Lidstrom Vs. Potvin

[Trottier]

From what I recall, I believe Potvin was paired with Stefan Persson most of the time from 1978 on. And calling Gord Lane a defense first defensemen is kind of a joke because he had zero offensive ability. Pretty much a 6th dman that was known more for his fighting than his defensive play. Besides, he didn't play for the Islanders until the 80-81 season and I don't recall seeing much of him on the ice with Potvin.

Gary Hart, for the most part, up until 1979. (Played with his brother often on the PP.)

1980-84, Bob Lorimer, Ken Morrow and Gord Lane, the latter very sparingly. An outstanding defensive dman (Morrow), and two journeymen. Post 1984, I've blissfully forgotten. Potvin and Persson triggered an often-lethal PP at the point.

I've seen more of your posts than just this thread.
You very often choose to mock others without really bringing anything valuable to the discussion. It's obnoxious.

Seriously? Goebbels???

I mock no individual. I challenge comments/opinions, sometimes strongly. As for the "Goebbels" reference: it was intended as sarcasm, in response to what I considered several overt mischaracterizations about Denis Potvin's game. That said, I will now delete it, to avoid any further conflict.

As for the adjusted stats comparison: it is relevant. But is it wrong to suggest that stats must be interpreted in proper context? Mike Green outscored Nik Lidstrom the last two years - would you rather him running your offense, especially in a clutch situation, instead of Lidstrom? (Rhetorical question.)

That's where personal observation plays an important part, at least to many of us. Based on observation, it's not going out on a limb to suggest that most knowledgable hockey people would want the puck on Nik Lidstrom's blade if their team was down a goal late in a game, and on a two minute PP. Regardless of Mike Green's superior head to head offensive totals.

Likewise, based on adjusted numbers, Potvin and Lidstrom are "close" offensively. Based on those who watched the two players over their entire careers, they are not that close.

That said, feel free to continue to consider my personal observations meaningless. Likewise, feel free to diminish Bobby Clarke's opinion that Potvin is the best tape-to-tape breakout passer he's ever seen. And so on. All meaningless, nostalga ridden memories, none "bringing any value to the conversation".

 

[Canadiens1958]

Gord Lane

From what I recall, I believe Potvin was paired with Stefan Persson most of the time from 1978 on. And calling Gord Lane a defense first defensemen is kind of a joke because he had zero offensive ability. Pretty much a 6th dman that was known more for his fighting than his defensive play. Besides, he didn't play for the Islanders until the 80-81 season and I don't recall seeing much of him on the ice with Potvin.

Perhaps the Islander fans will correct me but Gord Lane was acquired from the Capitals when Denis Potvin suffered the thumb injury that sidelined him for a good part of the 1979-80 season.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Perhaps the Islander fans will correct me but Gord Lane was acquired from the Capitals when Denis Potvin suffered the thumb injury that sidelined him for a good part of the 1979-80 season.

I stand corrected. (Yet again)

 

[Trottier]

Perhaps the Islander fans will correct me but Gord Lane was acquired from the Capitals when Denis Potvin suffered the thumb injury that sidelined him for a good part of the 1979-80 season.

Yes. For Mike Kaszycki, a center of NHL anonimity.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2655

Lane was one of those bit guys who was forgettable October-March. But he always played very solid come the postseason.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Gord Lane

Yes. For Mike Kaszycki, a center of NHL anonimity.

http://www.hockeydb.com/ihdb/stats/pdisplay.php?pid=2655

Lane was one of those bit guys who was forgettable October-March. But he always played very solid come the postseason.

Gord Lane was one of those defensemen who over the course of a regular season against variable opponents was forgettable but come playoff time when playing the same opponent over the course of a series that could stretch to seven games he was very effective.

Certain similarities with Hal Gill come to mind.

Mike Kaszycki was one of the Islanders who looked much better than he was playing with Denis Potvin. The Islanders until 1980 did not have forward dept. especially at center where they had to make do with Kaszycki, Merrick and Henning. Denis Potvin's ability to play with the depth forwards and stabilize the game until the next line change was a big plus.

