Was Adam Foote underrated?

[Hockey Outsider]

Hugely underrated, and the takes in this thread just confirm it.

To me, he was a top 5-10 NHL defender for a decade, but has a solitary 10th place finish in Norris voting to show for it. He was a far better player than Sergei Gonchar, and then compare their Norris finishes.

Part of that is injuries. Most of it is the fetishizing of guys who rack up 25-30 PP points/season to look good on the back of a hockey card over the guys who tilt the ice for their team in 25 hard minutes against top players.

If you could give me prime, healthy Adam Foote or prime, healthy Rob Blake for an NHL playoff series, I take Foote. And I realize that nobody will agree with me, for the record.

Agreed, for the most part. Lots of people don't remember that it was Foote - not Blake or Bourque - who led the 2001 Avalanche in ES ice time.

I've criticized Blake elsewhere. I'd still probably take him over Foote (understanding that Blake is higher risk, higher reward). But the gap between them isn't anywhere close to what you'd expect looking at scoring stats, Norris/all-star votes, or from the general consensus.

 

[Staniowski]

It's always hard to understand what overrated/underrated really means....but in the case of Adam Foote, I think he's just somewhat forgotten after a generation or so, which is usually what happens to players like him. He was highly regarded when he played, and this is not always reflected in Norris Trophy voting, etc. So, it doesn't seem like he was underrated at the time.

It's kind of the same for other defencemen of other eras, like Mike Ramsey, Kevin Lowe and Vasili Pervukhin in the 1980s....these guys - like Adam Foote in his era - were minor stars, really good defensemen, and everybody liked them.....but after a couple generations, they often either become forgotten or remembered differently than what they were when they played.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

i think the question is, overall among his generation what tier would you have foote at?

i count that generation of dmen as 1987 draft (so post-brian leetch) up to 1995 (so up to redden/chara, counting chara's draft age year, not actual draft year)

A lidstrom and pronger

B blake, desjardins, d hatcher, niedermayer, chara

C zubov, gonchar

D ozolinsh, zhitnik, hamrlik, aucoin, svehla, jonsson, jovanovski, ohlund, rafalski, redden

E schneider, wesley, sydor, matvichuk, yushkevich, norstrom, jason smith, mccabe, boris mironov

F hedican, carney, brisebois, philippe boucher, rathje, ragnarsson

where would you put foote?

i would put foote in tier C, which means he's underrated relative to zubov and gonchar's norris records, but fairly rated insofar as he's reputationally a cut above a defense-first guy like ohlund and a clear multiple tiers above pure defensive guys like matvichuk, yushkevich, and norstrom

(and before anyone complains about my tiers, yes D and E are a total mess and could be one giant tier)

 

[Stephen]

Always viewed Foote along the lines of Derian Hatcher during that era. Mean, physical defensive d-man on a western conference powerhouse. I ranked Hatcher a little higher at the time though.

I feel like Foote was more of a Robyn Regehr meets Ryan McDonagh than a Derian Hatcher type monster. Had the mean physicality and defensive presence but it didn't come in a mutant class package.

 

[Stephen]

i think the question is, overall among his generation what tier would you have foote at?

i count that generation of dmen as 1987 draft (so post-brian leetch) up to 1995 (so up to redden/chara, counting chara's draft age year, not actual draft year)

A lidstrom and pronger

B blake, desjardins, d hatcher, niedermayer, chara

C zubov, gonchar

D ozolinsh, zhitnik, hamrlik, aucoin, svehla, jonsson, jovanovski, ohlund, rafalski, redden

E schneider, wesley, sydor, matvichuk, yushkevich, norstrom, jason smith, mccabe, boris mironov

F hedican, carney, brisebois, philippe boucher, rathje, ragnarsson

where would you put foote?

i would put foote in tier C, which means he's underrated relative to zubov and gonchar's norris records, but fairly rated insofar as he's reputationally a cut above a defense-first guy like ohlund and a clear multiple tiers above pure defensive guys like matvichuk, yushkevich, and norstrom

(and before anyone complains about my tiers, yes D and E are a total mess and could be one giant tier)

Somehow, Eric Desjardins doesn't feel right being a whole tier ahead of Zubov or Gonchar. Hatcher is a difficult one to tier as well since he was so adept at one era and so redundant the next.

 

[Albatros]

i would put foote in tier C, which means he's underrated relative to zubov and gonchar's norris records

Zubov was severely underrated if anything, much more so than Foote.

 

[Michael Farkas]

D...?

