He was drafted in the third round in the draft so people probably didn't know how good he was back then. But could people have been able to tell that he had the talent to be as good as he eventually became? What kind of a defenceman was Lidstrom projected to be?
What kind of a d-man was Lidstrom projected to become early in his career?
- Thread starter Sticks and Pucks
- Start date
http://www.freep.com/article/201204...d-Wings-Nicklas-Lidstrom-is-ahead-of-the-game
He had the talent, he had the nature of being a world-class athlete, he learned from the best (playing with Brad McCrimmon, Paul Coffey and Larry Murphy) and when he got everything together, he started winning those trophies.
Lidström won every Norris Trophy with a different defensive pair he mainly played at those seasons.
2001 - Lidström - Larry Murphy (40-year-old Murphy retired after this season)
2002 - Lidström - Fredrik Olausson
2003 - Lidström - Jason Woolley
2006 - Lidström - Andreas Lilja
2007 - Lidström - Danny Markov
2008 - Lidström - Brian Rafalski
2011 - Lidström - Brad Stuart
He had the talent, he had the nature of being a world-class athlete, he learned from the best (playing with Brad McCrimmon, Paul Coffey and Larry Murphy) and when he got everything together, he started winning those trophies.
Lidström won every Norris Trophy with a different defensive pair he mainly played at those seasons.
2001 - Lidström - Larry Murphy (40-year-old Murphy retired after this season)
2002 - Lidström - Fredrik Olausson
2003 - Lidström - Jason Woolley
2006 - Lidström - Andreas Lilja
2007 - Lidström - Danny Markov
2008 - Lidström - Brian Rafalski
2011 - Lidström - Brad Stuart
This is interesting. So it seems like Lidstrom was just another good prospect back in the day. I guess when we say certain good prospects today could be the next Lidstrom, it is very possible!
TheDevilMadeMe
Registered User
If you want to discuss Lidstrom's place in history (vs Shore/Harvey/Bourque/whoever), please use this thread: http://hfboards.mandatory.com/showthread.php?t=1297143
The current thread is about how Lidstrom was projected as a prospect/young player
The current thread is about how Lidstrom was projected as a prospect/young player
It seems like d-men in general are a little more difficult to accurately project.
JSmith81x
Your weapon is guilt
Not exactly what you want, since it's three seasons into his career, but ...
From 1994-95 Hockey Scouting Report by Sherry Ross, page 117:
From 1994-95 Hockey Scouting Report by Sherry Ross, page 117:
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,204
I am just going by my memory since he wasn't hyped up as much as you would think. BUt even by 2000, if you had told me that Lidstrom would have had a career as good as Paul Coffey's I'd have thought you were crazy. Even at that point late in his career, I never envisioned him as a top 5ish defenseman of all-time. He just really turned it on after that.
LeBlondeDemon10
Registered User
Hockey sense. This is not learned in the gym. Some of the greatest players in history likely never touched a weight in their life. Of course some of the other greatest players did or something similar to it (Hull on the farm).
This quality is quickly disappearing in the game. Gretzky and Lemieux had it. Lafleur and Perreault had it. Coffey had it. Jagr still has it when watching him tonight. Giroux and Malkin have it. St. Louis and Karlsson have it. What's happened to our great chess players? Is today's game based too much on speed or do we just not see as many players like this because they are spread out over so many teams?
This quality is quickly disappearing in the game. Gretzky and Lemieux had it. Lafleur and Perreault had it. Coffey had it. Jagr still has it when watching him tonight. Giroux and Malkin have it. St. Louis and Karlsson have it. What's happened to our great chess players? Is today's game based too much on speed or do we just not see as many players like this because they are spread out over so many teams?
Last edited:
Well he was doing very well in the playoffs from 94 onwards and was hitting his stride in 96 in the regular season.
His style of play and the whole "team situation" in Detroit helped mask what most in Detroit knew before the rest of the league.
