Top-100 Hockey Players of All-Time - Preliminary Discussion Thread (Revenge of Michael Myers)

[sr edler]

Nicklas Lidstrom was a regular-assed, clean-cut, occasional-scotch, gambling is forbidden by the Bible (even insurance), paid-his-taxes-Jan-1st

Lidström apparently have a very big collection of hockey trading cards. That could also be considered some form of addiction.

 

[MXD]

Just on this page alone Lidstrom was first compared to Markus Naslund, then to Andrei Markov. Just compare him to Brendan Smith already. Sheesh...

You're not helping your case, unless you're being heavily sarcastic.

I'M ACTUALLY PRAISING LIDSTROM.

And explaining why, accoding to me, he took a backseat to inferior players in popular imagination.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Haha seriously...sentinel just can't get out of his own way this past week...we're promoting a Red Wing, just let us do our thing

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Hey QPQ @quoipourquoi, here's a quote from the polls board (doing their own top X players of all-time as we speak):

I get that but no goaltender should ever be mentioned in the top 10. They literally cannot score. They play one side of the game. Cant possibly be a top 10 player if youre playing half the game

Do you have alcohol poisoning yet?

 

[ImporterExporter]

Just on this page alone Lidstrom was first compared to Markus Naslund, then to Andrei Markov. Just compare him to Brendan Smith already. Sheesh...

Obviously I don't think those folks think Naslund or Markov were anywhere close to Lidstrom as hockey players, certainly on career value, but it is quite sad to see them in the same sentence at all.

Naslund was NEVER on Lidstrom's level. Lidstrom is a guy who in his prime was playing north of 30 minutes a game, huge role on both special teams. Scored as much or more than any other Dmen throughout his career and did that while playing a damn near perfect defensive game. Naslund was a soft, flashy star who managed to put together a few great OFFENSIVE seasons. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Sentinel]

It'd probably use "factual" instead of "reasonable".

Last time I checked (a week ago) Crosby wasn't the best player on his own team.

 

[Sentinel]

You're not helping your case, unless you're being heavily sarcastic.

I'M ACTUALLY PRAISING LIDSTROM.

And explaining why, accoding to me, he took a backseat to inferior players in popular imagination.

Of course I was being sarcastic. Note how my other post on Lidstrom essentially echoes your own sentiments.

 

[MXD]

Hey QPQ @quoipourquoi, here's a quote from the polls board (doing their own top X players of all-time as we speak):



Do you have alcohol poisoning yet?

Intravenous Old Rasputin's Ingestion.

... We're close to 4 Pappy Van Winkle Bottles / 60 territory.

 

[VanIslander]

Whether a player was ever considered the best or top 3 player is about perceptions of TALENT that involve reasonable judgements by his contemporaries as well as hype over perceptions of flashy style or potential.

TALENT, PEAK, CAREER... different considerations to take into account.

Lidstrom had CAREER. But how much PEAK? And how much TALENT compared to other top20 candidates?

Players like Perreault and Kariya had TALENT by all accounts, but lacked in other dimensions. The top 20 don't LACK in any of the three areas, but some have relatively more, some relatively less.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Lidstrom's peak was about 12 to 15 years (pretty good I feel like)...talent is comparable to other players in the top 20 of course (otherwise, I wouldn't be in his corner)...by saying that, I'm assuming that we realize that puck handling is not the lone skill that game success is dependent on...though the examples of 11 and Kariya make me question that...

 

[BenchBrawl]

The existence of Chris Pronger is a problem for Nicklas Lidstrom; at his best and when healthy, Pronger was better than Lidstrom.It's not just the spike Hart year, it's also his impact in the playoffs post-lockout.Also visually, Pronger was a more dominating force.

I feel this is unique among the Top 7 defensemen of all-time (Orr,Kelly,Harvey,Potvin,Shore,Lidstrom,Bourque).At their best, they were the best defenseman in the world, not just by accomplishments, but by top level of play as well (unless playing against another Top 7).Except Lidstrom.

I'm not sure about this, open to change my mind.

Edit: Add Fetisov to the list, and even Robinson.

 

[ImporterExporter]

Lidstrom's talent was incredible. I watched the vast majority of his career and have since re watched more games. Again, it boils down to him being, IMO, the most boring superstar ever to the play the game. There wasn't a ton of flair, there weren't dozens of jaw dropping plays. That DOESN'T mean he was any less skilled at what he did. He's a fine wine. Said it forever. Hopefully like a great wine, he ages well with some folks.

