So how does Bourque rate higher than Lidstrom, aside from career points, which we all know is subjective because of the era's they played in.
** Warning: very long post **
Here's how they compare in Hart, Norris and all-star voting, which are reasonable indicators for individual success.
Hart trophy voting
Player|First|Second|Third|Fourth|Fifth|Total
Bourque
|0|2|0|1|2|5
Lidstrom|0|0|0|1|0|1
Bourque was a Hart finalist five times, and was runner-up to Gretzky ('87) and Messier ('90). That's right, Bourque almost certainly would have won the Hart in 1987 if not for Gretzky's 183 point season -- he was far ahead of the players in 3rd and 4th. Bourque has a massive 5-1 lead in this category.
Norris trophy voting
Player|First|Second|Third|Fourth|Fifth|Total
Bourque
|5|6|4|4|0|19
Lidstrom|6|3|1|0|0|10
Despite winning one fewer Norris, Bourque has has a massive 19-10 edge in seasons as Norris finalist. Bourque has a stunning
fifteen seasons where he finished in the top three in Norris voting -- no other defenseman in history has more than ten. I would gladly trade Lidstrom's 1 additional Norris win for Bourque's additional nine years of being a top-five defensemen. I think most objective hockey fans would, as well.
All-star selections
Player|1st team|2nd team|Total
Bourque
|13|6|19
Lidstrom|9|1|10
Again, Bourque has a huge edge here. Aside from Gordie Howe, Bourque was the most consistently elite player in NHL history. He was a 1st-team all-star as a rookie (1980), in the year of his retirement (proving he could adapt to the modern NHL at age 41, in 2001), and seventeen times in between.
I think this indicates, pretty clearly, that Bourque had more individual success than Lidstrom. (So far, anyway). Obviously we should look at the context (did one player face tough competition? were the voters biased against one of them?) but this is a pretty decent case that Bourque was the more individually accomplished.
Data sources:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=545921,
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=550541
Offense, adjusted to peer groups
Somebody once said "It's no secret that the years Ray was in his prime offense was way higher than today"... I agree with this position and, frankly, it's impossible to deny it. The key point is, even after accounting for the fact that Bourque played in a higher scoring era, he's still ahead of Lidstrom, statistically.
A good way of looking at this is: how did they compare to their peer groups? I'm comparing Lidstrom (during his first sixteen seasons, from 1992-2009) and Bourque (during his first seventeen seasons, 1980-96). Yes, scoring was higher during Bourque's era, but that
doesn't matter because both players are compared against their peer groups here.
Player|Rank in games|Rank in goals|Rank in assists|Rank in points|Rank in Pts per GP
Bourque
|4th|38th|3rd|7th|28th
Lidstrom|1st|81st|4th|16th|63rd
Again, the fact that Bourque played in a higher-scoring era is irrelevant since both players are compared directly to their peers. Lidstrom ranked 6th in assists, 18th in points, and 1st in games played. Over his first seventeen seasons (1980-96), Bourque was even more dominant offensively - he ranked 3rd in assists (behind only Gretzky and Coffey) and was 7th in scoring. Bourque was the vastly superior goal-scorer and was the better offensive player overall,
adjusted for era.
Defense
Personally I think they're about even. I think that Lidstrom was better at even-strength as he played more conservatively than Bourque, but I think Bourque was superior on the penalty kill because he was stronger & more aggressive than Lidstrom and was thus better able to clear opponents away from the crease on the PK. I've watched hundreds of games from both and I think it would be tough to make an argument that either player is significantly better than the other here.
I don't think that plus/minus is a good indicator of defensive play for many reasons... but I will note that Bourque's plus/minus rating is +528 versus +409 for Lidstrom, despite the fact that Bourque played on weaker teams for almost his entire career. On a per-game basis, Bourque still has the higher plus-minus rating. Again, I don't think plus/minus is a useful stat, but some people do, so they might as well have access to this data.