Overlooked in the Potvin / Lidstrom comparison is the fact that Lidstrom throughout his career with the Red Wings had the advantage of superior defensive centers - Yzerman/Fedorov/Primeau/Larionov initially right up to Datsyuk. Beyond Trottier who was better than any of Lidstrom's centers the Islanders never had the same quality of defensive centers.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Norris finishes
Lidstrom: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 6, 6, 6, 8
Potvin: 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 4, 8, 10

Post-season All-Star Selections:
Lidstrom: 9 1st Team Selections; 2 2nd Team and 1st Team All-Rookie
Potvin: 5 1st Team; 2 2nd Team

The difference between Lidstrom and Potvin is a 3-Time Norris winner and a 4-Time 1st Team All-Star --- IE. Denis Potvin

Lidstrom's offense is also underrated - he is not as far behind Potvin offensively as many seem to think.

Scoring vs. other defensemen:
Lidstrom: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 3, 5
Potvin: 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 5, 7, 9

Adjusted Points gives us:

Potvin
Lidstrom

86
85
85
79
77
76
75
72
69
67
67
67
66
65
64
63
61
59
58
54
54
53
52
51
46
45
44
44
43
35
35
33

Potvin has 3 years less than 10% better than Lidstrom's best, and then from there Lidstrom beats him on a year-by-year basis.
Lidstrom also lost 1 1/2 years to lockouts.

There are so many things wrong with this post, it's hard to find a good starting point.

#1) The level of competition for those Norris and All-star placements that Lidstrom had was not even remotely close to the level Potvin faced.

#2) Adjusted stats are to be used as a rough guide, You DO NOT use them at face value or as a main component/basis to compare two players. If your argument can not hold up without the use of adjusted stats, then it's a **** argument to begin with.

#3) Saying Lidstrom was not far behind Potvin offensively is a joke. Potvin leading his team in scoring, even over guys like Trottier says different. Lidstrom, even in his best offensive years never came close to doing that.

The funniest thing about all this is that I actually have Lidstrom ranked just ahead of Potvin on my list but the absurd amount some of you are trying to project Lidstrom ahead of Potvin is absolutely ridiculous imo.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

I mock no individual. I challenge comments/opinions, sometimes strongly. As for the "Goebbels" reference: it was intended as sarcasm, in response to what I considered several overt mischaracterizations about Denis Potvin's game. That said, I will now delete it, to avoid any further conflict.

As for the adjusted stats comparison: it is relevant. But is it wrong to suggest that stats must be interpreted in proper context? Mike Green outscored Nik Lidstrom the last two years - would you rather him running your offense, especially in a clutch situation, instead of Lidstrom? (Rhetorical question.)

That's where personal observation plays an important part, at least to many of us. Based on observation, it's not going out on a limb to suggest that most knowledgable hockey people would want the puck on Nik Lidstrom's blade if their team was down a goal late in a game, and on a two minute PP. Regardless of Mike Green's superior head to head offensive totals.

Likewise, based on adjusted numbers, Potvin and Lidstrom are "close" offensively. Based on those who watched the two players over their entire careers, they are not that close.

That said, feel free to continue to consider my personal observations meaningless. Likewise, feel free to diminish Bobby Clarke's opinion that Potvin is the best tape-to-tape breakout passer he's ever seen. And so on. All meaningless, nostalga ridden memories, none "bringing any value to the conversation".

I realize that asking for common decency on an internet message board is most likely as futile as polishing firewood, but I thought I would try regardless. I appreciate your followup.

I was rightfully called out for making some lazy, sweeping statements earlier so I tried to add more context -- attempting to bring more than just my opinion to the discussion. I do not continue conversing with someone who LOLs at my decently thought-out statements, whether I am right or wrong, in real life and I will not do it on an online forum either.