 

[norrisnick]

i think the question is, overall among his generation what tier would you have foote at?

i count that generation of dmen as 1987 draft (so post-brian leetch) up to 1995 (so up to redden/chara, counting chara's draft age year, not actual draft year)

A lidstrom and pronger

B blake, desjardins, d hatcher, niedermayer, chara

C zubov, gonchar

D ozolinsh, zhitnik, hamrlik, aucoin, svehla, jonsson, jovanovski, ohlund, rafalski, redden

E schneider, wesley, sydor, matvichuk, yushkevich, norstrom, jason smith, mccabe, boris mironov

F hedican, carney, brisebois, philippe boucher, rathje, ragnarsson

where would you put foote?

i would put foote in tier C, which means he's underrated relative to zubov and gonchar's norris records, but fairly rated insofar as he's reputationally a cut above a defense-first guy like ohlund and a clear multiple tiers above pure defensive guys like matvichuk, yushkevich, and norstrom

(and before anyone complains about my tiers, yes D and E are a total mess and could be one giant tier)

There are a few names I'd rearrange in your A/B/C tiers

A1 - Lidstrom - the separation was there
A - Pronger, Niedermayer, Chara (injuries bring Pronger to his contemporaries in this tier)
B - Blake, Zubov, Gonchar, D Hatcher
C - Desjardin, Ozo, etc...

C is where I'd put Foote. And B is where I'd put Konstantinov given where his career ended.

 

[KirkAlbuquerque]

as a kid i always got a kick about him having a foot logo on his shoulder (the old Avs 2ndary logo) i always thought there was a connection until years later i realized its a sasquatch reference.

 

[GMR]

i think the question is, overall among his generation what tier would you have foote at?

i count that generation of dmen as 1987 draft (so post-brian leetch) up to 1995 (so up to redden/chara, counting chara's draft age year, not actual draft year)

A lidstrom and pronger

B blake, desjardins, d hatcher, niedermayer, chara

C zubov, gonchar

D ozolinsh, zhitnik, hamrlik, aucoin, svehla, jonsson, jovanovski, ohlund, rafalski, redden

E schneider, wesley, sydor, matvichuk, yushkevich, norstrom, jason smith, mccabe, boris mironov

F hedican, carney, brisebois, philippe boucher, rathje, ragnarsson

where would you put foote?

i would put foote in tier C, which means he's underrated relative to zubov and gonchar's norris records, but fairly rated insofar as he's reputationally a cut above a defense-first guy like ohlund and a clear multiple tiers above pure defensive guys like matvichuk, yushkevich, and norstrom

(and before anyone complains about my tiers, yes D and E are a total mess and could be one giant tier)

Zubov should be above Desjardins and Hatcher. Neither player sniffed the Hall of Fame for a reason. He's a Tier B player for me.

I'd put Foote in Tier C below the HOF/Norris winners in Tier B. Hatcher and Desjardins are in the same tier as Foote.

Also, as great as Pronger was, his single Norris win is rather unimpressive. Shouldn't a player with his size and talent have more than one Norris trophy? Talent wise, he belongs with Lidstrom in Tier A, but his career pales in comparison. I don't see them together. Pronger would be Tier A-B.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

One of my favourite defenseman to watch play as an Av. He won 2 cups and was a huge part in the Avs playoff success. He was always in the shadows of Bourque, Blake, Ozolinsh but he was tough as nails and was vicious in the corners and along the boards. I believe many players feared playing against him. Always saw him as a Scott Stevens lite. He made Team Canada for a reason.

Was he underrated? Very. Foote was one of the best defensive defensemen in the 90s and early 00s. A warrior through and through. As a Wings fan I absolutely hated him but I have a ton of respect for his game. He was a lynchpin on that Avs team during their cup contender years and I don't know if they could have won without him.

 

[Dingo]

wow, some wildly varying views, here.

i do believe defensive defensemen will often bring the biggest scope of opinion, as there arent really any statistics to go off of. you watch your team, and after a long, long time you suddenly go, “thats the guy i trust out there the most” good luck rating those pieces on other teams, though. Defensemen who dont get watched much get noticed for points, speed, big shots, and even the defensive ones more for toughness and one or two big plays.

There is a small list of defensemen whom i personally went, ‘damn, i think that guy is actually really, really valuable’ that arent usually mentioned as more than simply, ‘good, solid players’

Foote is definitely, for me, on that list

Ohlund
Rafalski
Timmonen
Daneyko
Foote

i cant think of a fifth

and this is totally dependent not only on my ability to rate this but also on which teams i spent time watching.

