idea about offensive or body positioning.Lidstrom and other defensemen can rely on these players to effectively take themselves out of the play and do so with great speed.

In Doug Harvey's era you had western players like Murray Balfour, Ab McDonald,Bronco Horvath who were not the elite skaters in the league but they could play in the offensive zone. Horvath almost won a scoring championship, while Balfour and McDonald played on lines with Bobby Hull and Stan Mikita. Tpday, try playing a Ryan White, Kyle Chipchura or Ben Maxwell on a line with an elite offensive talent and their lack of skill in the offensive zone will be a serious drag.

 

[Killion]

Goaltending is by far, bar none, THE greatest culprit in reduced scoring out of anything. More than all other factors combined IMO.

I enjoy low scoring games; perfectly happy with a tie actually, but I guess Im just weird. Im no fan of todays goaltenders nor the manner in which they play the game, with the exception of a few (Brodeur, Thomas, Halak). Anyhoo, long story there. I think one factor in terms of lower scoring in addition to size & style of todays goalies in comparison to yesterdays was the tinkering around with the goal line & blue lines. Moving the net out, even with the shorter blue line to blue line transitional area in the middle of the ice surface created a forward effect, diminishing somewhat the importance of playing the angles to the nth' degree. Not being able to play the puck outside of the trapezoid behind the net in the corners is yet another piece of idiocy, but I guess Id best be stopping right there or face the wrath of one & all for being a crotchety old coot....

 

[CC Chiefs*]

At least we half way agree on something.

Goaltending is by far, bar none, THE greatest culprit in reduced scoring out of anything. More than all other factors combined IMO.

Not to mention today's goalies/equipment is HUGE. As you well know in his day Dryden was huge and today he may be above average to average in height.

 

[Ohashi_Jouzu*]

Not to mention today's goalies/equipment is HUGE. As you well know in his day Dryden was huge and today he may be above average to average in height.

I think you'll find 6'4" is definitely above average, even in today's NHL. Having spoken with him for a decently long time in person (right outside my residence room after his commencement/convocation speech - can't remember which one - at Mount Allison back in the mid/late 90s), I remember him being tall, but I wouldn't have guessed 6'4". We all shrink a bit with age though, I guess.

 

[Soderberg]

Not surprising that a disproportionate number of the people making posts like this are Bruins fans.

I'm a Bruins fan and I think Weber deserved it, Chara 2nd. +/- might be a irrelevant stat, but I don't see how the "best defensemen" was a -2 for the season. I don't think any Bruins fan would be wrong for thinking Chara deserved it either.

 

[Soderberg]

Lidstrom def. got the Norris because of reputation this year. If there isn't a standout candidate they just shouldn't award it all haha. Better than inflating the amount of Norris' to someone who really wasn't the best d-man in the league this year. Sort of loses meaning when you hand it out like a popularity contest.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

New Westminster didn't have a ton of great skaters, Stan Smyl was a character player whose skating wouldn't make it in the AHL these days (I love Stan Smyl his heart and desire where off the charts).

Bottom line is that i will stand by what I said, the top Jr teams would compete quite well with the weaker NHL teams from the early 70's. Paul Reinhart even said as much on a radio interview during training camp in 2010 which i thought was interesting because players often shy away from making such comparisons.

This long versus short shift change still doesn't explain the lack of pace during peaks times in the game back in the day and players and play simply wasn't as fast or intense in the terms of time and space given to opposition players.

I know that I'm going out on a limb here but maybe players are better conditioned and actually better skaters than in the past thus making the pace faster and time and space for more skilled players less.

This assertion seems ludicrous to me.

And if it were true then the top 50 players of all-time would all be playing today.

As for the pace of the game, World Junior and NCAA championship level play usually has a faster pace than NHL games. Players at those levels have not the ability nor desire to slow the game down when its called for. That doesn't make it better.

 

[Hardyvan123]

This assertion seems ludicrous to me.

And if it were true then the top 50 players of all-time would all be playing today.

As for the pace of the game, World Junior and NCAA championship level play usually has a faster pace than NHL games. Players at those levels have not the ability nor desire to slow the game down when its called for. That doesn't make it better.

My vantage point is in Vancouver and I'm pretty confident that the strongest of the giant teams could compete with the NHL product here in Vancouver during the early 70's.

To be clear it would only be a hand full of teams perhaps 2 or 3 that could compete with the really lousy NHL teams of the early to mid 70's. (72-75 probably being the weakest with expansion and WHA)
11-12 Portland Winter Hawks if they keep Nino and Ryan would be competititve with a number of teams as well.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0054022011.html

Size of NHL teams wouldn't be nearly as big of a factor either as some Jr teams are very big as well as fast, skilled and playing great systems.

Todays Jr teams play complete systems and games while the early 70's Canucks were very north-south and quite slow and simply not a great collection of talent.

