Potvin vs Lidstrom

[Rhiessan71]

Switch datsyuk and zetterberg with trottier and bossy and the scoring gap probably narrows by a big gap.

Objectively, potvin's best season was 1976 because Bossy wasn't around and he lead his team in scoring. He probably deserved the hart over clarke, but bobby was a precious media darling, his harts are another matter.

Not sure how you can say the gap narrows by switching those players in one breath and then in the very next you are reciting Potvin's '76 season where he had 98 points (second highest of his career) with only a rookie Trottier. The same season that he not only led his team in scoring in the regular season including a whopping 31 goals but also in the playoff's and finished second in league scoring despite playing only 3 rounds and 3 less games than the leader, Leach, who if you know your history, this was the year Reggie set the still current playoff scoring record.

I'm sorry but I quite simply never saw Lidstrom be any where near that kind of offensive class. Not sure how anyone could.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Not to mention it's rather absurd to point to a 32 game stretch where Blake scores 18 of his 23 goals but somehow Lidstrom's offensive contributions are the ones that are inconsistent. Where was Blake the other 49 games he played?

It's absurd to point out Rob Blake's stretch of play (39 games) where the Los Angeles Kings went from a 12-14-6 record to clinching a playoff spot for the first time in five years? May I ask why?

Blake never went more than 10 games without a goal. Lidstrom? 22 games (#37-#58), followed by another 9 (#60-#68), and then another 10 to close out the season (#71-#80). He had a hot two months to start the season, but why would the voters recognize them as being all-around equals when Lidstrom had only scored three goals since Christmas? It's the Corey Perry situation all over again: To amp up one's play when the playoff seeds are forming is more significant, and Lidstrom Kris Letanged himself out of a Norris by being snake bitten after the holidays.

Since you have the gamesheets up anyway, could you give me the point figures for that stretch of games? You've tossed out goals twice now but something tells me the actual scoring is far closer.

You mean Lidstrom might have been picking up assists on the best team in the league even though he personally couldn't score more than three goals from Christmas to the playoffs? Scandalous!

If you want to know the totals, look them up. I'm not going to actively try to make your argument for Lidstrom for you when Rob Blake won the Norris. I just don't like to sit back when people blame nationality for a damn trophy when they don't even remember what the voters were actually holding against the player in the first place. And if JackSlater was being sarcastic, then why are you arguing with me about such an obvious detriment in his play that season?

 

[canucks4ever]

It's absurd to point out Rob Blake's stretch of play (39 games) where the Los Angeles Kings went from a 12-14-6 record to clinching a playoff spot for the first time in five years? May I ask why?

Blake never went more than 10 games without a goal. Lidstrom? 22 games (#37-#58), followed by another 9 (#60-#68), and then another 10 to close out the season (#71-#80). He had a hot two months to start the season, but why would the voters recognize them as being all-around equals when Lidstrom had only scored three goals since Christmas? It's the Corey Perry situation all over again: To amp up one's play when the playoff seeds are forming is more significant, and Lidstrom Kris Letanged himself out of a Norris by being snake bitten after the holidays.



You mean Lidstrom might have been picking up assists on the best team in the league even though he personally couldn't score more than three goals from Christmas to the playoffs? Scandalous!

If you want to know the totals, look them up. I'm not going to actively try to make your argument for Lidstrom for you when Rob Blake won the Norris. I just don't like to sit back when people blame nationality for a damn trophy when they don't even remember what the voters were actually holding against the player in the first place. And if JackSlater was being sarcastic, then why are you arguing with me about such an obvious detriment in his play that season?

You can try and nitpick your way into reasoning why blake won the trophy, lidstrom outscored him and he was much better defensively. It was a robbery. Since when is the norris decided on who was more consistent at scoring goals? This is pathetic. Blake was an average defender with good offensive skills, he was not the best defenseman that year. Even rob blake said lidstrom got robbed, lol.

Try and show arguments that blake was on his level defensively through even strength or penalty killing numbers? You can't, your only arguments is to turn the norris into a rocket richard trophy.

 

[quoipourquoi]

You can try and nitpick your way into reasoning why blake won the trophy, lidstrom outscored him and he was much better defensively. It was a robbery. Since when is the norris decided on who was more consistent at scoring goals? This is pathetic. Blake was an average defender with good offensive skills, he was not the best defenseman that year. Even rob blake said lidstrom got robbed, lol.

