THN.com Blog: Lidstrom - No. 1 Euro; No. 2 blueliner of all time
Red Wings defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom has an impressive resume already and he still has good years ahead of him.
Brian Costello
2007-12-01 00:43:53
The debate was interesting, but not terribly long when we were determining The Hockey News cover feature for our European issue, due to come out next week.
Nicklas Lidstrom is our cover boy, plain and simple. The best European-trained player ever in the NHL.
A case was made for Jaromir Jagr, the five-time scoring champion and destined to be the top-scoring European for long time to come. Jari Kurri had a lot of support, as did Dominik Hasek. But the more we studied the facts and figures, the more it became obvious.
Senior writer Mike Brophy wrote a terrific cover story on Lidstrom for the European issue.
A quote from Detroit GM Ken Holland pretty much said it all why Lidstrom goes down as the top European ever to play in the NHL: “For the last 10 years we’re near the top of the league in points, he plays almost 30 minutes a game, always against the other team’s best players, he’s always one of the highest-scoring defensemen, most years we’re near the top of the league in power play, most years we’re near the top of the league in penalty-killing and most years we’re near the top of the league in goals against. He plays every critical situation. We won three Stanley Cups and five Presidents’ Trophies. We’ve been to the final four times in the last 12 seasons and he has been the one constant.”
It got me thinking. Is Lidstrom the best defenseman ever to play the game? Better even than the immortal Bobby Orr?
In a word, no. There’s not even a fair debate in that comparison. Orr re-defined the game and goes down, in some people’s books, as the best player ever, ahead of even Wayne Gretzky.
So Lidstrom is not in Orr’s ballpark, but when all is said and done for the 37-year-old Red Wing – who is showing no signs of slowing down – can he go down as the No. 2 defenseman of all-time?
Old-time hockey fans will preach that Doug Harvey deserves that status. A seven-time winner of the Norris Trophy as top defenseman, he finished sixth overall in The Hockey News definitive 1997 list of the 50 best NHL players of all-time – behind Gretzky, Orr, Gordie Howe, Mario Lemieux and Maurice Richard. Harvey played in the Original Six era and had no peers.
The next generation of hockey fans will make a case for Ray Bourque, who finished eighth in Top 60 Since 1967, a recently released book written by Ken Campbell and Adam Proteau of The Hockey News. One spot behind him in ninth is Lidstrom.
Armchair fans will have fun debating whether or not Lidstrom, in the final few seasons of his career, can pass Bourque.
Here’s a quick tally sheet of leaders as it stands now: points (Bourque 1,579 to 888); Norris Trophies (five each); Norris runners-up (Bourque 6 to 3); first-team all-stars (Bourque 13 to 8); second-team all-stars (Bourque 6 to 0); and, Stanley Cups (Lidstrom 3 to 1). Lidstrom also won a Conn Smythe; Bourque won a Calder.
My vote goes to Lidstrom. He still has fuel in the tank to make the successful pass.
Frank (Posted 2008-06-14 20:01:54)
With all the talent today and all the speed and the fact that you get called a penality for touching a guy now, Lidstrom has still dominated his field. Ray was awesome and did great things idividually, but if I could pick two d man to be on my team it would be Bobby Orr and Nicklas Lidstrom no doubt about it. Lidstrom has been unbeatable for the last decade. His defense is untouchable, his passing the best, and he almost never ever makes a miskate in about 28 mins of play a game, agianst players like crosby, Malkin, AO, Gabroik and so many others. He can play anybody in any sitution and he wins! He does every thing so well it often gets overlooked. No one could skate like Orr and that puts him basicaly on this on level like the great one, But amoung people of this world I would trust Lidstrom to get the job done over Ray, or potvin, or coffy. That to me makes Lidstrom the 2nd best d man of all time. And by the way he is not done yet. 38 and still the man, cant find that anywhere else.
Ron (Posted 2008-06-03 17:59:03)
Hmm, Lidstrom is good, but he has to rank behind people like Bourque, Potvin, Coffey, Eddie Shore, Doug Harvey and Larry Robinson. It's too bad that Lidstrom couldn't have played in the era before today's boring robot hockey.
