You’re the gm of your favourite nhl team… which player would you take as #1?

[I Hate Blake Coleman]

Ovechkin.

Then I never ever f***ing let Dale Hunter anywhere near Washington until he perishes

 

[dirtydanglez]

lidstrom or jagr

 

[Sheppy]

Bourque or Lidstrom.

 

[WhataKnight]

If headshots are less prevalent?

Lindros. My name ain’t Marcel.

Vegas top-6:

Barbie - Eichel - Olofsson
Hertl - Lindros - Stone

That 2nd line would build a mega-condo in the opponent’s defensive zone, put it on AirBNB and agree to a rental to the other team….before cancelling the reservation to their faces, telling them to go f*** themselves.

 

[norrisnick]

I know plus minus isn’t the all and be all, but bourque had a +493 over his career and lidstrom +450. To me bourque is the answer…no slight on lidstrom, but bourque can have a better career plus minus on weaker teams then lidstrom and shoot 50% more, I’ll take bourque

Take like 5 minutes and compare +/- by decade. The 70's and 80's had by far the highest +/- of any era because the disparity between good teams and bad teams was ridiculous. And the 80s Bruins, weren't a bad team, being top 4 for the decade.

'59-'60 through '68-'69 Mikita led in +/- with +188, Esposito was 10th with +135

'69-'70 through '78-'79 Orr led in +/- with +498, Smith was 10th with +283

'79-'80 though '88-'89 Gretzky led in +/- with +568, Coffey was 10th with +264 -- (Bourque was 3rd with +347)

'89-'90 through '98-'99 Fedorov led in +/- with +221, Bourque was 10th with +157 -- (Lidstrom was 6th with +177)

'99-'00 through '09-'10 (extra year to get a 10th season due to lockout) Lidstrom led in +/- with +254, Redden was 10th with +137

'10-'11 through '19-'20 Marchand led in +/- with +224, Hedman was 10th with +119

Of the top 20 all-time leaders in +/-, Lidstrom is the only one to not play in the 70s or 80s.

 

[EdJovanovski]

Ovechkin

 

[UnSandvich]

Bourque or Lidstrom. 1LHD is a bigger hole for the Rangers than anything at F

 

[Regal]

I’m thinking in a vacuum it’s Ovechkin. I think Jagr was a better overall talent and had more years near his peak, but I don’t think it makes sense to take him. First, as a GM, you want someone who is going to be good out of the gate because your job isn’t guaranteed, and Ovechkin’s early career is much better. Second, even if you stay as GM for a long time, there’s no guarantee the player wants to stay with your team.

Prime Jagr was in a bad situation, sure, but he was also a bit of a prima donna and demanded to be traded. Ovechkin has never seemed to want out even when Hunter was playing him with 4th liners, and has been a solid leader through his career always doing what was asked of him. I think there’s an argument for Jagr being the better player, but I don’t see why anyone would want Jagr to start their team over Ovechkin.

Lindros I think even in a softer league is still a health question mark, and I don’t think the other forwards were as good.

Bourque and Lidstrom have good cases as well, but I don’t think they were as good at their best. I think that’s another situation though where you easily take Bourque for his ability to step in at 18 since there’s no guarantee you’re around for Lidstrom’s prime.

 

[McVespa99]

Bourque if I needed a Dman
Lindros if choosing a forward

 

[Realgud]

Lindros

HM to Bourque and Lidstrom but having a fresh Lindros with no prior injury concerns is a bet I'd be willing to take.

 

[Tie Domi Esquire]

Lindros. No modern player can stop him.

 

[Gaylord Q Tinkledink]

If it's for the modern game I'm really considering Lindros because he's a centre, he's big, he's mean, he's skilled.

Jagr with his size and fat ass in today's game might be impossible to get the puck from him until he scores.

 

[SillyRabbit]

I’m surprised lidstrom is heavily outvoted to bourque, but most hf posters remember lidstrom better then bourque. I think I’d go with bourque to. He was a cannon, shot 340 shots a year most years.

The History of Hockey Forum consensus has Bourque above Lidstrom for peak, prime and career.

But it's obviously close.

Lidstrom always blows out Bourque on the main boards though, for the reason you stated: Most posters on the main boards never watched Bourque play and it's hard to fathom a defenceman being better than Lidstrom.