Try and show arguments that blake was on his level defensively through even strength or penalty killing numbers? You can't, your only arguments is to turn the norris into a rocket richard trophy.

Oh, I thought the Norris was for two-way play and that scoring goals that result in your team winning was a good thing. My mistake.

Again, you're covering up the fact that Nicklas Lidstrom rode an awful near-fifty-game goal scoring slump into the Norris voting. Trust me, the three-goals thing came up when they were filling out their ballots.

When discussing Blake's impact, the other Kings rarely mention his offensive numbers. They point to days like Feb. 25, when Los Angeles had its first post- Nagano game. While many travel-weary Olympians around the league took time off, Blake, who had played for Canada and was named the top defenseman at the Games, was on the ice for almost 31 minutes in a 1-1 tie against the Red Wings.

His teammates also recall plays like the one he made against the Sharks earlier this year, when he caught streaking center Patrick Marleau from behind and plucked the puck neatly off his stick. And they talk about the way the 6'3", 220-pound Blake can, in the words of Robinson, "destroy somebody with a hit that turns a game around."

Blake approaches opponents almost benignly, crouched over and butt-first. Then he levels them with his trademark hip check. He hits hard and often—"It's a way to control a game," he says—and he regularly drops players in open ice. "You're always aware of him physically," says San Jose center Bernie Nicholls. "In our meetings before we play the Kings, our focus is on how to handle Blake. He's the best defenseman we play against, and he's having the best season of his life."

I think the only difference between this debate now and this debate last year is that no one pulls the plus-minus card anymore. Why don't you pull out some articles detailing how Rob Blake was "average" defensively in his prime instead of relying on me to come up with a list of reasons as to why Rob Blake has a Norris Trophy? Why don't you cite one source that validates the theory that pokechecking was under-recognized?

Suddenly because I remember how little Lidstrom chipped in after the All-Star Game and subsequently researched it, you're calling me pathetic and asking me to come up with all the answers while you get to fall back on the assumption of Lidstrom's perfection. Re-read your post, because you brought absolutely nothing to the table but a bad attitude.

 

[danincanada]

Oh, I thought the Norris was for two-way play and that scoring goals that result in your team winning was a good thing. My mistake.

'97-98:
Lidstrom TGF 126 TGA 75
Blake TGF 113 TGA 111

Being on the ice for many more goals for than goals against is more important than the goal scoring theme you're reaching for here. Lidstrom was superior to Blake but didn't have the bone crushing hits or canon from the point and media constantly saying "people are missing what Blake is doing because he's on the west coast".

Again, you're covering up the fact that Nicklas Lidstrom rode an awful near-fifty-game goal scoring slump into the Norris voting. Trust me, the three-goals thing came up when they were filling out their ballots.

You're acting like goal scoring is the major factor for the Norris and you're obviously nitpicking stats by just looking at an isolated timeframe that season as well. I don't think anyone is buying it. Most here know what type of players Lidstrom and Blake were and in hindsight if you see that Lidstrom recorded 9 more points and you assume he was also much better defensively than Blake (not a big assumption) than it's obvious who should have won the Norris that season.

 

[BraveCanadian]

'97-98:
Lidstrom TGF 126 TGA 75
Blake TGF 113 TGA 111

Being on the ice for many more goals for than goals against is more important than the goal scoring theme you're reaching for here. Lidstrom was superior to Blake but didn't have the bone crushing hits or canon from the point and media constantly saying "people are missing what Blake is doing because he's on the west coast".

Not picking sides in the debate, although I do think a case could be made for Lidstrom over Blake that year, but GF and GA arguments rely on the team an awful lot - not just the individual.

I do agree with you that the goal scoring by Lidstrom down the stretch doesn't mean much of anything.

 

[habitue*]

I did not read the thread.

But Potvin and Lidstrom are TOTALLY different types of players.

Potvin was a physical beasts and punishers on the blue line and had one of the best point shots in the History of hockey.

Lidstrom is a super skillful ans clever d-man who is still playing at 40 because he was able to avoid injuries and big contacts.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I do agree with you that the goal scoring by Lidstrom down the stretch doesn't mean much of anything.

Except that history shows us different though. It's the exact same reason Lidstrom lost the Calder.

Must of been anti-euro bias then too...wait a minute

 

[BraveCanadian]

Except that history shows us different though. It's the exact same reason Lidstrom lost the Calder.

It was? Goal scoring is not a big part of Lidstrom's game by any means. I think he has hit 20 goals in a season, what, once?

