Potvin vs Lidstrom

[plusandminus]

I have seen hundreds of Lidstrom games. I also follow the team very closely. I am not basing my claims on viewing a handful of youtube clips. If you think that Lidstrom makes only one or two bad plays per season, even at his peak, you are definitely delusional.

Please tell us more. It surely sounds as if you could have observed enough to tell us more about how good you rate him, his teammates, etc.

 

[tombombadil]

oh, ****!! i stirred up more of a nest!! Haha, and I have to run to work - so, i can't even witness the rest of it. I think Rhiessan and Tarheel just threw those out there, so obviously there will be quirks.

I guess, also in my mind, I must mean a peak of at least 2 or 3 years. I mean, if you wanted to get ridiculous, you would end up with Martin Gerber in net based off of how he played against Canada in 2006!

Personally, going from around my time period, there are 5 guys who are more or less flawless, and were considered the very best for at least a few years. After that, there are great defenseman with obvious holes, or at least missing parts, in their games who nearly always had one of the 5 greats ahead of them while they played. The 5, for me, would be Orr, Bourque, Potvin, Fetisov, and Lidstrom. After that, I have to start looking at what type of guy I would want. For me, this would be the Stevens-Pronger-Chelios type (yes, I love Vladdy, but I don't want to get called completely insane, so i leave him at the fringe of this), but I also have to allow for the Park-Coffey-Leetch type! in other words, my 6 through 10 are not set in stone!

 

[pluppe]

He can actually believe what he says, but no, I don't think he's an unbiased source. He's a coach who won helped develop and then won multiple Cups with Lidstrom. His loyalty towards the player he coached for so long isn't going to disappear when he switches teams.

I would put a lot more stock into Bowman comparing Lidstrom to Harvey, impliciting stating he was better than Robinson, since Bowman theoretically should be biased towards all 3 players.

were you reffering to this since that is exactly what happened?

http://www.usatoday.com/community/p...cript=personaScript&plckElementId=personaDest

In terms of modern players, Bowman would compare Harvey to Denis Potvin. In Montreal, Bowman coached Larry Robinson and Serge Savard. Robinson was more offensive and Savard was more defensive. "Nick is a combination of both of them," Bowman said.

 

[tombombadil]

MacIniss and Robinson are kicking around in my head... and Salming and even Chara, based on fighting ability for an elite guy aren't terribly off the radar. I just watched Canada-Sweden '76, and Salming was ridiculously good... maybe he wouldn't be in my head otherwise!

 

[plusandminus]

MacIniss and Robinson are kicking around in my head... and Salming and even Chara, based on fighting ability for an elite guy aren't terribly off the radar. I just watched Canada-Sweden '76, and Salming was ridiculously good... maybe he wouldn't be in my head otherwise!

Yes, Salming was extremely good. I can even think of him having a higher peak than Lidstrom (and I'm surely not alone). But for some reason Lidstrom have 7 Norris' and Salming none. I do think it's a bit paradoxal.

 

[JackSlater]

Please tell us more. It surely sounds as if you could have observed enough to tell us more about how good you rate him, his teammates, etc.

Number four all time among defencemen is "how good" I rate him. I have no idea why I would rate Lidstrom's teammates or anything else relating to him. He obviously played on great teams if that is what you are asking.

 

[plusandminus]

Number four all time among defencemen is "how good" I rate him. I have no idea why I would rate Lidstrom's teammates or anything else relating to him. He obviously played on great teams if that is what you are asking.

I meant rating him compared to his defenceman teammates. But if you rate him as number 4 all time, then I suppose you obviously think of him being quite a bit better than all his defenceman teammates.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Please. First of all, I don't think you have even seen very much of Lidstrom over the years. Not enough to post about him as much as you do anyways.

Second, I think you are being disingenuous about your feelings when it comes to Lidstrom. You will say one good thing about him only to bring up a bunch of other points to drag him back down. You know you can't go too far or people won't take you seriously so you tone it down to look reasonable. Your bias resonates too much in your posts for your to hide it well though. It's very transparant - always has been.