Oh yes, Bobby Orr was in another galaxy.
David M (Posted 2008-05-27 05:01:44)
This is what separates D-men from others. There are different types, offensive , defensive, hard-hitters.
I will reluctantly have to say that Bourque is probably the best all-around d-man. The thing people knock against him is that he never got a chance to show his stuff with a good team.
However, the Bruins were one of the best teams in the league for a good 10/15 years. They were never able to attract a big name star since this was Ray's Team and Sinden assured him nobody would ever make more than him.
Lidstrom is probably the smartest player ever, any position, but put him in Boston in Ray's era and then put Ray in Detroit in the 90's. Ray would still have about 5 Norris Trophies and a couple of Cups while Lidstrom would be a flop.
While I do agree that Orr is the best player of his era, keep in mind that the NHL was very watered down, most of the best Euro players were not in the NHL,the WHA was siphoning off talent and the League went from 6 teams to 12 and kept adding more and more. I'll admit some stars of the 80's also had inflated stats because goalies were pretty horrendous, but the 70's were an absolute joke.
Jeff Clifton (Posted 2008-05-23 12:02:56)
This arguement is ridiculous. Bourque was twice the d-man Lidstrom will ever be.
Bourque's +/- is only second to Orr's at +528, and Lidstrom is WAY down (200 points) below that marker.
So your telling me, that with Lidstrom playing on teams that featured at one point 11 HOF'ers, that his defense was more effective than Ray's? What a joke.
Ray passed, hit, and shot 10 times better than Nick. His one ice responsibility is reflected in his +/- rating, and didnt play with nearly the caliber level players that Nick has had around him. Ray's +51 season came during a time in the 80's when goals were actually scored. Not this pathetic trapping time, and with the Wings excellent D, why isnt Nicks all time +/- better? Like 200 points better? Because while he is great, one of the best all time, he is not as good as you would like to think. Thats why.
Of COURSE Nick has won the Norris a good number of times and might pass Ray in that dept. Sorry, just becuase Nick has no competition and is riding a stellar teams coattails, does not mean he is half the d-man Ray was. Doug Harvey won it 7 times, where does that leave him? Number 3. Thats where.
All those comments about Lemieux beating Ray, gee, I wonder how many times Lemiuex would have WORKED Lidstrom had he actually played against him. Ask Mario who the best d-man is, "Ray Bourque, hands down". He has lamented that for years.
So take your silly arguement and feed those who want to be fed crap. The rest of the world will be happy to remind themselves that Nick if anything is 4th or 5th on the all time list. Besides Orr beating Lidstroms face into a pulp, Ray's stats blowing his away, lets not forget that Potvin and Harvey would have taken his head off. Like a lamb with his Lady Byng.
Interesting arguement about Cups, I thought that was a team accomplishment. But if thats how your going to rate Lidstrom against others, I guess Paul Coffey is even better than Nick.
I cant wait for to read from people like this, how Crosby is the best ever; the new Great One, and is SOOO much better than Wayne.
Fool.
Tom W (Posted 2008-03-26 20:38:33)
Lidström is a phenomena seriously, just taking a step over to nhl and succed is something not everyone can do, cause the style of play is very diffrent the rink is diffrent and so on, some even argue that lidas may be the best player today and as a defenceman tha is some achivment as its easier to go nuts over a scoring machine and idolise them.
this debate is similar to the one that goes on in football and i am talking about the football that is played all over the world, some argue that the brazillian player pele who had his breakthru in the world cup 1958 is the best and some says the argentinian player Maradona is the best thru all times.