Now that you mention it purely looking at a player and when he played it's pretty obvious to me that at least 50 of the top 100 players of all time are playing right now if we do not give consideration for era and other factors.

Of course that's not fair to earlier players so we evaluate a ton of factors when comparing players to try to "even out the playing failed " and compare apples with apples.

 

[Rhiessan71]

My vantage point is in Vancouver and I'm pretty confident that the strongest of the giant teams could compete with the NHL product here in Vancouver during the early 70's.

To be clear it would only be a hand full of teams perhaps 2 or 3 that could compete with the really lousy NHL teams of the early to mid 70's. (72-75 probably being the weakest with expansion and WHA)
11-12 Portland Winter Hawks if they keep Nino and Ryan would be competititve with a number of teams as well.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0054022011.html

Size of NHL teams wouldn't be nearly as big of a factor either as some Jr teams are very big as well as fast, skilled and playing great systems.

Todays Jr teams play complete systems and games while the early 70's Canucks were very north-south and quite slow and simply not a great collection of talent.

Now that you mention it purely looking at a player and when he played it's pretty obvious to me that at least 50 of the top 100 players of all time are playing right now if we do not give consideration for era and other factors.

Of course that's not fair to earlier players so we evaluate a ton of factors when comparing players to try to "even out the playing failed " and compare apples with apples.

Today's junior players would get killed, literally.
It would take about 10 minutes and then none of the Jr players would go any where near the corners or the front of the net, guaranteed!

You love to talk about skill and skating but always ignore how much tougher a player had to be back then.
Besides I would love to see that Junior team skating around on tube skates, carrying around an extra 30lbs of equipment and using actual wooden sticks with minimal curves.
Or their goalie trying to play full butterfly without getting his collarbone shattered or even having any energy left by the 3rd period after going up and down so much in much heavier equipment. Equipment that is now almost twice as heavy from water retention at that point heh.
Like I said in another post Casey, context goes both ways.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Today's junior players would get killed, literally.
It would take about 10 minutes and then none of the Jr players would go any where near the corners or the front of the net, guaranteed!

You love to talk about skill and skating but always ignore how much tougher a player had to be back then.
Besides I would love to see that Junior team skating around on tube skates, carrying around an extra 30lbs of equipment and using actual wooden sticks with minimal curves.
Or their goalie trying to play full butterfly without getting his collarbone shattered or even having any energy left by the 3rd period after going up and down so much in much heavier equipment. Equipment that is now almost twice as heavy from water retention at that point heh.
Like I said in another post Casey, context goes both ways.

Look i know that if I said that the planets revolved around the sun you would say otherwise but how about reading what I said.

I said the top Jr teams and only a handfull would be competitive with the weaker early mid 70's teams like Washington. Portlands lineup is for the most part big enough and tough enough to play with those weaker teams.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000491975.html

Here is Washington's lineup in 75 and even if you put todays Jr teams in the old equipment and gave them say a month to get used to it they would do quite well against that lofty tough Washington team IMO.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Look i know that if I said that the planets revolved around the sun you would say otherwise but how about reading what I said.

I said the top Jr teams and only a handfull would be competitive with the weaker early mid 70's teams like Washington. Portlands lineup is for the most part big enough and tough enough to play with those weaker teams.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0000491975.html

Here is Washington's lineup in 75 and even if you put todays Jr teams in the old equipment and gave them say a month to get used to it they would do quite well against that lofty tough Washington team IMO.

I have no doubt they would do well...at first. That's what happens when you take a modern athlete back 40 friggin years lol and it still doesn't mean those Junior players are any more talented either, it just means those Jr players are able to harness more of their talent at a younger age.
They'd still get killed and be scared ****less after one period.

This is the thing that you constantly ignore in your old vs new ramblings. That talent is still talent and bringing any of those old players into today's game means they would also get the same opportunities to develop their talent at today's pace and benefits.
Whether Bobby Orr plays in the 70's or today, it doesn't matter, he would still be well ahead of the curve. Maybe the competition today is better and deeper than it was in 1975 but at the same time, Orr would also be that much better than he was and he would still be one of the best players to ever play the game.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Strength

My vantage point is in Vancouver and I'm pretty confident that the strongest of the giant teams could compete with the NHL product here in Vancouver during the early 70's.

To be clear it would only be a hand full of teams perhaps 2 or 3 that could compete with the really lousy NHL teams of the early to mid 70's. (72-75 probably being the weakest with expansion and WHA)
11-12 Portland Winter Hawks if they keep Nino and Ryan would be competititve with a number of teams as well.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/leagues/seasons/teams/0054022011.html

Size of NHL teams wouldn't be nearly as big of a factor either as some Jr teams are very big as well as fast, skilled and playing great systems.

Todays Jr teams play complete systems and games while the early 70's Canucks were very north-south and quite slow and simply not a great collection of talent.

Now that you mention it purely looking at a player and when he played it's pretty obvious to me that at least 50 of the top 100 players of all time are playing right now if we do not give consideration for era and other factors.