You know, after looking over a few of the previous Lidstrom vs whoever threads I noticed something.
You accuse me of being negative towards Lidstrom and anything positive I say, which I almost always do about the guy is apparently, in your opinion, disingenuous.
Well, when was the last time you and some of the other louder Lidstrom pundits even had anything positive to say about whoever Lidstrom was being compared against?
At least I try to temper the negatives with positives.

I'm actually glad you brought this up and accused me of it. It made me take a real good look at these arguments and I feel even better about what and more importantly, how I have said what I have said in them.
Thanks

 

[Hardyvan123]

oh, ****!! i stirred up more of a nest!! Haha, and I have to run to work - so, i can't even witness the rest of it. I think Rhiessan and Tarheel just threw those out there, so obviously there will be quirks.

I guess, also in my mind, I must mean a peak of at least 2 or 3 years. I mean, if you wanted to get ridiculous, you would end up with Martin Gerber in net based off of how he played against Canada in 2006!

Personally, going from around my time period, there are 5 guys who are more or less flawless, and were considered the very best for at least a few years. After that, there are great defenseman with obvious holes, or at least missing parts, in their games who nearly always had one of the 5 greats ahead of them while they played. The 5, for me, would be Orr, Bourque, Potvin, Fetisov, and Lidstrom. After that, I have to start looking at what type of guy I would want. For me, this would be the Stevens-Pronger-Chelios type (yes, I love Vladdy, but I don't want to get called completely insane, so i leave him at the fringe of this), but I also have to allow for the Park-Coffey-Leetch type! in other words, my 6 through 10 are not set in stone!

Did you stop watching him when he came into the NHL?

 

[JackSlater]

I meant rating him compared to his defenceman teammates. But if you rate him as number 4 all time, then I suppose you obviously think of him being quite a bit better than all his defenceman teammates.

Definitely. Since the 1995-96 season only Chelios and to a lesser extent Konstantinov have been close to prime Lidstrom among Red Wing defencemen, and only for short intervals.

 

[canucks4ever]

Definitely. Since the 1995-96 season only Chelios and to a lesser extent Konstantinov have been close to prime Lidstrom among Red Wing defencemen, and only for short intervals.

What are your thoughts about lidstrom in 1995-96 and 1996-97? Do you think he was robbed of all star team selections? I only saw him play in the 1996 playoffs against colorado and the 1997 playoffs against philly and to me he was better DEFENSIVELY than konstantinov. Vlad was pretty ineffective against big physical players like lindros and leclair.

 

[Rhiessan71]

What are your thoughts about lidstrom in 1995-96 and 1996-97? Do you think he was robbed of all star team selections? I only saw him play in the 1996 playoffs against colorado and the 1997 playoffs against philly and to me he was better DEFENSIVELY than konstantinov. Vlad was pretty ineffective against big physical players like lindros and leclair.

I wouldn't say Vlad was ever ineffective. Less effective would be a better way of putting it.

Very few players could actually be effective physically vs Lindros in his prime. Hell, he manhandled Chara and that's unheard by any of today's players.
I think only Stevens really had any success vs Lindros physically and despite how it eventually turned out, Lindros still won more of those battles than Stevens did. There were other players like Ulf, Marchment and Kasperitus who had success vs other power forwards who had no success at all and got completely run over by Lindros. So I don't think it reflects badly on Vlady for being over-matched physically vs the guy, that's a long ass line.
The two players that I have seen "handle" Lindros the best would be between Lidstrom and Niedermayer but neither of them did it alone. Lindros, in his prime, was never controllable by a single person.

Lindros was an absolute beast, the likes of which we haven't seen before or since.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I wouldn't say Vlad was ever ineffective. Less effective would be a better way of putting it.