Pele got to be an icon cause he was so young when he had his breakthrough and he did things that ppl never had seen in those days, i think he is even bigger today then he actually as, cause when ppl remebers back, the memories becomes larger and better then it actually was, its like back in the days when i was young sort of thing, then you have maradona, who did all those things, but he could do all this in full speed, wich pele couldnt he never had to, back then you could actually walk on the pitch with no one attacking you, you had more time and more space, today you have less then a second to react in most situations as football has progressed, all sports do, back in 58 pele was outstanding, during the 80's and 90's maradona was outstanding, compare them techniqually isnt fair as maradona could be blindfolded and have one leg chained to a pole and still be able to do things pele never could. Its probably the same with hockey, the game has become quicker, tougher, faster and players are more tactical today, doing comparisments like that is not fair to be honest, the players who been great in the past are untochable in our memories and will always be, but today at this moment id say lidas is by far the best defencman there is, and in 30 years i will say, there has never been a better defence man then Lidstrom, some of you will, some of you wont.
when it comes to the football argument i go for maradona tho, cause i seen him play, i seen what he has done, i was to young to see pele, i seen clips of course, but its not the same thing. I cant be unfair and compare the diffrent eras as no football player from 58 would even play a second dvision team here in sweden today even if they were in that same age as then and at their best. i can only go on what i seen maradona do and no one i ever seen has come near that. I will most likley say the same thing about Lidas when he is just a memory as a hockey player
David M (Posted 2008-03-17 05:25:14)
I lived In Windsor, Ontario and followed the Wings. Back in 92-93 Nick Lidstrom was going through the sophomore Jinx and only picked up his game when Coffey came on board. Lidstrom could have been another Niinimaa had it not been for that luck of playing behind good vets (Howe, Chiasson). Coffey was not the best defensive D, but on offense, 2nd after Orr. Overall, Bourque is probably better, but how many times have I seen the guy get deked out of his pants by Lemieux, Bure etc.
As for Euro, this is not even close. No1 Jagr
No2 Jagr
No3 Jagr
Tom Begley (Posted 2008-03-11 21:08:16)
I stumbled accross this article, Right on Brian, Lidstrom is a living legend and history will prove it, the stats don't have to. He is THE MAN in his era, no question about it, it isn't even debateable to anyone who knows the game and has been around long enough to see it. I saw all of the guys you compare him to live and in person with one exception, Doug Harvey,(a little before my time). And you can throw in Brad Park for good measure too. What's a Niedermeyer anyway? Eldon, you're kidding right? That's the first time I've ever heard his name come up in any discussion that had anything to do with great defensemen. Especially with the names being thrown around here.
lille (Posted 2008-03-05 12:42:50)
some reasons he's so good - 1 he came to a good and offensive team in detroit red wings 2 he looks so kind no one wants to tackle him 3 he's swedish
Kristopher Arseneault (Posted 2007-12-16 15:21:43)
Eldon, you're argument is really not that good. Stunned silence doesn't mean that he didn't deserve it, which he sorely did that year. If you're going to claim that Niedermeyer deserved one of his trophies, name the year, because I can't figure it out for the life of me which one it'd be. Saying he's close to Lidstrom when Lidstrom's stats (Both playoff and regular season) and ice time are both higher, and Lidstrom has been a far more consistent player despite being 3 years older definitely hurts that argument. For Pete's sake, Lidstrom has been up for LADY BYNG consideration while still winning Norris Trophies! That should tell you something about how mistake-free he plays. Also look at Niedermeyer's career stats: He isn't in the same LEAGUE as Lidstrom. He's a great player, and had that one great season... that Lidstrom has beaten 5 times in the past. Add in the fact that Lidstrom continues to get better and play more time all while OLDER than Niedermeyer, and this shouldn't even be a discussion.
Jason (Posted 2007-12-16 12:13:55)
Couldn't agree more with Lidstrom as the best Euro ever. He is the smartest hockey player the league has ever seen and simply cannot be rattled. His resume speaks for itself and needs no rehashing for those who know hockey. When you get to the stratosphere level of talent that exists with guys like Orr, Lidstrom etc., the differences are so minor that debate is really a matter of preference and a product of the times in which they skated. I would kill to have either on my blue line!
matt cranmer (Posted 2007-12-15 15:59:55)
Lidstrom has been the best D-man in the league many years, and should already have at least 6 Norris trophy's. Remember, Lidstrom was the first, and the only, Euro D-man to win the Norris. There was alot of biasis toward Euro defenders until Lidstrom won his first Norris and the Conn Smyth. Lidstrom has won more Norris's then any other Euro D-man has even been nominated for, and as a long time Wings fan, i can say he is a better overall player then Brendan Shannahan, Sergie Fedorov, or even Steve Yzerman.