I think Foote was great. Id take him and Ohlund happily on a top pairing, and most people would probably be happy letting me take them.

edit - Desjardins! thats a good one.

ill take those six, please. stats and highlights be damned.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

wow, some wildly varying views, here.

i do believe defensive defensemen will often bring the biggest scope of opinion, as there arent really any statistics to go off of. you watch your team, and after a long, long time you suddenly go, “thats the guy i trust out there the most” good luck rating those pieces on other teams, though. Defensemen who dont get watched much get noticed for points, speed, big shots, and even the defensive ones more for toughness and one or two big plays.

There is a small list of defensemen whom i personally went, ‘damn, i think that guy is actually really, really valuable’ that arent usually mentioned as more than simply, ‘good, solid players’

Foote is definitely, for me, on that list

Ohlund
Rafalski
Timmonen
Daneyko
Foote

i cant think of a fifth

and this is totally dependent not only on my ability to rate this but also on which teams i spent time watching.

I think Foote was great. Id take him and Ohlund happily on a top pairing, and most people would probably be happy letting me take them.

edit - Desjardins! thats a good one.

ill take those six, please. stats and highlights be damned.

You can’t forget Craig Ludwig or Brad McCrimmon!

 

[cupcrazyman2]

You need that type of dman back there if you want to win a cup(s)

 

[Albatros]

You need that type of dman back there if you want to win a cup(s)

Though the Wings went all the way with Andreas Lilja as their main stay-at-home option.

 

[norrisnick]

Though the Wings went all the way with Andreas Lilja as their main stay-at-home option.

Um... Lidstrom? After Lidstrom graduated from McCrimmon's finishing school in '93 he was the stay-at-home guy on his pairing until retirement. And if you don't want to count him for whatever reason, that was also Stuart's role on the 2nd pairing with Kronwall.

 

[Albatros]

Lidström finished that season with 70 points and wasn't much of a physical player at all. Stuart more of a limited two-way guy that had good stretches.

 

[OgeeOgelthorpe]

Though the Wings went all the way with Andreas Lilja as their main stay-at-home option.

Uh...no.

When the Wings won in 08 Lilja was the #5/#6 guy.

Lidstrom - Rafalski
Kronwall - Stuart


That was Detroit's top 4 in 08 and 09. Brad Stuart was a rock for Detroit. Kronwall - Stuart as the 2nd pair were better than half the league's top pair. Maybe more.

 

[norrisnick]

Lidström finished that season with 70 points and wasn't much of a physical player at all. Stuart more of a limited two-way guy that had good stretches.

Neither of these things preclude someone from being a stay-at-home defenseman.

 

[Albatros]

Neither of these things preclude someone from being a stay-at-home defenseman.

Also 5th among all defensemen in shots on goal. Calling Lidström a stay-at-home defenseman in any meaningful sense of the word is just counterfactual.

 

[Hobnobs]

Also 5th among all defensemen in shots on goal. Calling Lidström a stay-at-home defenseman in any meaningful sense of the word is just counterfactual.

You do realize a stay-at-home defenseman can still exist in the offensive zone, right? Lidström was definitely Detroits defense first defenseman.

Who was 4th in shots that year btw?

 

[norrisnick]

Also 5th among all defensemen in shots on goal. Calling Lidström a stay-at-home defenseman in any meaningful sense of the word is just counterfactual.

Is he not allowed to join the rest of the team into the offensive zone? Stay-at-home is not a literal term.

Lidstrom was defense first from the moment he was paired up with Paul Coffey. His first instinct is always to make the safe play and retreat in any sort of 50/50 play. First one back and last one out. He was the conscience that allowed Coffey, Murphy, Schneider, Rafalski, Olausson, etc... to do their thing while he played defense against every top line.

 

[Albatros]

You do realize a stay-at-home defenseman can still exist in the offensive zone, right? Lidström was definitely Detroits defense first defenseman.

Who was 4th in shots that year btw?

Defense-first ≠ stay-at-home. Most two-way defensemen prioritize defensive play.

 

[norrisnick]

Defense-first ≠ stay-at-home. Most two-way defensemen prioritize defensive play.

Then what pray tell is stay-at-home if not defense first? Are these guys not allowed to pass or shoot? Everything is a chip up and out or a dump in?

Lidstrom does everything a defenseman should do with regards to actually playing defense. He just also has world class offensive touch on top of it, but he never sacrificed defense for offense.

 

[Michael Farkas]

Yeah, even in liberal/non-literal use, I don't think Lidstrom can be characterized as a 'stay at home' d-man. I certainly view him as a defensive-minded or defense-first d-man if I had no other viable choices available (like two-way). But there's a connotation to "stay at home" for me that can be a departure from "defensive defenseman"...it's semantics really because it's not like we only have four minutes of Lidstrom film...I probably have that much on my phone.

Like...Rob Scuderi was a stay at home defenseman...he's a guy that basically only crossed the red line in the 2nd period...