I mean maybe we *think* it was the reason he didn't win the Calder but I don't think I've seen any of the voters say so.. and having seen the season in question just as you did I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that Pavel Bure was the definition of a player who stood out.

 

[overpass]

Most here know what type of players Lidstrom and Blake were and in hindsight if you see that Lidstrom recorded 9 more points and you assume he was also much better defensively than Blake (not a big assumption) than it's obvious who should have won the Norris that season.

Lidstrom does not have a right to every single Norris trophy during his career because he was really good defensively in his 30s.

Where does it end? Should he get the Norris for 1997 because while Brian Leetch scored 78 points, "we know what type of player he was?" And Chris Chelios scored 5 more points than Lidstrom in 1996, but he also hurt his team with 140 penalty minutes. I guess Lidstrom should have won that one too.

We've already decided he should have the Norris for 1998, 1999, and 2000. Why not give him two more revisionist awards?

 

[Rhiessan71]

It was? Goal scoring is not a big part of Lidstrom's game by any means. I think he has hit 20 goals in a season, what, once?

I mean maybe we *think* it was the reason he didn't win the Calder but I don't think I've seen any of the voters say so.. and having seen the season in question just as you did I think it had a lot more to do with the fact that Pavel Bure was the definition of a player who stood out.

Bure really only stood out in the last 23 games though. He only had 12 goals in his first 42 games and then exploded down the stretch with an incredible 22 goals in his final 23 games to propel the 'Nucks into first place in their division and capture the Calder.

The argument was that Blake's stronger play than Lidstrom's down the stretch shouldn't of been a factor but history shows us, it is always a factor.

 

[Pear Juice]

Lidstrom does not have a right to every single Norris trophy during his career because he was really good defensively in his 30s.

Where does it end? Should he get the Norris for 1997 because while Brian Leetch scored 78 points, "we know what type of player he was?" And Chris Chelios scored 5 more points than Lidstrom in 1996, but he also hurt his team with 140 penalty minutes. I guess Lidstrom should have won that one too.

We've already decided he should have the Norris for 1998, 1999, and 2000. Why not give him two more revisionist awards?

He shouldn't get any of them. Giving people credit for stuff they didn't achieve is a dangerous path to take. It is much better to simply say that he was a close second or third. It's virtually the same thing except that it is also true. I don't have time to access the actual votes though. Anyone has the record for 1998 easily at hand?

 

[overpass]

He shouldn't get any of them. Giving people credit for stuff they didn't achieve is a dangerous path to take. It is much better to simply say that he was a close second or third. It's virtually the same thing except that it is also true. I don't have time to access the actual votes though. Anyone has the record for 1998 easily at hand?

I agree with you. I guess my tone didn't come through correctly.

I have no problem with someone disagreeing with the results of the Norris voting, and having their own opinion on the topic. Especially if they watched that season. But I really don't like the practice of calling a large group of voters biased because one disagrees with the result of their process.

Awards voting for Lidstrom

1992-93 Calder: Pavel Bure 222 (26-27-11); Nicklas Lidstrom 183 (23-16-20); Tony Amonte 183 (18-22-27)

1995-96 Norris: Chris Chelios 408 (22-19-9-3-1); Ray Bourque 403 (23-16-8-7-0); Brian Leetch 245 (6-6-23-7-7); Vladimir Konstantinov 131 (2-6-7-10-4); Paul Coffey 83 (0-4-2-12-9); Nicklas Lidstrom 54 (0-1-3-7-11)

1996-97 Norris: Brian Leetch 494 (42-8-3-1-0); Vladimir Konstantinov 178 (2-10-13-6-5); Sandis Ozolinsh 176 (2-12-9-8-3); Chris Chelios 172 (0-7-18-9-6); Scott Stevens 171 (7-8-4-7-4); Nicklas Lidstrom 60 (0-5-2-3-6)

1997-98 Norris: Rob Blake 401 (27-12-8-2-1); Nicklas Lidstrom 369 (15-22-10-5-0); Chris Pronger 316 (8-15-23-5-1)

1998-99 Norris: Al MacInnis 548 (54-0-1-1-0); Nicklas Lidstrom 234 (0-21-9-13-3); Ray Bourque 157 (0-9-12-8-10)

1999-00 Norris: Chris Pronger 565 (53-5-0-0-0); Nicklas Lidstom 400 (5-46-5-1-0); Rob Blake 196 (0-3-25-15-5)

 

[Pear Juice]

I agree with you. I guess my tone didn't come through correctly.