Vince (Posted 2007-12-12 17:36:47)
Does Kevin Paul Dupont play hockey or know anything about hockey, that would make him an expert. No one who is in their right mind compares anyone to ORR.
Eldon (Posted 2007-12-10 01:19:02)
However, Niedermayer should have won at least one and maybe two of Lidstrom's Norris trophy's and everyone must remember the Detroit fans stunned silence when they announced Lidstrom as the Conn Smythe winner over Yzerman. Sure they cheered after about 30 seconds of silence and yes Lidstrom was great in that playoffs, but Niedermayer and Lidstrom are about a dead even tie for who is the best defenseman of the last 10 years. Remember, Niedermayer was a Conn Smythe winner and also won the Olympics and World Championships and oh yeah, one more Cup.
Dustin Burns (Posted 2007-12-09 19:36:24)
Nicklas Lidstrom has played 20 more HOURS than anyone else in the league since 2000. One career roughing penalty. 3 Stanley Cups. He probably should have a Hart too. The media was all over Pronger back in 2000, because he was physical. Oh and Lidstrom will retire playing his entire career for only one team. Can't say that about Orr/Bourque.
Rob (Posted 2007-12-03 13:31:18)
Two equations that make sense:
1) If a great team, the most successful franchise in last the 15 years, has a player who plays around 30 minutes a game and is on ice for more than half the game, is he one of the best of all-time? Yes.
2) 30 minutes a game + top points among defensemen every year + near best plus/minus in NHL + Conn Smyth + 3 Cups = No. 1 Euro and No. 2 blueliner of all time.
Kudos to THN for having the courage to give a Euro-player the credit he deserves by naming him the 2nd best blueliner ever.
James (Posted 2007-12-02 22:23:43)
For those Bourque fans, you don't see any video highlights of anyone making him look silly like Mario did to Ray.
I think Mario score his first goal ever while Bourque was on the ice and on Youtube, Mario top 10 goals tribute, Bourque was one of the top 5 embarassed defencemen. Yes Lidstrom (and not Lindstrom), did play against Mario, Gretz, as well as Crosby, Thornton, Teemu, Bure, Iginla.... Not once in his NHL career has anyone made Lidstrom look like a sieve.
Having said that, Lidstrom is the #1 Euro defencemen. Jagr should be #1 Euro all time.
tom Slick (Posted 2007-12-02 17:33:40)
ah, how do i make tear drops instead of :+(.. i think too many have been listening to coach's corner too much . a Euro beating out a good Canadina boy for #2? outrageous!!! really, IMHO, it comes down to personal bias, oops, opinion :+). and as for Lids not playing against 'great' D-men, a joke. your turn on TSN or Sportsnet, and Pronger, Nedimeyer, Phanuff, they're great if you listen to teh announcers. and don't forget when Prnger went to the Oilers, he was their Saviour. come on, can' thave it both ways. either they're gresat ot bums all teh time, not just when they're on your team....
ryan (Posted 2007-12-02 14:45:41)
I think we might have to ask ourselves, would Detroit be as good as they are wihtout Lindstrom? Probably not. He (and Yzerman) have been the backbone of arguably the best overall team in the league for the past 15 years. And if he continues to play another 5 years or so he will probably win a few more norris trophies and maybe another cup and conne smythe, assuming he doesn't get hurt. So think off his numbers and trophies now and then add another five years of playing.
We should probably analyze this question again when he retires and I think it may be clear that he is at least amongst the top 3 or 4 defensmen to ever play. Obviously he will never win an Art Ross trophy, I believe only Orr has accomplished that and most likely a defenseman will never do so again, but this discusson isn't comparing Lindstrom to Orr, because Orr was in a league of his own like Mario and Gretzky.
I think when all is said and done Lindstrom will have (and already does) the hardware to back up his supremecy over his career. I am being a little bias because I am a wings fan and I have watched him his whole career, but man is he great at what he does.