From 96 onwards he was getting pretty serious recognition for the Norris during a time of some strong seasons by other top Dmen of all time as well.
Basically from 96 onwards he was a constant top 5 Dman in the league and just took it to another level at the end of the decade and through the 2000's
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,204
sr edler
gold is not reality
- Mar 20, 2010
- 12,260
- 7,331
He almost won the Calder with a very strong rookie season so it's not that he was completely quiet in the early 90s or came from nowhere, but his team didn't rely on him as much as a number one defenseman back then so he went a bit under the radar.
Actually, that's what I wanted! I was pretty sure that Lidstrom was not hyped up to be all that early in his career. From this article it seems that Lidstrom wasn't really hyped to be what he was even when he was in his mid-20s. To see him do what he eventually did is quite remarkable.
Yeah, it's quite remarkable that he won all his Norris Trophies when he was in his 30s (and 40s in 2011) and before that he seemed to have been just another very good defenseman.
Would it be fair to suggest that Lidstrom in his 20s was what Duncan Keith is today?
I thought Lidstrom was severely underrated for a few seasons prior to his breakout in the '97 finals, but even at that there is no way I could have reasonably guessed he'd end up a near unanimous top 10 (and most seem to have him top 5) defenseman of all time. I would guess that even the most wildly optimistic Lidstrom fan might have forecast "only" a Norris or two. Most would have probably raised an serious eyebrow if you predicted he'd turn out better than Brian Leetch. You would have been laughed out of the room to suggest he would one day be regularly compared to Bourque.
If anything, I think the reasonable assumption pre'97 finals would have been that he'd end up with a career maybe slightly better than what Sergei Zubov ended up having. Lidstrom seemed destined to be an extremely good defenseman highly respected by his teammates and Wings fans, but somewhat overlooked by the national media in favor of more flashy alternatives (e.g. Pronger, Blake, or even his teammate Konstantinov).
Big Phil
Registered User
- Nov 2, 2003
- 31,703
- 4,204
Probably better than Keith. By a bit. Lidstrom was at least more consistent. We have yet to see that from Keith outside of 2010. I was looking at some old Hockey News magazines and the season preview right around 1998 or 1999 talked much more about Pronger and how it was only a matter of time before he was without a doubt the best defenseman in the game. If this is 2000 after Pronger's Hart win, I know that I for sure would never have guessed Lidstrom would be the defenseman with the better career. It is easy for us to look back on hindsight because he was still good in the 1990s (just not all-time great). But at that time Lidstrom was so quiet that he was almost forgotten. Pronger was the future, or so we thought. He was always compared to Larry Robinson and no one thought Pronger would have a career any worse than Big Bird, but he did. As for Lidstrom, well, he wasn't even the first person you thought about on the Red Wings.
OrrNumber4
Registered User
- Jul 25, 2002
- 17,949
- 9,639
Lidstrom's skating definitely got better. To a point where it was good enough to work with his brain.
I think we see this in other parts of society too. You get growing demands to produce scientists, scholars, athletes, military officers, analysts, etc. You get more and more elaborate systems to train them, evaluate them, grade the training etc, etc. But some things are natural talents and that can't be trained and little focus are thus placed on that ("intangibles" is a word we use at these boards a lot and it is partly related to this natural skill).
So we get more and more people in the systems of society who are trained, in fact they were easy to train, learned fast as they fit into the system well. Many of these natural talents are sorted out earlier as the system don't find them docile enough. As the system itself is graded itself it represents "truth". This is certainly true in the university sphere and is a problem with mass education, but the problem is wider than that cultural sphere.
Dissonance
Registered User
The 1991 Canada Cup was really a huge turning point in how people saw Lidstrom in the early days. Prior to that, Detroit was planning to bring him over to North America and develop him slowly in the minors. But Lidstrom was so good in that tournament that Detroit found him a roster spot and eventually put him on the top shutdown pairing with Brad McCrimmon.
