The Athletic's 100 best players - Lidstrom at #8

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

I didnt see much of this guy play, but would this architype apply to Scott Niedermayer? Obviously not as good as Lidstrom, but from what I remember he was good defensively and I dont believe he was that physical.

oh that's a good pick.

It's funny because I think of Niedermayer as more offensive minded than Lidstrom but playing most of his career with New Jersey I know he was reigned in a lot of the time. I'd say he's more physical than Lidstrom too but not by leaps and bounds.

I didn't like Niedermayer much purely because he was on the Devils and I tired of hearing about what a smooooth skater he was.

 

[norrisnick]

I didnt see much of this guy play, but would this architype apply to Scott Niedermayer? Obviously not as good as Lidstrom, but from what I remember he was good defensively and I dont believe he was that physical.

Niedermayer was more physical than Lidstrom. Not so much in the course of playing defense, but he was sneaky dirty. He was more speed based, puck transition and chasing down rushes rather than in zone defense.

The way Nick played defense, I am similarly struggling to find a comparable. He was ultra conservative with regards to any pinches/breakouts. He'd retreat rather than gamble. But his ability to hold the zone and make a play from the blueline was ridiculous so when he was making a play he wasn't gambling. If there was a puck anywhere within the radius of his stick, he was getting a piece of it.

 

[14ari13]

I was pretty explicit in the post you replied to when I said, "'who do you feel luckiest to have seen play?'" That was the subject you replied to. So no, it wasn't "quite clear" that you were talking about entertainment factor all of a sudden lol.

I sometimes wonder if people understand what they read about.

Then again, I'm not sure how anyone can find nothing entertaining about Nicklas Lidstrom, so maybe I'm setting the bar too high

I misread your post a little bit.
But I think if we ask Lidstrom himself he would say the same about his game too what I said. I even think that he said it once. I don't remember which award he won and then in the interview he said that it should have been given to some forwards not to him.

I'm sorry for your loss.

Nothing to be sorry for. Datsyuk is clearly my favourite player of all our stars. This means I like his game better than Yzerman's, Fedorovs, Lidstroms, Zetterbergs....
But what makes you think that I say he is a better player than they?
You and the most posters here don't know how the Swedes rank they players. I was very surprised to learn that they thought that Sundin was a better player than both Forsberg and Lidstrom. It took a very time before Lidstrom was recognised in his own country. Lidstrom is far more appreciated in Canada and USA than in Sweden.
When Sweden played Finland for the gold medal and Lidstrom scored the gwg their commentator went "Sundin, why did you wait so long". I was like wtf, Lidstrom scored a beauty from the blue line and the commentator gives the credit to Sundin.
I like better Kronwalls game than Lidstroms. My favourite non wings player is Stevens. Seiders too.


Edit. Here is the video. The commentator says "Forsberg, why did you wait for so long, why didn't you do this before". I remembered wrong, I thought he said Sundin, but he said Forsberg.

 

[ricky0034]

I do think Lidstrom started to take his game to the level it got by the late nineties, but yeah, he was definitely underappreciated in the mid nineties a bit.

I never got the notion of "Ray Bourque 22 years of consistency" myself. It's like his best level of play in the late eighties and early nineties is then stretched to before and after because of all star voting and whatever lol (Bourque was actually criticized for game to game inconsistency early on in his career, and it was obvious he wasn't the same level of player by the mid/late nineties).

"all star voting and whatever" is a stupidly dismissive way of describing a year end thing voted on by the same people who vote for the Norris

the same people that vote for the Norris thought that Bourque was one of the two best Defensemen in the league for 13 seasons and one of the four best for an additional 6

he was voted one of the two for 17 straight seasons starting from his very first season in the league at the age of 19

and of course Bourque wasn't the same level of player by the mid-late nineties he was in his mid-late thirties by then

 

[tabness]

"all star voting and whatever" is a stupidly dismissive way of describing a year end thing voted on by the same people who vote for the Norris

the same people that vote for the Norris thought that Bourque was one of the two best Defensemen in the league for 13 seasons and one of the four best for an additional 6

he was voted one of the two for 17 straight seasons starting from his very first season in the league at the age of 19

and of course Bourque wasn't the same level of player by the mid-late nineties he was in his mid-late thirties by then

Yes, I'm very dismissive of something I consider stupid, you seem to be implying I care about the Norris voting, I assure you, it's stupid to me as well. The point made was clear, Bourque's play in the early and late part of his career wasn't close to his prime play, the awards/all star voting greatly obfuscates that, because awards/all star voting sucks and is done by people who don't watch many games (at least post original six) and likely have never played at any level.

I'm not really interested in having a further conversation on a hockey reference bot topic lol, is there something about Bourque's or Lidstrom's play you want to bring up instead?