Anyways, the fact that I used several sources to back up my personal observations (stats, voting records and NHL polls) should tell you I do value first-hand observations and opinions, and not just stats. I just do not value a single opinion automatically above all others. Stats tend to be less subjective and will be around a lot longer than first-hand observations - I figure I am going to have to use them in order to back up my statement thirty years from now that say.... "Lidstrom was better than Green in '09 and '10", despite Green outscoring him and finishing higher in Norris voting. Otherwise I'm just going to simply sound like a daft curmudgeon.

In addition to both Potvin and Lidstrom being considered the best in their era, both of them were the #1 offensive Dmen of their era. Lidstrom is also considered the #1 defensive Dman of his era, while Potvin is not. Lidstrom also maintained an elite level of play for much longer than Potvin. Regarding the OP's question, I believe Lidstrom was a better defenseman, despite Potvin having a higher offensive peak. I tend to weigh defense from a defenseman more than offense.... and while playing physical has a lot of value, performing equally well, if not better, without playing physical has value as well -- not only from remaining in position, but staying healthy longer and being available for the ever-important penalty kills.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

There are so many things wrong with this post, it's hard to find a good starting point.

#1) The level of competition for those Norris and All-star placements that Lidstrom had was not even remotely close to the level Potvin faced.

#2) Adjusted stats are to be used as a rough guide, You DO NOT use them at face value or as a main component/basis to compare two players. If your argument can not hold up without the use of adjusted stats, then it's a **** argument to begin with.

#3) Saying Lidstrom was not far behind Potvin offensively is a joke. Potvin leading his team in scoring, even over guys like Trottier says different. Lidstrom, even in his best offensive years never came close to doing that.

The funniest thing about all this is that I actually have Lidstrom ranked just ahead of Potvin on my list but the absurd amount some of you are trying to project Lidstrom ahead of Potvin is absolutely ridiculous imo.

If I was using any of those points by itself, I would agree with you -- but taken altogether it does lead credence to the notion that Lidstrom is not that far from Potvin offensively.

1) Whether you think defenseman from the recent era are 'not even close' to defensemen of previous eras, there is the fact that they are 'not even close' to Lidstrom. Perhaps if Lidstrom was barely squeeking by the Prongers, Neidermayers, Blakes and others as the best of his generation you would have a point.... but the fact is Lidstrom is universally uncontested as the best for a decade-long stretch. His competition may have been less, but he beat them by a corresponding larger amount as well. If Lidstrom had only 3 Norrisses in this era, the argument for him over Potvin would certainly be less.

2) I did not mean for them to be taken at face value, which is why I did not present them alone to back up my opinion. I've been around long enough to know adjusted stats should be taken with a grain of salt, thank you. I do believe 70 points in the deadpuck era is worth more than 70 points in 1980, however.

3) I guess it is up to you how much you want to take from Potvin beating Trottier in his rookie and sophomore years, but I think we can both agree Trottier went on to do much better offensively than Potvin ever did.

Regardless, Lidstrom has come within "not even close" to doing similar.

In 2006, he had 80 pts - 7 behind team-leading Datsyuk
In 2001, he had 71 pts - 5 behind team-leading Shanahan
In 2000, he had 73 pts - 6 behind team-leading Yzerman

Lidstrom has also led the Red Wings in playoff scoring.

Their offensive finishes amongst peers (defensemen) also indicates that they were within 'not even close' of one another.

PS.... I thought you 'ignored' me? Please put me back on if my posts add little more than comedic value for you.

 

[Rhiessan71]

If I was using any of those points by itself, I would agree with you -- but taken altogether it does lead credence to the notion that Lidstrom is not that far from Potvin offensively.

1) Whether you think defenseman from the recent era are 'not even close' to defensemen of previous eras, there is the fact that they are 'not even close' to Lidstrom. Perhaps if Lidstrom was barely squeeking by the Prongers, Neidermayers, Blakes and others as the best of his generation you would have a point.... but the fact is Lidstrom is universally uncontested as the best for a decade-long stretch. His competition may have been less, but he beat them by a corresponding larger amount as well. If Lidstrom had only 3 Norrisses in this era, the argument for him over Potvin would certainly be less.