He was probably the most hyped rookie going into the 1991-92 season before Bure’s contract mess with Russia got resolved.
He was probably the most hyped rookie going into the 1991-92 season before Bure’s contract mess with Russia got resolved.
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
I did not pay much attention to prospects back then, but we knew he was something special right away - though obviously not to the degree of special he ended up becoming. He flat-out deserved the Calder his rookie year, so it's not like he was an unknown early in his career. I personally started to really notice his defensive play when he was paired with Coffey - from the amount of times I breathed a sigh of relief that "at least Lidstrom was back there".
RabbinsDuck
Registered User
And it's interesting Lidstrom has always stated McCrimmon had the largest influence on him. More so than Murphy, Coffey or Howe.
Dennis Bonvie
Registered User
More like its based too much on defense (and structure).
At too early an age is structure introduced and creativity discouraged. Make the safe play so we can win. That mentally shouldn't be applied until someone is playing at a level that is training players for the possiblity of a pro career.
He was also available for the 1988 draft, so you could say he was drafted in the 15:th round 
The biggest reason of his low drafting would be that scouting, especially in Europe, was not what it is today. Drafting back then can´t be judged the way it can be from mid 90´s and forward.
The biggest reason he was picked as he was is that no scout besides Red Wings Rockström really had seen him. If scouting was as evolved as it is today he probably would have been picked early 1988.
Also: intelligent players as Lidstrom who rely on "playing easy" by not making mistakes is also much harder to notice than say a exciting Bure-type of player.
Some of the story is told here, a funny part about a player calling Christer Rockström about this young D he couldn´t beat in practice:
http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2009/5/26/888187/si-looks-into-the-wings-1989-draft
That year alone of scouting from Christer Rockström cemented future Stanley Cups (Neil Smith also played a big part...). Rockström convinced them too pick Lidström. He was a big part in securing Federov by drafting him in the 4:th round, before the 80:s last round custom on Soviet players. If remember it correctley also responsible for Konstantinov. He was also one of the more outraged people when Bure was picked (told not eligible by NHL heads when Red Wings and him asked before the draft). And he recommended Håkan Andersson when he left... Rockstrom later "found" Kovalev, Nemchinov, Norstrom, Lundqvist and so on for the Rangers...
And some saw it earlier then others. After the CC 1991 loss to Canada the then best D out Sweden:
"Den gamle hjälten Börje Salming pekade bort mot Nicklas Lidström:
- Där har ni killen som får ta över nu. Fy fan så bra han är."
Rough translation: The old hero Borje Salming pointed towards Nicklas Lidstrom:
- There you have the guy that can take over now. Damn he´s good"
The quote is slightly funnier in swedish...
Also, not sure what one would call early in his career. I would call 25 early for a D and by that time he already had the A on his shirt, with some older good players not getting it. A sure sign of what Detroit believed. He wasn´t as concealed as the myth is. As said above, he´s breakout season is at 26-years old. 6:th in Norris-voting two years there and then second place from 97/98-99/00. Concidering his playingstyle wasn´t glamourus that´s impressive. Of course no one at the millenium shift would have believed he was going to be a top-5 D all-time but he was projected to greatness before that - well before that by a few with sharp eyes.
The biggest reason of his low drafting would be that scouting, especially in Europe, was not what it is today. Drafting back then can´t be judged the way it can be from mid 90´s and forward.
The biggest reason he was picked as he was is that no scout besides Red Wings Rockström really had seen him. If scouting was as evolved as it is today he probably would have been picked early 1988.
Also: intelligent players as Lidstrom who rely on "playing easy" by not making mistakes is also much harder to notice than say a exciting Bure-type of player.