 

[CanadienShark]

Tough call. I'd go:

Bourque
Lidstrom
Jagr
Lindros
Ovechkin

In that order, but wouldn't fault anyone for rearranging that group in any order.

 

[norrisnick]

Lindros. No modern player can stop him.

Another guy in this poll did.

 

[ponder719]

As hard as it is to turn down the opportunity to have Jagr, or Lindros minus all the injuries, given what we know about his career here, the Flyers have (checks notes) NEVER drafted a defenseman with a legit Hall of Fame pedigree. We've never even drafted a defenseman who played 1,000 NHL games. (Murray Baron's come closest; Provorov and Gostisbehere are the closest active names, both over 600 GP.)

It has to be one of Bourque or Lidström, and of the two, one of them was almost a Flyer. Given the chance, let's make that happen. Bourque it is.

 

[Albatros]

The History of Hockey Forum consensus has Bourque above Lidstrom for peak, prime and career.

But it's obviously close.

Lidstrom always blows out Bourque on the main boards though, for the reason you stated: Most posters on the main boards never watched Bourque play and it's hard to fathom a defenceman being better than Lidstrom.

Bourque was arguably better than Lidström offensively, but Lidström was better than Bourque defensively. If you want a rock solid defensive anchor for 20 years then Lidström is a rather obvious choice over anyone in the history of the game. Bourque was a true franchise player in Boston, but ultimately they never won a cup with him unlike with Orr and Chára.

 

[Garbageyuk]

Lindros. Imagine him playing in a league without all the hooking, grabbing, and slashing of the 90s. There aren’t guys like Stevens running around looking to take people’s heads off either. Easy decision.

 

[nowhereman]

Debated between Lindros and Bourque. Voted Bourque because we know what he can bring: twenty years of best-in-the-world defense and a top 10 career of all-time. As good as Lindros could have been, I'll go with the 2nd or 3rd best defender of all time (behind only Orr and Maybe Harvey).

 

[Evergreen]

Bourque

 

[nowhereman]

Bourque was arguably better than Lidström offensively, but Lidström was better than Bourque defensively. If you want a rock solid defensive anchor for 20 years then Lidström is a rather obvious choice over anyone in the history of the game. Bourque was a true franchise player in Boston, but ultimately they never won a cup with him unlike with Orr and Chára.

The biggest difference between the two players was Yzerman, Fedorov, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Chelios, Hasek, Shannahan, Larionov, Fetisov, Murphy, Konstantinov, Hull, and so on. If you were making a list of the players who have played with the highest quality of players in NHL history, Lidstrom is up there with Coffey and Henry Richard. He played on a stacked, HHOF-packed roster almost all of his career, while Bourque never had even remotely close to that kind of support.

When the Bourque Bruins were at their peak, in the late 80s, his best support was Neely, Janney, Carpenter, Linesman, Kasper, Courtnall and Wesley. Him winning the Cup in a pre-cap, Oilers and Penguins-dominated NHL was never going to happen. The moment he went to a true contender, he immediately won.

IMO, Bourque dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom through most of his career, while boasting similar longevity.

 

[SoupNazi]

Strange assortment of players here.

 

[Our Lady Peace]

Sakic, and then Bourque

I'm surprised Burnaby Joe is not getting the love he deserves here

 

[Albatros]

The biggest difference between the two players was Yzerman, Fedorov, Datsyuk, Zetterberg, Chelios, Hasek, Shannahan, Larionov, Fetisov, Murphy, Konstantinov, Hull, and so on. If you were making a list of the players who have played with the highest quality of players in NHL history, Lidstrom is up there with Coffey and Henry Richard. He played on a stacked, HHOF-packed roster almost all of his career, while Bourque never had even remotely close to that kind of support.

When the Bourque Bruins were at their peak, in the late 80s, his best support was Neely, Janney, Carpenter, Linesman, Kasper, Courtnall and Wesley. Him winning the Cup in a pre-cap, Oilers and Penguins-dominated NHL was never going to happen. The moment he went to a true contender, he immediately won.

IMO, Bourque dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom through most of his career, while boasting similar longevity.

Detroit had some great teams no doubt, yet none of those players won four cups there. Lidström did.

Nothing away from Bourque in the 1980s, but the league was a lot weaker then.

 

[MNRube]

Lidstrom. Bourque with a modern stick might break the league, Jagr was Jagr and Lindros is one of my all-time favorites. But I think watching Lidstrom for 15+ years would be the most satisfying.