 

[The Macho King]

The existence of Chris Pronger is a problem for Nicklas Lidstrom; at his best and when healthy, Pronger was better than Lidstrom. It's not just the spike Hart year, it's also his impact in the playoffs post-lockout.Also visually, Pronger was a more dominating force.

I feel this is unique among the Top 7 defensemen of all-time (Orr,Kelly,Harvey,Potvin,Shore,Lidstrom,Bourque).At their best, they were the best defenseman in the world, not just by accomplishments, but by top level of play as well (unless playing against another Top 7).Except Lidstrom.

I'm not sure about this, open to change my mind.

I'm sorry - this is such bullshit. Pronger's post-lockout playoff runs (and predominately the Oilers run) have caused worms to enter peoples brains and remember him as something far more impressive than what he really was.

 

[BenchBrawl]

I'm sorry - this is such bull****. Pronger's post-lockout playoff runs (and predominately the Oilers run) have caused worms to enter peoples brains and remember him as something far more impressive than what he really was.

I don't think this is true.In the end if you could choose ANY player for a playoff run post lockout I'd pick Chris Pronger.This is a testament of the impact he could have on a lineup.

By the way, I'm not trying to argue that Pronger should be ranked ahead of Lidstrom in the list.Pronger wasn't consistent from year to year and he didn't manage to put it all together so his on-paper resume looks good, so he must pay the price.But he was the most dominant force from the blueline.

 

[MXD]

I feel this is unique among the Top 7 defensemen of all-time (Orr,Kelly,Harvey,Potvin,Shore,Lidstrom,Bourque).At their best, they were the best defenseman in the world, not just by accomplishments, but by top level of play as well (unless playing against another Top 7).Except Lidstrom.

I'm not sure about this, open to change my mind.

Lidstrom was also the most "boring" player in that bunch, with the possible notable exception of Harvey (that's something I disagree with from what little footage I've seen from Harvey, but it can at least be argued)

And Lidstrom was at its best the better D-Men in the world too, it's just that, one of these years, a notoriously inconsistent player hit his spike. I don't think those 6 other D-Men faced anything resembling Spike Pronger. Hell, Raymond Bourque, in the middle of his prime, was completely outplayed *according to voters* by a strictly inferior player, too!

 

[Sentinel]

The existence of Chris Pronger is a problem for Nicklas Lidstrom; at his best and when healthy, Pronger was better than Lidstrom.It's not just the spike Hart year, it's also his impact in the playoffs post-lockout.Also visually, Pronger was a more dominating force.

I feel this is unique among the Top 7 defensemen of all-time (Orr,Kelly,Harvey,Potvin,Shore,Lidstrom,Bourque).At their best, they were the best defenseman in the world, not just by accomplishments, but by top level of play as well (unless playing against another Top 7).Except Lidstrom.

I'm not sure about this, open to change my mind.

In Pronger's Hart-winning season, in 7 PO games he had 32 PIM. In Lidstrom's Conn Smythe-winning playoffs, in 23 PO games he had 2 PIM. Which one was more beneficial to their team?

Oh, and I don't think Lidstrom was boring. Far from it.

"He winds up... aaand Nikki Sixx becomes Nikki Seven!"

 

[VanIslander]

Who was better, Pronger or Niedermayer? was a lively debate for years. I was a HUGE Pronger fan but too much has been made of his Hart season (Fedorov's too). Peak is a 5 to 7 year period, especially when looking at the best of the best.

I've often thought Pronger more talented than Lidstrom but less accomplished, both in terms of peak period and career, regular season and playoffs.

 

[The Macho King]

I don't think this is true.In the end if you could choose ANY player for a playoff run post lockout I'd pick Chris Pronger.This is a testament of the impact he could have on a lineup.

By the way, I'm not trying to argue that Pronger should be ranked ahead of Lidstrom in the list.

Pronger benefited from the whistles being put away, and he was always a great player, so don't think I'm knocking him here (although I know I have him lower on my list than the majority of people).