Whether Lidstrom is just squeaking by or not had little to do with it. The fact remains that for the last decade or more he has rarely had to compete with anyone.
Compare that to Potvin or Bourque who's competition is a who's who list of all-time top 20 Dmen.
Whether you agree or not, the fact remains that some of Lidstrom's Norris awards were uncontested.

2) I did not mean for them to be taken at face value, which is why I did not present them alone to back up my opinion. I've been around long enough to know adjusted stats should be taken with a grain of salt, thank you. I do believe 70 points in the deadpuck era is worth more than 70 points in 1980, however.

Yeah but you are suggesting that 70 points even in the DPE is somehow worth 90-100 in the mid to late 70's.
I mean we're not talking about the mid 80's here where you might have a better argument.
At some point you have to go on what you actually saw with your own eyes and anyone who actually saw both knows right away that Potvin was by far the more dangerous player offensively.

3) I guess it is up to you how much you want to take from Potvin beating Trottier in his rookie and sophomore years, but I think we can both agree Trottier went on to do much better offensively than Potvin ever did.

In the comparison of a forward to a Dman maybe heh.

Regardless, Lidstrom has come within "not even close" to doing similar.

In 2006, he had 80 pts - 7 behind team-leading Datsyuk
In 2001, he had 71 pts - 5 behind team-leading Shanahan
In 2000, he had 73 pts - 6 behind team-leading Yzerman

Lidstrom has also led the Red Wings in playoff scoring.

Granted that "not even close" is improper (especially after I gave you so much crap for doing it in another thread ).
However, only once in all those years was he even second in scoring. Even when he was only half a dozen points behind the team leader, he was still 3rd, 4th or lower overall.
Potvin also lead his team in scoring in the playoff's.

Their offensive finishes amongst peers (defensemen) also indicates that they were within 'not even close' of one another.

Are you seriously going to try and say that Potvin going up against Orr, Park, Bourque and Coffey is even remotely on the same level as what Lidstrom went up against....c'mon dude, lets have some reality here at least.
As much as I hate the "not even close" thing, I don't think there's a better place to use it than when describing Potvin's level of competition to Lidstrom's.

 

[canucks4ever]

Potvin's competition was better but lets get real, his competition for his norris trophies were habs big 3, salming and park. He never competed against coffey or bourque for his norrises.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Potvin's competition was better but lets get real, his competition for his norris trophies were habs big 3, salming and park. He never competed against coffey or bourque for his norrises.

Ummm...dude....he was still in Norris contention well into the 80's.

 

[canucks4ever]

Ummm...dude....he was still in Norris contention well into the 80's.

He was in norris contention a grand total of 2 times, in 1981 where he lost to the legendary randy carlyle and 1984. No other season in the 80's was he a top 4 norris finalist. Why would competition mean so much anyways, it doesnt change the fact that Lidstrom is better defensively than most of those guys anyways.

Honestly, if Doug Wilson and Caryle can win in the 80's and Rod Langway can win back to back strictly based on his defense, I have no problem believing Lidstrom would have won 3 or 4 back in those days.

 

[Rhiessan71]

He was in norris contention a grand total of 2 times, in 1981 where he lost to the legendary randy carlyle and 1984. No other season in the 80's was he a top 4 norris finalist. Why would competition mean so much anyways, it doesnt change the fact that Lidstrom is better defensively than most of those guys anyways.

Honestly, if Doug Wilson and Caryle can win in the 80's and Rod Langway can win back to back strictly based on his defense, I have no problem believing Lidstrom would have won 3 or 4 back in those days.

Hahaha...you can believe it all you want but you'll be one of the only ones.
If waht you say is true, then where's all Lidstrom's Norris wins in the 90's

 

[canucks4ever]

Hahaha...you can believe it all you want but you'll be one of the only ones.
If waht you say is true, then where's all Lidstrom's Norris wins in the 90's

Doug Harvey didnt become an elite player until he was 27, fail to see your point. Many here think Lidstrom was robbed in 98, you know having your name announced at a banquet hall doesnt change on ice results. Lidstrom was a top 4 defensemen since 96 in my books.