I have no problem with someone disagreeing with the results of the Norris voting, and having their own opinion on the topic. Especially if they watched that season. But I really don't like the practice of calling a large group of voters biased because one disagrees with the result of their process.

Awards voting for Lidstrom

1992-93 Calder: Pavel Bure 222 (26-27-11); Nicklas Lidstrom 183 (23-16-20); Tony Amonte 183 (18-22-27)

1995-96 Norris: Chris Chelios 408 (22-19-9-3-1); Ray Bourque 403 (23-16-8-7-0); Brian Leetch 245 (6-6-23-7-7); Vladimir Konstantinov 131 (2-6-7-10-4); Paul Coffey 83 (0-4-2-12-9); Nicklas Lidstrom 54 (0-1-3-7-11)

1996-97 Norris: Brian Leetch 494 (42-8-3-1-0); Vladimir Konstantinov 178 (2-10-13-6-5); Sandis Ozolinsh 176 (2-12-9-8-3); Chris Chelios 172 (0-7-18-9-6); Scott Stevens 171 (7-8-4-7-4); Nicklas Lidstrom 60 (0-5-2-3-6)

1997-98 Norris: Rob Blake 401 (27-12-8-2-1); Nicklas Lidstrom 369 (15-22-10-5-0); Chris Pronger 316 (8-15-23-5-1)

1998-99 Norris: Al MacInnis 548 (54-0-1-1-0); Nicklas Lidstrom 234 (0-21-9-13-3); Ray Bourque 157 (0-9-12-8-10)

1999-00 Norris: Chris Pronger 565 (53-5-0-0-0); Nicklas Lidstom 400 (5-46-5-1-0); Rob Blake 196 (0-3-25-15-5)

Oh your tone was fine, got the message, just wanted to "retweet" it If any trophy voting is very tight then surely it should be evident by just looking at the voting records. In this case it's clear that it was quite tight in 1998. Lidström actually has more total votes than Blake.

 

[danincanada]

Lidstrom does not have a right to every single Norris trophy during his career because he was really good defensively in his 30s.

Where does it end? Should he get the Norris for 1997 because while Brian Leetch scored 78 points, "we know what type of player he was?" And Chris Chelios scored 5 more points than Lidstrom in 1996, but he also hurt his team with 140 penalty minutes. I guess Lidstrom should have won that one too.

We've already decided he should have the Norris for 1998, 1999, and 2000. Why not give him two more revisionist awards?

By '97 and '98 Lidstrom's impeccable defensive play was already evident to those who watched him. He WAS superior to Blake defensively in '98 and recorded 9 more points as well. Lidstrom doesn't have the right to every Norris but he definitely should have won it that season because he was the better player. After that season he proved it again come playoff time winning another Cup.

 

[danincanada]

Bure really only stood out in the last 23 games though. He only had 12 goals in his first 42 games and then exploded down the stretch with an incredible 22 goals in his final 23 games to propel the 'Nucks into first place in their division and capture the Calder.

The argument was that Blake's stronger play than Lidstrom's down the stretch shouldn't of been a factor but history shows us, it is always a factor.

It wasn't a factor in '09 when Chara rode a hot start to a Norris when Lidstrom was clearly better down the stretch, then that carried over into the playoffs.

Chara:
Pre All-Star GP 47 G 11 A 18 PTS 29 +22 PIM 56
Post All-Star GP 33 G 8 A 13 PTS 21 +1 PIM 39

Lidstrom:
Pre All-Star GP 44 G 7 A 25 PTS 32 +16 PIM 14
Post All-Star GP 34 G 9 A 18 PTS 27 +15 PIM 16

 

[tarheelhockey]

The 1991 Calder Race

Why not go to primary sources instead of trying to read the voters' minds?

PRESEASON HYPE
Lidstrom and Bure were both part of the big story of 1991, which was the sudden surge in European talent. Both were seen as blue-chip acquisitions. Bure was stuck in contract limbo during a protracted dispute over whether he would be allowed to leave Russia, and did not play in the Canada Cup. Lidstrom starred in leading Sweden to the World Championship and, as more of a sure thing contract-wise, benefitted from a decent amount of positive attention compared to Bure. The Wings were expected to be a good team, Vancouver was expected to be near the middle or cellar of their division.