Some of the story is told here, a funny part about a player calling Christer Rockström about this young D he couldn´t beat in practice:
http://www.wingingitinmotown.com/2009/5/26/888187/si-looks-into-the-wings-1989-draft
That year alone of scouting from Christer Rockström cemented future Stanley Cups (Neil Smith also played a big part...). Rockström convinced them too pick Lidström. He was a big part in securing Federov by drafting him in the 4:th round, before the 80:s last round custom on Soviet players. If remember it correctley also responsible for Konstantinov. He was also one of the more outraged people when Bure was picked (told not eligible by NHL heads when Red Wings and him asked before the draft). And he recommended Håkan Andersson when he left... Rockstrom later "found" Kovalev, Nemchinov, Norstrom, Lundqvist and so on for the Rangers...
And some saw it earlier then others. After the CC 1991 loss to Canada the then best D out Sweden:
"Den gamle hjälten Börje Salming pekade bort mot Nicklas Lidström:
- Där har ni killen som får ta över nu. Fy fan så bra han är."
Rough translation: The old hero Borje Salming pointed towards Nicklas Lidstrom:
- There you have the guy that can take over now. Damn he´s good"
The quote is slightly funnier in swedish...
Also, not sure what one would call early in his career. I would call 25 early for a D and by that time he already had the A on his shirt, with some older good players not getting it. A sure sign of what Detroit believed. He wasn´t as concealed as the myth is. As said above, he´s breakout season is at 26-years old. 6:th in Norris-voting two years there and then second place from 97/98-99/00. Concidering his playingstyle wasn´t glamourus that´s impressive. Of course no one at the millenium shift would have believed he was going to be a top-5 D all-time but he was projected to greatness before that - well before that by a few with sharp eyes.
DatsyukToZetterberg
Alligator!
Not trying to go too far off topic but I've always seen that the wings were pissed off. Is there anymore to the story then the wings being told they couldn't draft him then he got drafted? I drool a bit thinking of the damage a Federov & Bure combo could do.
Drafting russians (soviets more correctley...) high was as I said not something you did. Vyacheslav Fetisov in the 8:th round as a 25 year old was more the model. A just-in-case-pick. That a change was coming was kind of obviouse in the sense that Mogilny, Fedorov and Bure was actually drafted as prospects and not as established star players, Sergei could have been drafted in 1988 as Mogilny in 1987... In the spring 1989 Sergei Priakin was allowed to come over and play a couple of games for the Flames and at the start of the 89/90-season the whole green unit+others came over (sending back part of their salary to the Soviet sport system).
And of course a change in the eastern block as a whole was massive in 88-89, to the level that "even" NHL-teams where beginning to think about what this would mean for them (five months after the draft the Berlin Wall fell... NOT the Bulin Wall
). Sorry... Now I´m drifting...At the draft:
Bure was widely seen as the most talented player in the draft. But besides the soviet factor as a european teen to be drafted past the third round you had to have played 11 pro games for a club. Bure was thought to have played only 5 or 6 I believe. No one would draft a young soviet that early. Detroit was the team most active in questioning about Bure, getting a "no-go" from vice president Gil Stein at the draft if I remember correctley. Their plan before that was to draft Bure with their 5:th (instead Shawn McCosh), long before Vancouvers 6:th and the rumour about the Oilers in the 8:th.
Deemed illegal at first, but just before he was about to re-enter the draft a year later Canuck Igor Larionov "found" some game sheets with Bure on it. The Canucks appealed and won. The story is that Bures name "surprisingly" was written at the bottom of every one of the new game sheets (game cheats?). No fact to that last, could be myth for a better story from sore losers.
Short story:
Detroit were about to steal him first, but was to polite in asking the board about it. Canucks just went with it and it sure paid of.