 

[Reds4Life]

The competition argument..again.
You know, defensemen are not the only competition. How about forwards, goalies and different rules? How do you know Lidstrom would not win 6 Norris trophies if he played in late 70s, early 80s? You don't. So unless you want to bring assumptions (would Potvin scored so much against better goalies?) into this, the competition argument is pointless. Randy freaking Carlyle beat Potvin for Norris. Doug Wilson did too.
Yeah, competition Lidstrom would never beat. LOL

 

[canucks4ever]

The competition argument..again.
You know, defensemen are not the only competition. How about forwards, goalies and different rules? How do you know Lidstrom would not win 6 Norris trophies if he played in late 70s, early 80s? You don't. So unless you want to bring assumptions (would Potvin scored so much against better goalies?) into this, the competition argument is pointless. Randy freaking Carlyle beat Potvin for Norris. Doug Wilson did too.
Yeah, competition Lidstrom would never beat. LOL

Exactly, lidstrom never put himself into situations where he wanted to be the #1 option on offense like Potvin did. He also never played his prime years in an era full of inflated stats, its all assumptions used to make lidstrom look worse.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Doug Harvey didnt become an elite player until he was 27, fail to see your point. Many here think Lidstrom was robbed in 98, you know having your name announced at a banquet hall doesnt change on ice results. Lidstrom was a top 4 defensemen since 96 in my books.

More like '98, that's when he truly stepped up and really made people take notice but Blake still Deserved that Norris, he was at that time more dominant on a much, much weaker team than Lidstrom.

As far as age goes....Orr was elite at 18, Potvin 20, Bourque 20, Chelios 22.
Lidstrom had to adjust to the NA game and it showed.
Is that a bad thing...naw but it certainly doesn't help his cause either.

 

[Rhiessan71]

The competition argument..again.
You know, defensemen are not the only competition. How about forwards, goalies and different rules? How do you know Lidstrom would not win 6 Norris trophies if he played in late 70s, early 80s? You don't. So unless you want to bring assumptions (would Potvin scored so much against better goalies?) into this, the competition argument is pointless. Randy freaking Carlyle beat Potvin for Norris. Doug Wilson did too.
Yeah, competition Lidstrom would never beat. LOL

Yeah...lets beat on Wilson, Langway and Carlyle. Guys you never obviously saw play.
I mean hell, these guys didn't just beat out Potvin, they beat out Robinson, Park, Bourque, Stevens, Coffey....yeah, they must of been total crap Give your heads a shake!
Funny though, I could easily say the same thing about Lidstrom losing to Chara, Niedermayer and Pronger.
I mean hey, Pronger is the only one that is arguably going to end up in the top 20 all-time.
If Lidstrom can't even beat out those 3 guys then Bourque, Chelios and Coffey would have a cake walk by your reasoning.

 

[Reds4Life]

Yeah...lets beat on Wilson, Langway and Carlyle. Guys you never obviously saw play.
I mean hell, these guys didn't just beat out Potvin, they beat out Robinson, Park, Bourque, Stevens, Coffey....yeah, they must of been total crap Give your heads a shake!
Funny though, I could easily say the same thing about Lidstrom losing to Chara, Niedermayer and Pronger.
I mean hey, Pronger is the only one that is arguably going to end up in the top 20 all-time.

Langway? I never mentioned him. Give yourself a break and please stop making **** up.
If Wilson or Carlyle can beat them, what makes you think Lidstrom would not?
And Lidstrom only lost to Chara when he was what, 39 years old? Pronger is better than Wilson or Carlyle and Niedermayer won when Lidstrom had off year. It's not like if you put Lidstrom to Potvin's era he would not win any Norris trophies. Lidstrom destroyed his competition most of the time, not just barely won his Norris trophies.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Langway? I never mentioned him. Give yourself a break and please stop making **** up.
If Wilson or Carlyle can beat them, what makes you think Lidstrom would not?
And Lidstrom only lost to Chara when he was what, 39 years old? Pronger is better than Wilson or Carlyle and Niedermayer won when Lidstrom had off year. It's not like if you put Lidstrom to Potvin's era he would not win any Norris trophies. Lidstrom destroyed his competition most of the time, not just barely won his Norris trophies.