Very few players could actually be effective physically vs Lindros in his prime. Hell, he manhandled Chara and that's unheard by any of today's players.
I think only Stevens really had any success vs Lindros physically and despite how it eventually turned out, Lindros still won more of those battles than Stevens did.
The two players that I have seen "handle" Lindros the best would be between Lidstrom and Niedermayer but neither of them did it alone. Lindros, in his prime, was never controllable by a single person.

Lindros might have beat up Stevens in that famous fight, but in actual hockey games, Stevens usually came out on top, especially in the playoffs. When did Niedermayer match up against Lindros?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Lindros might have beat up Stevens in that famous fight, but in actual hockey games, Stevens usually came out on top, especially in the playoffs.

Can't say I agree with that. Like I said, in the end Stevens obviously got the better of him but most of the time in both the playoffs and the regular season, they would run at each other like a couple of bulls and Stevens lost more of those collisions than he won.
I'm definitely not talking about their fights. Stevens was a terrible fighter, strong as all hell but not a good fighter.
I met him at a golf tourny in Kitchener a few years back after he retired and he's still a monster. I am 6' 220 and I felt small heh.

When did Niedermayer match up against Lindros?

Nieds faced him the same times that Stevens did. He was the guy giving Lindros pause enough for Stevens to demolish him.
No different than what Lidstrom did to him in Detroit while the backcheckers could get involved.

Heh, watch the video's of Stevens big hits on Lindros and Kozlov from the playoffs. Who is the exact same D-man setting those hits up...Niedermayer.
Hell, on the Kozlov hit, Stevens almost took Niedermayer with him.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Can't say I agree with that. Like I said, in the end Stevens obviously got the better of him but most of the time in both the playoffs and the regular season, they would run at each other like a couple of bulls and Stevens lost more of those collisions than he won.
I'm definitely not talking about their fights. Stevens was a terrible fighter, strong as all hell but not a good fighter.
I met him at a golf tourny in Kitchener a few years back after he retired and he's still a monster. I am 6' 220 and I felt small heh.

When Stevens got 7 first place votes for the Norris in 1997, a big story was how Lindros knew he'd lose the majority of battles with Stevens so preferred to avoid his side of the ice. I posted an article saying as much when Stevens came up for discussion during Vote 3 of the defensemen project. Obviously, Lindros was one fo the few players who could beat Stevens consistently in battles, but Stevens won more than he lost.

Stevens also made the seemingly invincible Lindros look very mortal in the 1995 playoffs. Coach Lemaire kept a young Niedermayer as far from Lindros as possible at the time.

Nieds faced him the same times that Stevens did. He was the guy giving Lindros pause enough for Stevens to demolish him.
No different than what Lidstrom did to him in Detroit while the backcheckers could get involved.

Heh, watch the video's of Stevens big hits on Lindros and Kozlov from the playoffs. Who is the exact same D-man setting those hits up...Niedermayer.
Hell, on the Kozlov hit, Stevens almost took Niedermayer with him.

I've seen those videos... many times. 2 famous incidents don't make Niedermayer Stevens' regular partner.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Very few players could actually be effective physically vs Lindros in his prime. Hell, he manhandled Chara and that's unheard by any of today's players.
I think only Stevens really had any success vs Lindros physically and despite how it eventually turned out, Lindros still won more of those battles than Stevens did. There were other players like Ulf, Marchment and Kasperitus who had success vs other power forwards who had no success at all and got completely run over by Lindros. So I don't think it reflects badly on Vlady for being over-matched physically vs the guy, that's a long ass line.
The two players that I have seen "handle" Lindros the best would be between Lidstrom and Niedermayer but neither of them did it alone. Lindros, in his prime, was never controllable by a single person.

Lindros was an absolute beast, the likes of which we haven't seen before or since.

I agree with this.. Lindros was a monster before the injuries piled up.

He and Stevens crashed into one another an awful lot and I would have to agree that often Lindros got the better of it early on (especially when they fought) but Stevens definitely stood up to him which took away from Lindros' dominance.

