Top NHL player in the 21st Century so far? #4(Inspired by ESPN ranking)

[GoldenKnight]

If we exclude anything before January 1st, 2000, Lidstrom loses exactly 650 games. Not a small amount - that's 41.5% of his career total.

On the other hand, Lidstrom wasn't equally good throughout his career. It took him half a decade to develop. He was a Norris trophy finalist 11 times; 8 of those seasons took place after 2000 (plus he should get credit for half of the 1999-00 campaign). Even if we exclude everything before January 1st, 2000, Lidstrom would still get credit for all seven of his Norris trophies, plus his Conn Smythe.

Malkin still ends up with more games (1,145 vs 914). Is Malkin so much better that 231 extra games makes up the difference? Maybe. But if I had to choose between a defensemen who gave me 8 or 9 years as Norris trophy finalist (with seven wins), or a forward who placed in the top ten in scoring four times, I'd go with the defenseman.

I’d go with the player who won MVP. Malkin is still adding to his resume and by the time he retires with 500+ goals and 1300+ points, I think we will have a clear consensus answer to the question of who was better between the two in the 2000s.

Nostalgia always tends to favor the retired player, but when both played in the NHL at the same time, Malkin was always considered the more impactful player.

 

[Albatros]

Malkin is still adding to his resume

Besides stat compiling he hasn't added anything meaningful to his resume in years. His last award was 12 years ago.

 

[Letsdothis]

Besides stat compiling he hasn't added anything meaningful to his resume in years. His last award was 12 years ago.

Just because a player doesn't win an award doesn't mean he isn't adding anything to his resume lol.

 

[CanadienShark]

The Perfect Human.

 

[Albatros]

Just because a player doesn't win an award doesn't mean he isn't adding anything to his resume lol.

Two seasons with any award votes since 2012, neither time anywhere close to a finalist. Sure he's been a good player also those last 12 years, but nowhere close to an all-time great anymore.

 

[MakeTheGoalsLarger]

I think the answer should be Malkin, Kane or Lidstrom, but I voted for Lundqvist simply because Price has votes and f that.

I originally voted for Lidstrom, but since he's running away with it anyway I changed it to Price to make up for your vote.

 

[Felidae]

Apples and oranges. Malkin's awards are league-wide. Lidstrom's are mostly restricted to 1/3 of the players - a 1/3 that includes almost none of the actual best players.

Virtually nobody ever asserted Lidstrom was the best player in the world. Malkin was in the conversation for a time and almost inarguably was in 2012.

I've always thought defenseman (and goalies to a lesser extent) get underrated in Hart voting.

But even if you think Lidstrom was never the best player in the world, there's huge value in being at the top of your specific position and playing an an incredibly high level almost every year.

Malkin may have peaked higher, but his constant injuries and even consistency issues was something that was almost never an issue with Lidstrom.

 

[wetcoast]

Besides stat compiling he hasn't added anything meaningful to his resume in years. His last award was 12 years ago.

Either way it doesn't matter as this isn't a projection thread but for play in the 21st Century so far.

 

[Midnight Judges]

I've always thought defenseman (and goalies to a lesser extent) get underrated in Hart voting.

But even if you think Lidstrom was never the best player in the world, there's huge value in being at the top of your specific position and playing an an incredibly high level almost every year.

Malkin may have peaked higher, but his constant injuries and even consistency issues was something that was almost never an issue with Lidstrom.

Malkin definitely peaked higher. There is no maybe about it.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Malkin spent quite a bit of time closer to the 10th best forward than to the 1st.

Objectively not true. Unless you are specifically focusing on a 37 year old Malkin since he played all 82 games. Malkin was a top 3 forward in the game for about a decade.

 

[Albatros]

Objectively not true. Unless you are specifically focusing on a 37 year old Malkin since he played all 82 games. Malkin was a top 3 forward in the game for about a decade.

Why doesn't his All-Star vote reflect that if it's "objectively" the case? He was in top 3 for any position three times. Additionally one fourth place with any significant number of votes.

 

[Aladyyn]

The reason why Lidstrom's Norris and Hart voting records are so different is that he benefitted from an extremely weak era in terms of defensemen.

 

[Midnight Judges]

Why doesn't his All-Star vote reflect that if it's "objectively" the case? He was in top 3 for any position three times. Additionally one fourth place with any significant number of votes.

Much of that has to do with missed games - '10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

 

[Albatros]

Much of that has to do with missed games - '10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17,

Even in points per game he was top 3 only once in those years. 2014 and 2017 were really the only years when he had a chance.

 

[dr robbie]

so right now from the poll results it's

1.Crosby
3. Ovechkin
3. McDavid

Is there any reason 2/3 became a tie? I thought Ovi won the second poll pretty handedly. Though, I might have missed something in the threads.

 

[Dingo]

Kucherov has passed Malkin for me, or, at least, he has caught him. Two or three epic playoff runs, two Rosses, and more healthy top tens in scoring. And, likely to add another couple of really good seasons.

Lidstrom would still be a good pick. Too bad that its only half his career, but it was the better half, honestly.

XXI century Lidstrom is actually peak Lidstrom. I voted him.

7 Norris Trophies, 2 Cups, Conn Smythe, led all defensemen in goals and assists from 2000 until retirement while being one of the most effective shutdown and PK defensemen in the league, great leader.

And I would argue Kucherov should be next, not Malkin, based on his accomplishments already (and being very likely to add on them).

looks like we are same page, but i took Kucherov first..... you might be more right, actually.

 

[wetcoast]

Is there any reason 2/3 became a tie? I thought Ovi won the second poll pretty handedly. Though, I might have missed something in the threads.

Probably because I didn't put a closing date on the poll but when I created the 3rd poll, Ovii had a substantial lead.

In hindsight it might have been a better idea to have a set time but honestly I'm always more interested in the arguments than the poll results but sadly there was been very little discussion for some of the voting results.

 

[TheGoldenJet]

Why doesn't his All-Star vote reflect that if it's "objectively" the case? He was in top 3 for any position three times. Additionally one fourth place with any significant number of votes.

Because he very rarely played a full season?

Should be obvious.