Langway was mentioned earlier.
Hey, wait a minute here, I never said that Lidstrom couldn't of won back then, my point was that he wouldn't of won as many or as easily and that's very much the truth.

 

[Reds4Life]

Langway was mentioned earlier.
I never said that Lidstrom couldn't of won back then, my point was that he wouldn't of won as many or as easily and that's very much the truth.

How do you know what kind of year(s) would Lidstrom had? It was completly different game.

Can you also tell me if 2007 Ducks would win the Cup in 1928?

 

[Canadiens1958]

Norris Trophy and Ageism??????????

Age forms some interesting patterns when it comes to Norris Trophy winners.

http://www.hockey-reference.com/awards/norris.html

1954-67 only two winners younger than 30 - Kelly and
Laperriere

1968-92 only one winner 30 or older - Ray Bourque

1993 - 2010 only four winners under 30 Leetch, Blake, Pronger, Keith.

Perhaps this sheds some context regarding the different eras that Lidstrom and Potvin starred in.

 

[Rhiessan71]

How do you know what kind of year(s) would Lidstrom had? It was completly different game.

Can you also tell me if 2007 Ducks would win the Cup in 1928?

I don't but if you honestly think Lidstrom would still have 6 Norris trophies playing in the 80's, you're on crack.
There were Dmen better offensively (Coffey, Bourque) and Dmen that were better defensively (Langway) than Lidstrom.

There's not a single year going all the way back to 1970 where if Lidstrom had of started his career, he would of won 6 Norris other than when he did, no freakin way.
Does he win a few here and there, sure, does he take home 6...no!
Bourque's 5 will always be more impressive than Lidstrom's 6, ALWAYS!

 

[Reds4Life]

I don't but if you honestly think Lidstrom would still have 6 Norris trophies playing in the 80's, you're on crack.
There were Dmen better offensively (Coffey, Bourque) and Dmen that were better defensively (Langway) than Lidstrom.

There's not a single year going all the way back to 1970 where if Lidstrom had of started his career, he would of won 6 Norris other than when he did, no freakin way.
Does he win a few here and there, sure, does he take home 6...no!
Bourque's 5 will always be more impressive than Lidstrom's 6, ALWAYS!

And you say this based on years those defensemen had in THAT era and Lidstrom in DIFFERENT era.
You are on crack if you think you can make comparisons just like that.
Like I said you have no fooking idea how would Lidstrom do. You do not know if he would be worse than Bourque offensively, if he played focused on offense (because he had to) like Ray. So do not play all-knowing demigod.

 

[Rhiessan71]

And you say this based on years those defensemen had in THAT era and Lidstrom in DIFFERENT era.
You are on crack if you think you can make comparisons just like that.
Like I said you have no fooking idea how would Lidstrom do. You do not know if he would be worse than Bourque offensively, if he played focused on offense (because he had to) like Ray. So do not play all-knowing demigod.

I know for a fact he would not of been as good offensively as Bourque, nothing in the stats or what I saw with my own eyes would allow me to think otherwise.

Just find 6 years in the 70's or 80's where you think Lidstrom could of won it over the person that did.
By all means, prove me wrong.
Lidstrom has been good for a very long time but to try and assert that he could of won it over the peek years of Potvin, Robinson, Bourque, Coffey, Chelios even Leetch when he couldn't even win it over the peek years of MacInnis, Pronger, Neids or Chara is quite frankly ridiculous.
Scott Stevens couldn't even buy a Norris over that span and I'd put him up against Lidstrom defensively any day of the week and he wasn't even that far behind Lidstrom offensively.