Of course that's not fair to earlier players so we evaluate a ton of factors when comparing players to try to "even out the playing failed " and compare apples with apples.

Looking at size is one thing but there is a major difference between "man strength" and "teen strength" and size.Simply teenagers do not have the strength to last.They may have size but not the strength that an adult with the same build would have.

Prime example would be Nino in his 9 gamer in the NHL this past season.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/players/n/niedeni01.html

1G/1A and that was on a team surrounded by adults.Typical junior team with 16 and 17 year olds, not a chance.

Another example would be Eric Lindros. First year in the NHL he was 19 and bigger than most NHL players yet the veteran dmen would bounce him around easily. Same thing happened to Brett Lindros.

If the early seventies Canucks played nice it would be one thing but if Orland Kurtenbach and the other physical players played theit game, not a chance.

 

[Hardyvan123]

I have no doubt they would do well...at first. That's what happens when you take a modern athlete back 40 friggin years lol and it still doesn't mean those Junior players are any more talented either, it just means those Jr players are able to harness more of their talent at a younger age.
They'd still get killed and be scared ****less after one period.

This is the thing that you constantly ignore in your old vs new ramblings. That talent is still talent and bringing any of those old players into today's game means they would also get the same opportunities to develop their talent at today's pace and benefits.
Whether Bobby Orr plays in the 70's or today, it doesn't matter, he would still be well ahead of the curve. Maybe the competition today is better and deeper than it was in 1975 but at the same time, Orr would also be that much better than he was and he would still be one of the best players to ever play the game.

Anyone who watches hockey knows that there is no maybe about the difference and its purely subjective on how much better Orr would be.
Sure the equipment, training and especially medical advances would help to prolong his career but it is very debatable on how much, if nay more talent he would have gained with these advances.

My whole point in bringing up the comp was to point out that it is harder to stand out in a more competitive environment than a weaker one and anyone who tries to minimize or ignore the differences between the early 70's and the 00's isn't really interested in serious discussion on the topic at hand IMO.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Muhammad Ali and Others

Anyone who watches hockey knows that there is no maybe about the difference and its purely subjective on how much better Orr would be.
Sure the equipment, training and especially medical advances would help to prolong his career but it is very debatable on how much, if nay more talent he would have gained with these advances.

My whole point in bringing up the comp was to point out that it is harder to stand out in a more competitive environment than a weaker one and anyone who tries to minimize or ignore the differences between the early 70's and the 00's

Muhammad Ali would definitely contradict your position as boxing from his era was much more competitive than from today. Tiger Woods also managed to stand out in the more competitive pro golf environment of the 00's.

Team level - Canada's performance at the WJCs during the last 20 - 25 years is a very high level of dominance relative to the competition levels. Detroit making the playoffs annually since 1990-91 and counting surpasses the string put together by any NHL dynasty teams from the O6 era or post expansion era into the early 1990's.That they did not win more SCs raises the following, weak team or weak competition issue. The strong team amongst strong competition question is not really there given the fact that they rarely had elite level goaltending.

Your position is open to some serious questions.

 

[Killion]

The strong team amongst strong competition question is not really there given the fact that they rarely had elite level goaltending.

Uh-oh. Now youve' gone n' done it.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Anyone who watches hockey knows that there is no maybe about the difference and its purely subjective on how much better Orr would be.
Sure the equipment, training and especially medical advances would help to prolong his career but it is very debatable on how much, if nay more talent he would have gained with these advances.

My whole point in bringing up the comp was to point out that it is harder to stand out in a more competitive environment than a weaker one and anyone who tries to minimize or ignore the differences between the early 70's and the 00's

No dude, talent is still talent and if today's coaching and training allows for players to better fulfill their talent, then Orr would be even better. Medical advances alone would make him a better player for pete's sake.

The level to which he would dominate is the only subjective part, not whether he would or not.
He would still be the best D-man in the league.

You always think I'm picking on you Casey but I'm not (Ok, the Casey thing is picking on you a little bit maybe ).
But you know, it's not that your theories don't have some basis but you always take them too far and blanket everything with it. It's almost like attacking the Russians in winter, you know deep down that it's not going to go well but just because other more notable men have failed in the past, you will accomplish what they couldn't. It seems you just can't help yourself.
Your weaker competition theory only goes so far. For one, if competition was so weak and the league so watered down then why wasn't there an even steeper separation between the top players. Why weren't they all dominating like Orr?
All you have to do is take some of Orr's competition and compare them to what came later. You can go Park, Robinson and Potvin and go right into Bourque and of course Bourque takes you right into today pretty much. I'm sorry but the gap is huge. You know what level those guys were to Orr and you know what level they are to Bourque.
Second, I would easily consider Potvin, Park, Robinson and Salming at the very least equal to if not better, not to mention by far more consistent than anyone Lidstrom has faced for his Norris's.