As told, Lidström wasn´t allowed to be picked after the third round either and it was Rockström and Smith who fought and convinced Devellano by arguing that next year he would have been seen and would have become a sure first rounder. Devellano was said to prefere his tested Islanders-model, hardnosed Canadians at first (even if that was also the first winning great team with great swedish players as Persson, Jonsson and to some degree Kallur...). Devellano, to his great credit, caved and the rest is history. Lidström was seen as a hell of a player-to-be already in his teen by a few who had actually seen him, even if course not one-of-the-greatest-of-all-time-good... The "problem", as seen now by every other team than Detroit I would guess, was that no one expect Rockström and later Smith had seen him.
Drafting russians (soviets more correctley...) high was as I said not something you did. Vyacheslav Fetisov in the 8:th round as a 25 year old was more the model. A just-in-case-pick. That a change was coming was kind of obviouse in the sense that Mogilny, Fedorov and Bure was actually drafted as prospects and not as established star players, Sergei could have been drafted in 1988 as Mogilny in 1987... In the spring 1989 Sergei Priakin was allowed to come over and play a couple of games for the Flames and at the start of the 89/90-season the whole green unit+others came over (sending back part of their salary to the Soviet sport system).
And of course a change in the eastern block as a whole was massive in 88-89, to the level that "even" NHL-teams where beginning to think about what this would mean for them (five months after the draft the Berlin Wall fell... NOT the Bulin Wall
At the draft:
Bure was widely seen as the most talented player in the draft. But besides the soviet factor as a european teen to be drafted past the third round you had to have played 11 pro games for a club. Bure was thought to have played only 5 or 6 I believe. No one would draft a young soviet that early. Detroit was the team most active in questioning about Bure, getting a "no-go" from vice president Gil Stein at the draft if I remember correctley. Their plan before that was to draft Bure with their 5:th (instead Shawn McCosh), long before Vancouvers 6:th and the rumour about the Oilers in the 8:th.
Deemed illegal at first, but just before he was about to re-enter the draft a year later Canuck Igor Larionov "found" some game sheets with Bure on it. The Canucks appealed and won. The story is that Bures name "surprisingly" was written at the bottom of every one of the new game sheets (game cheats?). No fact to that last, could be myth for a better story from sore losers.[/B]
Short story:
Detroit were about to steal him first, but was to polite in asking the board about it. Canucks just went with it and it sure paid of.
As told, Lidström wasn´t allowed to be picked after the third round either and it was Rockström and Smith who fought and convinced Devellano by arguing that next year he would have been seen and would have become a sure first rounder. Devellano was said to prefere his tested Islanders-model, hardnosed Canadians at first (even if that was also the first winning great team with great swedish players as Persson, Jonsson and to some degree Kallur...). Devellano, to his great credit, caved and the rest is history. Lidström was seen as a hell of a player-to-be already in his teen by a few who had actually seen him, even if course not one-of-the-greatest-of-all-time-good... The "problem", as seen now by every other team than Detroit I would guess, was that no one expect Rockström and later Smith had seen him.
No idea on Detroit's side but Mike Penny, the Canucks head scout at the time, relayed this information on a radio interview on Vancouver's Team1040 a couple of months ago.
Basically for players like Bure scouts had to follow them and get copies of game sheets, Penny went to a game on either Christmas day or Boxing day and was the only NHL scout there (besides one other guy and it wasn't a Detroit Scout) Mike had borrowed a car, it was a long out of the way drive and got a copy of that game sheet and had the "proof" at the draft of Bure playing in 11 games.
The system is much better now as the rules and eligible players are all common knowledge now.
Statistically, Lidstrom should've won the Calder back in 91-92 instead of Bure. Looking at Lidstrom and Bure's stats, and considering that Lidstrom was a defenseman compared to Bure being a forward:
Lidstrom: GP: 80, G: 11, A: 49, P: 60, +/-: 36
compared to:
Bure: GP: 65, G: 34, A: 26, P: 60, +/-: 0
Users who are viewing this thread
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
NHL Out of Town talk - 2026 Stanley Cup Final; Vegas Golden Knights @ Carolina Hurricanes (25 Viewers)- Latest: marianne99
-