Lee J (Posted 2007-12-02 11:39:54)
Not having seen Lidstrom play that often, it's hard to say where to rank him (and of course he's not done yet). But I did watch closely when Dennis Potvin lead his team to five straight SC finals with 4 straight Cups. Any "all-time" list would have to put his accomplishments pretty darn near the top.
Hart Stoffman (Posted 2007-12-02 01:54:48)
Lidstrom is better than Harvey was, eh? I'd argue with that if it wasn't so obviously ignorant. I'm shocked by this, because the author is generally a good, experienced hockey guy. But this is beyond belief. Lidstrom may be in the top 5 all time - probably is - but to put him ahead of Harvey is pure nonsense. And if you think I'm some biased Hab lover, I'm a Leafs guy!
Tom S (Posted 2007-12-01 22:53:56)
Second best defenseman all-time? I don't think so. Lidstrom is a great player, who played in a great system for him. But Lidstrom would only be the fourth best defenseman in Bruins history behind (Orr, Bourque and Shore) if he played in Boston. That isn't even counting the other clubs, so I don't agree with that part of the column at all.
andrew (Posted 2007-12-01 22:50:24)
How could you say that lidstrom is better than paul coffey and ray bourque
Gil Matthews (Posted 2007-12-01 18:21:43)
I have been watchinh the NHL for over sixty years nad have read the hockey news since it began.
Lidstrom is great, but in my opinion, Harvey was better, and I would rank Bourque ahead of both of them. Bourque never had the teammates that the other great defenseman(including the matchless Orr) had. Bourque had an ability to control the ice and dominate a game in a way that neither Harvey or Lidstrom never had to demonstrate because of the strength and depth of their teams. Brad Park also had the ability to dominate the ice; he was great, not far behind the others.
Chris (Posted 2007-12-01 18:04:43)
Randall, I'd say it's a bit of a stretch to think that having a player a couple of years earlier would have made the difference between the Nordiques staying or leaving. Just doesn't work that way. Statsny should get consideration though as best Euro. It's too hard to judge this argument, though, because of the fact that Lidstrom (not "Lindstrom" Vince....you want people to take you seriously and tell people to "check their facts" yet you don't even take the time to get the name right) is still playing and could play another couple of years. You can't compare a finished career with one that is still being made.
Randall Stephens (Posted 2007-12-01 16:22:53)
Best European ever? Hard to argue, but what if Peter Stastny came into the NHL as an 18-year old? Stastny joined the Nordiques as a 24-year old, and put up 109 points in his first season. Had he started at 18 (6 extra seasons), that's easily another 500-600 points to go on top of his 1239 career total. Then of course, you also have to bring in Anton and Marian early as well. The Nordiques surely would have built a dynasty around the Stastnys, may have passed the Habs as Quebec's team, and ultimately may have never left La Belle Province, which of course means that the Colorado Avalance would not exist today. Patrick Roy would have went elsewhere, Eric Lindros probably would have stayed, and the Flyers would have benefited from a young, healthy Peter Forsberg from Day 1, not to mention keeping Ron Hextall and Mike Ricci.
So yeah, right now I'll say Lidstrom is the best European ever. But it could have been a lot different..............
Gord White (Posted 2007-12-01 14:56:30)
I think what it comes down to is who you like better, really. Both Bourque and Lidstrom are/were fantastic players and should rank #s 2 and 3 on any top defensemen list. Which one you put first is up to you. As for the Stanley Cup debate, I think it's unfair. Lidstrom obviously did play on better teams than Bourque did, and it takes great TEAMS to win Stanley Cups, not a single great player.
Kevin Powell (Posted 2007-12-01 14:18:19)
You have EXACTLY right. Nick is the best Euro of all time and is the #2 Dman behind Orr. While Bourque was very talented he doesn't even make my personal top six:
1)Orr-One can only imagine a injury free career to the age of 35. We NEVER saw Bobby Orr play in his prime.
2) Lidstrom-as evidenced by some comments, Nick is still underappreciated. His genius is in making his play look so effortless. Yzerman once said that Lidstrom was the best player that he ever played with. What else can you say.
3) Doug Harvey-The Bobby Orr of his day.