 

[SoupGuru]

I've said it before, Lidstrom was a defensive defenseman that chipped in on offense when he could. I think the younger guys see his stat line and are a little meh without understanding he was always the last one into the o-zone and the first one out.

 

[ricky0034]

Yes, I'm very dismissive of something I consider stupid, you seem to be implying I care about the Norris voting, I assure you, it's stupid to me as well. The point made was clear, Bourque's play in the early and late part of his career wasn't close to his prime play, the awards/all star voting greatly obfuscates that, because awards/all star voting sucks and is done by people who don't watch many games (at least post original six) and likely have never played at any level.

I'm not really interested in having a further conversation on a hockey reference bot topic lol, is there something about Bourque's or Lidstrom's play you want to bring up instead?

yeah yeah I get it all non Wings are bad something something wotch gamez something something nEVeR pLaYEd HacKEy

 

[Pizza!Pizza!]

The narrative here at hfboards has definitely become "he didn't win a Norris until his 30s so he wasn't that good early in his career." When it was more that people didn't notice this quiet Swedish kid, when you have guys like Vlad and Coffey in the lineup. In that era you were either an offensive Dman or you played physical hockey.

Also if Lidstrom was a quiet but confident kid from Ontario he probably gets more attention earlier in his career.

Actually asking an honest question, have there been many Dmen like Lidstrom who weren't very physical in the traditional sense but were very good defensively? I'm struggling to come up with names but I'm also not very awake yet.

I also think Lidstrom is a rare case of the oft-used argument here that a player could've scored more if they would've focused less on defense. The times you were most likely to see Lidstrom jumping into the play offensively was when the Wings were behind in the third period.

Kevin Lowe comes to mind.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Actually asking an honest question, have there been many Dmen like Lidstrom who weren't very physical in the traditional sense but were very good defensively? I'm struggling to come up with names but I'm also not very awake yet.

I also think Lidstrom is a rare case of the oft-used argument here that a player could've scored more if they would've focused less on defense. The times you were most likely to see Lidstrom jumping into the play offensively was when the Wings were behind in the third period.

Teppo Numinen
Sergei Zubov
Scott Niedermeyer
Larry Murphy
Niklas Hjalmarsson (Blocked a ton of shots for Chicago)
Calle Johansson
Don Sweeney
Wade Redden
Tommy Albelin (I don’t remember him being very physical)
Mark Howe

Those are some guys that I remember from the 90s and early 00s that played solid defense but weren’t hitting machines.

 

[Henkka]

I've said it before, Lidstrom was a defensive defenseman that chipped in on offense when he could. I think the younger guys see his stat line and are a little meh without understanding he was always the last one into the o-zone and the first one out.

Lidström had that superior long-strech pass, which enabled him to stay low, and still score more even-strength points than anybody else. Then a different game on the PP, where he was also phenomenal, thanks to his QB skills.

Even-strength points from his era:

He also had more ES goals than any other defenceman from 1991 to 2012..

I just find in hilarious to talk about a defensive defenseman. He wasn't that. HE was Norris Defenceman, which will succeed in every area. Many can't do that. Be very effective defensively and at same time, mostly leading scorer defenceman. He was maybe more mentally defensive, than typical offensive "idiot" and "risk taker" defencemen. But never a defensive defenceman, when you have abilities to be offensively most effective versus your era.

He was a Norris Defenceman. One of the most perfect combination of all.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Teppo Numinen
Sergei Zubov
Scott Niedermeyer
Larry Murphy
Niklas Hjalmarsson (Blocked a ton of shots for Chicago)
Calle Johansson
Don Sweeney
Wade Redden
Tommy Albelin (I don’t remember him being very physical)
Mark Howe

Those are some guys that I remember from the 90s and early 00s that played solid defense but weren’t hitting machines.

That's a good list. Some of those guys I didn't see play enough to have an opinion. Zubov I think of as more of a prototypical offensive Dman. Murph is a good pick and one I should've thought of.

 

[norrisnick]

That's a good list. Some of those guys I didn't see play enough to have an opinion. Zubov I think of as more of a prototypical offensive Dman. Murph is a good pick and one I should've thought of.

Dallas Zubov was actually pretty underrated as a steady puck-mover. Obviously not as good defensively as Lidstrom or even a Keith, but he wasn't a liability. I'd say effectively equal to Murphy. Zubov's mobility made up for some of Murph's savvy and vice versa.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

That's a good list. Some of those guys I didn't see play enough to have an opinion. Zubov I think of as more of a prototypical offensive Dman. Murph is a good pick and one I should've thought of.

Zubov has great offensive numbers but his defense was also elite. The guy deserved way more Norris recognition than he got.