And then the of course the famous hit scrambled what was left of Lindros' brain and basically ended Lindros as a major player.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Wait, what are we talking about?

 

[BraveCanadian]

Wait, what are we talking about?

Ha. Good point.

Something along the lines of being physical against unscrambled Lindros didn't really work that well so the Lidstrom method did contain him pretty good?

Thread titles are so limiting.

 

[Rhiessan71]

When Stevens got 7 first place votes for the Norris in 1997, a big story was how Lindros knew he'd lose the majority of battles with Stevens so preferred to avoid his side of the ice. I posted an article saying as much when Stevens came up for discussion during Vote 3 of the defensemen project. Obviously, Lindros was one fo the few players who could beat Stevens consistently in battles, but Stevens won more than he lost.

Stevens also made the seemingly invincible Lindros look very mortal in the 1995 playoffs. Coach Lemaire kept a young Niedermayer as far from Lindros as possible at the time.



I've seen those videos... many times. 2 famous incidents don't make Niedermayer Stevens' regular partner.

Fair enough. I haven't watched any of those games in quite a while so I will trust in your Devil's expertise on the matter.

 

[JackSlater]

What are your thoughts about lidstrom in 1995-96 and 1996-97? Do you think he was robbed of all star team selections? I only saw him play in the 1996 playoffs against colorado and the 1997 playoffs against philly and to me he was better DEFENSIVELY than konstantinov. Vlad was pretty ineffective against big physical players like lindros and leclair.

1996- Bourque and Chelios were well ahead of all other defencemen. Lidstrom was basically going for either of the second team spots. I would put Leetch comfortably ahead of Lidstrom that year. Keep in mind when you look back at that year that everything was working for Detroit in the regular season, while New York needed Leetch to make their team work. Konstantinov and Lidstrom is basically a toss up for me. At this point I would say that Konstantinov was the superior defensive player, while Lidstrom was better offensively. The stats probably overstate Lidstrom's superiority however, as I believe Konstantinov was being used in more defensive situations. Overall they were very close, although at the time I would have picked Lidstrom. Coffey has the points to be an all star, but by that point he was becoming as bad defensively as many today think he always was. MacInnis had a very solid year that year and should have gotten some consideration, but I am somewhat biased toward him. Stevens was his typical self, and would not have been out of place on the second team either. Overall I probably would have put Lidstrom as the final second all star, but I would not say he was robbed. He was very close with Konstantinov to me.

1997- Leetch was the deserving winner of the Norris. Lidstrom was given more offensive opportunities and overall improved slighty from the previous year. Chelios was not as good as in the previous season, while Bourque missed some games. Bourque may have won the Norris had he played the whole season. Ozolinsh was all offence basically. Stevens was once again solid. Konstantinov was pretty much the same as the previous year. Sydor was good in Dallas too. Pronger started to become a great defenceman that year. Anyway, I would have probably put Lidstrom as a first team all star that year, so I guess you could say he was somewhat robbed. That being said, it is not as if Lidstrom was head and shoulders above any of the other elite defencemen that season, and he was definitely behind Leetch. The competition among defencemen was very strong when Lidstrom emerged, although for award purposes this has been made up for by the last few seasons.

Regarding the 1997 finals, as others have suggested Lindros was not realistically going to be stopped by Konstantinov. Lindros probably outweighed Konstantinov by 40 pounds. Konstantinov had no chance to effectively use his physical game against Lindros; he would get crushed. Lidstrom on the other hand was able to basically outsmart Lindros. He did this along with Murphy, who often gets neglected in the discussion of that series even though he was also quite effective. I would not base comparisons of Lidstrom and Konstantinov on a series where they faced off against probably the worst player on Earth for Konstantinov's style to be effective against.