Pronger's playoff career has to be split in halves, because pre-lockout he and the Blues were nothing short of disappointing. Post-lockout, he had that transcendent run with the Oilers, was one of about a dozen Ducks that were great in the playoffs in 07, and was one of the best Flyers players on their run. That's great and all, but 06 was just a weird season all around in the playoffs, and that Ducks team is probably the best post-lockout team assembled. Meanwhile, that Flyers team benefited greatly from Halak going super saiyan and knocking out the two best teams in the East before the Conference Finals.

Lidstrom was great in the playoffs on either side of the lockout, and he also wasn't the player that was going to take the stupid cross-checking penalty in the last five minutes or miss Game 6 of a series because he decided to see how far he could stick his elbow through someone's head. For all the "old school hockey" nonsense, I would rather have Lidstrom shutting down teams on the ice than Pronger intimidating players from the penalty/press box.

 

[BenchBrawl]

Lidstrom was also the most "boring" player in that bunch, with the possible notable exception of Harvey (that's something I disagree with from what little footage I've seen from Harvey, but it can at least be argued)

And Lidstrom was at its best the better D-Men in the world too, it's just that, one of these years, a notoriously inconsistent player hit his spike.

This "boring" argument must die.I can appreciate a subtle player just like I can appreciate a flashy one.I'm not going to automatically think the flashy player or big open-ice hitter is superior.I too watched Andrei Markov's career and appreciated his impact.

You mention Harvey: well, Harvey stood out big time.

 

[BenchBrawl]

But seriously, I have an unknown lineup, which I am informed could contend for the Stanley Cup.I can pick ANY player post lockout.I'd pick Chris Pronger.

Edit: Crosby is the only other candidate that would make me hesitate.

 

[MXD]

This "boring" argument must die.I can appreciate a subtle player just like I can appreciate a flashy one.I'm not going to automatically think the flashy player or big open-ice hitter is superior.I too watched Andrei Markov's career and appreciated his impact.

You mention Harvey: well, Harvey stood out big time.

For the record, I'm saying that Lidstrom might have been generally underrated (media, awards voting) due to his playing style. That wasn't adressed to you or to anyone here specifically.

He also earned a Norris that should've gone to someone else.

 

[ImporterExporter]

In Pronger's Hart-winning season, in 7 PO games he had 32 PIM. In Lidstrom's Conn Smythe-winning playoffs, in 23 PO games he had 2 PIM. Which one was more beneficial to their team?

Oh, and I don't think Lidstrom was boring. Far from it.

"He winds up... aaand Nikki Sixx becomes Nikki Seven!"

So much this.

Pronger gets love because he was a physical freak and played a traditional North American game that was littered all over the NHL in the DPE. Yes, he was an amazing player when on, but his consistency was not close to Lidstrom. And as Sentinal pointed out, Pronger was volatile in terms of taking stupid penalties which put his own team in a bind. You never had to worry about that with Nick.

I'll take Lidstrom 6 days a week and twice on Sunday's over Pronger.

As for being boring.....I mean in the traditional sense of the modern era where we are so enamored with highlights. It's a fast food culture and guys like Lidstrom don't necessarily fit that mold.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Hey QPQ @quoipourquoi, here's a quote from the polls board (doing their own top X players of all-time as we speak):



Do you have alcohol poisoning yet?

Posts like that are why my cellphone has gone through two OtterBox cases this year.


Also, in terms of peak value, Markus Naslund was better than Nicklas Lidstrom for, like, three-straight years. The only reason I mentioned Naslund, a player with three-consecutive top-5 Hart finishes to Lidstrom’s once-in-a-career and not Roman Cechmanek is because Cechmanek isn’t from Sweden.

 

[Michael Farkas]

The only thing Pronger had on Lidstrom was a slapshot and physicality...

Lidstrom was a better skater, puck mover, puck carrier, better positionally, smarter, better risk mitigator...virtually everything. And it's not by that terribly small a margin either...

Let's keep Lidstrom in the company that he keeps (Bourque, Potvin, Fetisov, etc.) and Pronger in the company that he keeps (namely, Scott Stevens)...

And if we're going to play the "stickhandling = talent" card...where did you guys put Housley on your list?

 

[quoipourquoi]

In Pronger's Hart-winning season, in 7 PO games he had 32 PIM. In Lidstrom's Conn Smythe-winning playoffs, in 23 PO games he had 2 PIM. Which one was more beneficial to their team?

Pronger scored 7 points in 7 games and half of those penalties came in the last 30 seconds of a 4-2 game making them completely inconsequential, so... Pronger.