4) Larry Robinson-Big Bird is often overlooked because he played on such dominant Canadiens teams. He could score and hit with the best.
5) Denis Potvin: Great dman who was glue for the Islander Cup teams.
6) Eddie Shore: Conceded to be among the top six dmen of all time by almost everyone.
Sorry Ray.
Ryan (Posted 2007-12-01 13:29:51)
Vince,
Check your numbers, Lidstrom has 5 Norris trophies and 3 Cups to go along with his 2002 Conn Smythe. He hasn't played against great players in his career? I can think of some, Gretzky, Lemieux, Sakic, Jagr, Forsberg and Bure just to name a few. In the '97 finals he shut down Phillie's "Legion of Doom" line. He is always among the defensive leaders in points, time on ice per game and plus/minus. The Red Wings were supposed to crumble after Yzerman and Shanahan left but Lidstrom became the go-to guy and the team is still elite. Lidstrom did play with a lot of great players but look at the Red Wings' roster now. They're not exactly full of potential hall of famers like they once were and Lidstrom is still playing great hockey and putting up Norris winning seasons.
Vince F (Posted 2007-12-01 13:07:18)
If Lindstrom really is the best European player how come he has no MVP award? Or Art Ross it doesn't matter if he's a defenceman. He has played against 0 really good players on D. If you think otherwise then eMail me about some good D he played against. Stan Makita, Jamaier Jager. the Dominater are all better than he is. There are have and always will be lots of better Europeans. Name 5 good reasons he is #2 D and #1 Euro other than 4 norris and 2 Stanly Cup. You won't. That's all he has why? becase he played with good, great, and Hall of fame players. So you still think he's #2 D and #1 Euro. We will see about that.
John the Leaf Fan (Posted 2007-12-01 12:56:18)
Here they are, Bourque vs. 'Lindstrom', head to head. Not much between them in terms of raw statistics.
B:1991-92 Boston Bruins NHL 80 21 60 81
L:1991-92 Det Red Wings NHL 80 11 49 60
B:1992-93 Boston Bruins NHL 78 19 63 82
L:1992-93 Det Red Wings NHL 84 7 34 41
B:1993-94 Boston Bruins NHL 72 20 71 91
L:1993-94 Det Red Wings NHL 84 10 46 56
B:1994-95 Boston Bruins NHL 46 12 31 43
L:1994-95 Det Red Wings NHL 43 10 16 26
B:1995-96 Boston Bruins NHL 82 20 62 82
L:1995-96 Det Red Wings NHL 81 17 50 67
B:1996-97 Boston Bruins NHL 62 19 31 50
L:1996-97 Det Red Wings NHL 79 15 42 57
B:1997-98 Boston Bruins NHL 82 13 35 48
L:1997-98 Det Red Wings NHL 80 17 42 59
B:1998-99 Boston Bruins NHL 81 10 47 57
L:1998-99 Det Red Wings NHL 81 14 43 57
B:1999-00 Boston Bruins NHL 65 10 28 38
L:1999-00 Det Red Wings NHL 81 20 53 73
B:1999-00 Col Avalanche NHL 14 8 6 14
B:2000-01 Col Avalanche NHL 80 7 52 59
L:2000-01 Det Red Wings NHL 82 15 56 71
ryan belbas (Posted 2007-12-01 12:40:37)
I have to agree, Lindstrom is the second best of all time. Unfortunately he missed much of the 80's with the very high scoring and played much of his prime in the low scoring 90's and 2000's so his stats are not going to be there with Coffey and Buorque, but it is his overall abilities that seperate him from them. He is virtually impossible to beat one on one, beacause he is amazing with his stick, he never panics and makes a bad play or pass, he plays 30 min. a game and is always amongst leasgue leaders in +/-, he is always in the top 3 defensive scoring, he has stepped into the captaincy with ease, he is a monster on the powerplay, and does all this without great size, but with talent and smarts. Unfortunately critics are so high on Niedermeyer and Pronger (for some reason) that they tend to get more accolades, while Lindstrom sits in the
background and owns them in every category. Go Wings.