Discipline
The conventional argument is that Bourque's physical play gives him an edge over Lidstrom. While I agree that it's an advantage, Bourque's marginally more reckless style also means that he spends more time in the penalty box.
Over the span of their careers, Lidstrom had 442 PIM in 1,330 games (average per 82 games = 27 PIM per year). Bourque had 1,167 PIM in 1,691 games (average per 82 games = 57 PIM). That works out to an extra 15 minor penalties per year... assuming an 80% PK rate, Bourque's penalties cost his team an extra 3 goals per year. That's a small advantage for Lidstrom, but it's worth considering.
Playoffs
Although Lidstrom gets the edge, I want to emphasize that Bourque was a dominant playoff performers. Bourque lost twice in the Stanley Cup finals to the dynasty Edmonton Oilers -- and although I don't like to go into hypotheticals too much, I personally don't think that any team from the past decade, including Lidstrom's Wings, could have defeated the dynasty Oilers. Bourque had "bad timing" since he peaked when the NHL's last true dynasty peaked.
Bourque had multiple Smythe-calibre performances (as did Lidstrom, who indeed won the trophy once). In 1988 Bourque must have played 35 min per game, finished 7th overall and 1st among defensemen in playoff scoring, and at +16 he was the only player on his team in the dougle digits. In 1991, Bourque again played around 35 min per game, and finished 6th overall and 1st among defensemen in PO scoring. His worst PO run in Boston, when he went to the SC finals, was in 1990, when he was still 1st in PO scoring among defensemen (12th overall) and had a higher plus/minus rating than any player not on the Oilers. Bourque was also great in 1983 (Bruins lost in conference finals to the dynasty Islanders) despite Bourque's 23 pts in 17 games.
Bourque really only played on a stacked team twice in his career and in those two years, he won 1 Cup and went to the conference finals the other time. I don't deny that Lidstrom has had more team playoff success, but based on the strength of their individual playoff performances, I see them as nearly equal.
Durability
Through 17 seasons, Lidstrom played in 1,252 of a possible 1,280 games (97.7% availability). Through his first 17 seasons, Bourque played in 1,228 of a possible 1,338 games (91.8% availability). Assuming an 82-game schedule, this means that Lidstrom is available to play in an extra 5 games per year.
2004-05 lockout
Lidstrom missed an entire season due to the 2004-05 lockout. A lot of people forget that 2004 was easily Lidstrom's worst season in a decade (offense deteriorating due to losing PP time, and finishing out of the top five in Norris voting), so it's not like he was a lock to be a Norris finalist. Still, he obviously rebounded from that down year and he certainly could have added to his legacy.
Quality of competition
Bourque faced significantly tougher competition than Lidstrom. Here's a comparison of the players they faced three or more times in each of the years they were top five in Norris voting.
Bourque: Coffey (x11), Robinson (x5), Chelios (x5), Stevens (x5), Leetch (x5), MacInnis (x5) Langway (x5), Murphy (x4), Howe (x4), Housley (x4), Wilson (x4)
Lidstrom: Pronger (x5), Blake (x5), Gonchar (x4), Niedermayer (x3), Chara (x3)
Bourque faced off against
eight HOF defensemen at least four times each, plus three borderline HOFers. Lidstrom faced off against at most four HOF defensemen. Not only did he face a lower number of HOF calibre defensemen, he faced them fewer times on average (5.6 times for Bourque vs 4.0 times for Lidstrom). This simple comparison shows that Bourque faced tougher, and more frequent, high-end competition.
Overall
Bourque has the edge in Hart voting, Norris voting, all-star voting, offense (relative to peer groups), quality of competition, and physical play. Defense is too close to call. Lidstrom has the Smythe and a small edge in playoff performances, and the edge in durability and discipline. Both players are in my top 20 all-time, but I think Bourque was a bit better, for a bit longer. I will keep an open mind; Lidstrom could pass Bourque with several more Hart and Norris calibre seasons.