 

[Rhiessan71]

1996- Bourque and Chelios were well ahead of all other defencemen. Lidstrom was basically going for either of the second team spots. I would put Leetch comfortably ahead of Lidstrom that year. Keep in mind when you look back at that year that everything was working for Detroit in the regular season, while New York needed Leetch to make their team work. Konstantinov and Lidstrom is basically a toss up for me. At this point I would say that Konstantinov was the superior defensive player, while Lidstrom was better offensively. The stats probably overstate Lidstrom's superiority however, as I believe Konstantinov was being used in more defensive situations. Overall they were very close, although at the time I would have picked Lidstrom. Coffey has the points to be an all star, but by that point he was becoming as bad defensively as many today think he always was. MacInnis had a very solid year that year and should have gotten some consideration, but I am somewhat biased toward him. Stevens was his typical self, and would not have been out of place on the second team either. Overall I probably would have put Lidstrom as the final second all star, but I would not say he was robbed. He was very close with Konstantinov to me.

1997- Leetch was the deserving winner of the Norris. Lidstrom was given more offensive opportunities and overall improved slighty from the previous year. Chelios was not as good as in the previous season, while Bourque missed some games. Bourque may have won the Norris had he played the whole season. Ozolinsh was all offence basically. Stevens was once again solid. Konstantinov was pretty much the same as the previous year. Sydor was good in Dallas too. Pronger started to become a great defenceman that year. Anyway, I would have probably put Lidstrom as a first team all star that year, so I guess you could say he was somewhat robbed. That being said, it is not as if Lidstrom was head and shoulders above any of the other elite defencemen that season, and he was definitely behind Leetch. The competition among defencemen was very strong when Lidstrom emerged, although for award purposes this has been made up for by the last few seasons.

Regarding the 1997 finals, as others have suggested Lindros was not realistically going to be stopped by Konstantinov. Lindros probably outweighed Konstantinov by 40 pounds. Konstantinov had no chance to effectively use his physical game against Lindros; he would get crushed. Lidstrom on the other hand was able to basically outsmart Lindros. He did this along with Murphy, who often gets neglected in the discussion of that series even though he was also quite effective. I would not base comparisons of Lidstrom and Konstantinov on a series where they faced off against probably the worst player on Earth for Konstantinov's style to be effective against.

This is perhaps the most reasonable and level headed post in the entire thread imo.

Thanks for the insight Jack.

 

[Brooklanders*]

Thought this would be an interesting spin-off debate from the Top 60 thread.

Lidstrom placed #5 on the list. By all indications, Potvin will comfortably place #6. We didn't really discuss these guys head-to-head during the first round of voting, largely because Lidstrom was being compared to the 3 players immediately ahead of him.

So, is there a good argument to put Potvin at the #5 spot? Is this more of a tie? Is Lidstrom in fact clearly ahead of Potvin? What do you guys think?

Potvin is clearly the better player

 

[Brooklanders*]

I'm not saying Isles were carried by three men, but Wings had arguably more depth.

No way did the wings have better talent a better team or more depth
The isles would have destroyed your redwing teams

 

[Brooklanders*]

Lidstrom's peak is criminally underrated. Nick is rapidly approaching 42, not nearly as spry/mobile as he was 10 years ago, and still a focal point of the "who is the best defenseman in the league?" debate. Everyone likes to attribute this to "oh the competition is meh" whereas it really should open some eyes up to how mind-bogglingly good Lidstrom was for most of his career. In '02 Bowman referred to him as as near as perfect as you can get (or something to that effect, I'm not going to bother looking that quote up again).

Potvin may have been more visually impressive, but that doesn't make him more effective. Sure Nick wasn't a bruiser but I looked up a bunch of quotes from the likes of Crosby, Nash, Kane, Iginla where they all say that playing against a defenseman like Lidstrom is more frustrating than playing against a bruiser and that they'd rather have a guy engage physically than just take the puck away and make you chase the transition game.

Potvin wins the style points competition in a landslide. I'll give him that.



Here's hoping that massive error went unnoticed for 7 hours...

You obviously didn't watch potvin play