Jamie (Posted 2007-12-01 12:26:12)
I think its funny how everyone is saying that Bourque competed against guys like Paul Coffey, Brian Leetch, Chris Chelios, Rod Langway, Phil Housley, Al MacInnis, Rob Blake, etc.. but somehow seem to forget that Lidstrom was there in those years to. Yes, Bourque did start earlier than Lidstrom, but there was still at least 10 years overlap where they both played in the league. So please, dont make that as your big argumentative point as it doesnt really hold much merit.
Vinny (Posted 2007-12-01 11:53:56)
I bet any defenceman that played for Pilly, Boston, New Yorks or Detroit in the 1960's/70's/80's could run over Nick Lindstrom.
And there have been lot's off beter European players. Lindstrom doesn't know how to give a hip check! He is not the #2 defenceman or the #1 European. So check your facts.
Keith Loud (Posted 2007-12-01 11:14:13)
Fun debate, indeed. Kevin Paul Dupont (Boston Globe) made a good case for Ray at his retirement as the best Bruin of all time (even ahead of Orr), and was tempted to call him better overall. Ray absolutely suffered from the lack of talent around him, particularly from 1995-2000, while Lidstrom has undoubtedly benefitted from supportive ownership in Detroit (do the greats make those around them better? yes, but they also benefit from the talents of those on the ice around them). Four points:
1) Ray was hardly a "hanger on" in Colorado in 2001 - he was playing the power play and shorthanded at age 40. Cheap shot.
2) Ray very well could/should have won the Hart in 1990, when 2 NY writers didn't include him on their ballots, allowing Messier to win instead. In the pivotal Game 1 of that year's Stanley Cup Finals against Messier's Oilers, who scored the 2 goals in the 3rd period to send the game into triple overtime? Raymond Jean Bourque.
3) Ray often submerged his offensive talents for his defensive game. Remember all of those ridiculous accuracy contests at the All-Star games he won 4/4 or 4/5? He was one of the failed shootout participants in the '98 Olympics for Canada because of the skills the coach saw in practice. And playing defense so effectively in Gretzky's prime '80s was a major accomplishment. Please don't try to argue that it is as hard to win Norris trophies now than it was against Potvin, Langway, Chelios, and Coffey in their primes...
4) Look at what he did for his defensive partners. Big Al Pedersen was but one example of the many journeyman defensemen who was made to look good when paired with Ray on the Bruins' blueline. Ask Don Sweeney about who turned him into a 15 year NHL veteran. And it could be argued that Rob Blake's best season in the NHL followed his pairing with Ray on that '98 Canadian Olympic Team.
I am glad that we are arguing Orr, Bourque, Lidstrom, and Harvey, and that no one seriously considers Coffey in that league anymore.
Tim Krauss (Posted 2007-12-01 10:52:40)
A disturbing trend in sportswriting and from beat writers is that they point to statistics when evaluating talent, which is often most troubling in hockey where a player can do a great deal of value to a team by not accumulating a lot of goals, assists, or even penalty minutes. And sure, plus/minus is good for something, too. Regardless, I'm a huge Ray Bourque fan and I know that Lidstrom is one of the smoothest defenseman I've ever seen; I've seen no player handle the puck any better. Ray Bourque had the best one-timer I ever saw, could take a pass and immediately slap it to the goal better than anyone I've ever seen, save for Brett Hull perhaps. Both are outstanding players and I don't even care who people think is better, just don't base it all on statistics...there are too many good players that never get mentioned because they don't have the goals and assists, etc. It makes it harder to judge, but when we are talking about overall play we have to look well beyond mere statistics, and good luck with that!
Nathan (Posted 2007-12-01 10:47:22)
Bob, you're off.
The first thing to debunk is the points debate. Bourque largely played in an era where the game was open, and as such, the offensive stats of all players, especially defensemen, are bloated. For example, I don't think anyone would consider Paul Coffey to be as good as Bourque or Potvin, or honestly, as good as Chelios when it comes to the entire defensive game. But his numbers are inflated, so some people will fall for it.
Lidstrom played in an era with Bourque, Scott Stevens, Brian Leetch, Chris Chelios, Phil Housley, Al MacInnis, and Rob Blake. And his career will also have a healthy overlap with guys like Pronger, Niedermayer, Redden, Chara, and even Phaneuf. And I don't think there's any question that the level of the average defenseman has risen considerably as a result of the way the game has changed since Lidstrom came into the league. If Lidstrom had weak competition, explain to me why Pronger, Blake, Leetch, and MacInnis didn't win more Norris trophies, and why guys like Redden and Chara may never win it despite their high quality.
As for plain talent, Bourque was undoubtedly a better hitter. Bourque had a quicker release, and for that, I give him the edge in shot, even though Lidstrom is very accurate and shoots very hard. I'm willing to call passing a wash because the argument can go either way. Bourque was probably better through the neutral zone in the short passing game, but in a very defensive era where the first pass out of your own end has easily become the most important pass in the game because of the trap, Lidstrom takes the cake. Bourque was faster. Lidstrom is the best positional defender in the history of the game, and that counts for a lot when... you know... you're a defender. Lidstrom, being better with his stick and positioning, is inherently the better penalty killer. And as far as power play QB, I don't know if there's ever been a player better at holding the puck in at the blueline than Lidstrom; but, given Bourque's quicker release, I'll consider it a tie.
The cherry on top is that Lidstrom has won. Say what you will, but even the Great One would be looked upon differently had he never won Cups. The Wings have had great teams, but like Holland says, the one constant through all of those teams is Nicklas Lidstrom. That's proof enough.
The last point to make is the ability to come through in the clutch. Bourque wasn't an epic choker by any means, but as another poster mentioned, Lidstrom did score a gold medal game-winner. He was also a playoff MVP -- that says a lot about your ability to do it when it counts.
Bourque is a no-doubt HOFer and a no-doubt all-time player. He's obviously one of the top 6 or 7 defenseman to ever play the game. To say that Lidstrom might be one spot ahead of him is far from crazy, and when you examine their games as a whole, it makes perfect sense.
jay draudt (Posted 2007-12-01 10:17:05)
Don't forget who scored the winning goal in the Gold Medal Olympic game?
Old Raymond only won a Cup as a hanger on in Colorado. Just because Raymond has more points it's like Pete Rose is the all-time hits leader but you would still pick Babe Ruth on your time ahead of him because of over all abilities.
Vince Friyia (Posted 2007-12-01 09:45:47)
My friend, Denis Potvin would have Bourque and Lidstrom for lunch. Hacek and Jagr have MVP awards. Lidstrom is out of their league on both accounts.
rich rodgers (Posted 2007-12-01 08:35:25)
So Bourque was a better leader because his teams were worse? Over a decade or two that doesn't hold up. Nick's teams were better at least partly because HE WAS ON THEM. If you can't even admit that then there's no point listening what you have to say. Not even close, indeed.
Bob Roys (Posted 2007-12-01 07:48:00)
You have got to be kidding. Lidstrom ahead of Raymond Bourque?? Bourque won hos Norris Trophys playing in an era with the likes of Paul Coffey, Brian Leetch, Chris Chelios, Rod Langway, Phil Housley, Al MacInnis, Rob Blake and others as his competition for the award. Who does Lidstrom have as competition? Pronger and Niedermayer? Lidstrom wins Norris Trophys because while he is a great defenseman, there usually isn't anyone else to give it to. Why not poll the NHL's GM's and see who they would rather have playing for them in their prime? Except for the Red Wings GM, the vote might be unanimous. Bourque was a better passer, shooter, checker, hitter, penalty killer, powerplay QB, and leader. Winning Stanley Cups is a team accomplishment, and Lidstrom has played for better teams than Bourque did. It does not make him a better player. Not even close.
George Malik (Posted 2007-12-01 06:59:46)
Would it be possible for Red Wings fans to purchase a copy of this issue?
Advertisement
Where do you think Mats Sundin will end up?
Our Partners
The Hockey News Corporation. All Rights Reserved © 2007 Transcontinental
Standards: XHTML 1.0 STRICT + CSS 2. V 1.1 04.03.2008