On defense, the Wings will add a minimum of two new players - Swede Niklas Lidstrom and Soviet Vladimir Konstantinov. Lidstrom is a skilled defenseman, who could rival the speed of Calgary's Al MacInnis. It's possible Lidstrom will have difficulty adjusting to the 80-game NHL schedule and its more physical play, but Murray is hoping the Swede's talent will make up for any problems.

"In the World Championships, Niklas left a very good impression with me," Murray said. "He's shown he plays very well, especially in big games.

"The question is the 80-game grind. Strength is a major factor. Niklas is tall, but slim. But he can sure shoot the puck."

Konstantinov would be more likely to be the player on the blue line to get Lidstrom the puck, since he is considered more of a defensive defenseman.

Rookie Ds Vladimir Konstantinov and Niklas Lidstrom could be Calder candidates.

Soviet defector Pavel Bure , who played with Sergei Fedorov and Alexander Mogilny in for the Soviet national team, could be a big addition if his contractual release is arranged.

[preseason team previews article]

A bright spot to watch is newly signed defenseman Niklas Lidstrom , who was a star for Team Sweden in the World Championships last year.

The local papers have been pessimistic about the Canucks' ability to sign Bure should he win his court case. If he doesn't sign within 15 days of winning, he could become a free agent. But Burke said the Canucks had no intention of letting the 20-year-old left winger get away.

"He's better at the same stage than (Sergei) Fedorov was," said Burke, referring to the Red Wings' forward. "He is fast, I mean blinding speed, and he's strong for a guy who's not too big.

EARLY REVIEWS
Lidstrom jumped out to an early lead in the Calder race at a time of year when few rookies are really being talked about. The Canucks were the surprise team of the league early on, and Bure joined the team on November 5th.

Pavel Bure , one of the brightest prospects to come out of Soviet junior hockey, agreed to a multi-year contract yesterday with the Vancouver Canucks.

11/6/1991

Soviet rookie Pavel Bure , 20, failed to score in his debut with Vancouver, but he didn't disappoint the home crowd.

Bure , 20, signed to a four-year, $2.7 million contract last week, made several spectacular rink-length dashes, only to be denied by Winnipeg goalie Rick Tabaracci.

"He did some exciting things," said Brian Burke, Canucks vice president of hockey operations. "You can't teach what he's got."

"I thought he gave a pretty good accounting of himself," Canucks assistant coach Rick Ley said. "He certainly had the fans out of their seats."

His speed and puck-handling ability drew admiring gasps from the crowd.

"He's right up there in skating ability with the best in the league," said Vancouver defenseman Robert Dirk, who scored the game-tying goal with 8:25 remaining in the third period. "He kicks it up to another gear. When he does that, he makes a defenseman look like a turnstile. Only a couple of guys in the league can do that."

Detroit Red Wings: The Wings are surging. Paul Ysebaert, Jimmy Carson, Nicklas Lidstrom , Brad McCrimmon and Tim Cheveldae have been keys. Now the team needs Steve Yzerman, Sergei Fedorov, Gerard Gallant, Yves Racine and Vincent Riendeau to come through in the second quarter.

The four Sabres face stiff competition for the Calder Trophy from Niklas Lidstrom of the Detroit Red Wings, Tony Amonte and Doug Weight of the New York Rangers and Kevin Todd of the New Jersey Devils.

Numbers through the end of November:

Lidstrom

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
10/3/1991 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
10/5/1991 | TOR | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1
10/10/1991 | MTL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
10/12/1991 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
10/15/1991 | EDM | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
10/17/1991 | STL | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2
10/19/1991 | QUE | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
10/23/1991 | WIN | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
10/25/1991 | TOR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
10/26/1991 | TOR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
10/28/1991 | LAK | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
10/30/1991 | BUF | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/1/1991 | HAR | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
11/2/1991 | BOS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/5/1991 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
11/7/1991 | STL | 2 | 2 | 4 | 6
11/8/1991 | WSH | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/10/1991 | STL | 0 | 2 | 2 | -1
11/12/1991 | CGY | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0
11/14/1991 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/16/1991 | LAK | 0 | 3 | 3 | 1
11/19/1991 | CHI | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
11/22/1991 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/23/1991 | MNS | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
11/25/1991 | WSH | 0 | 2 | 2 | 3
11/30/1991 | STL | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1
TOTAL | 26 | 4 | 20 | 24 | 20

Bure

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
11/5/1991 | WIN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/7/1991 | LAK | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
11/10/1991 | NYI | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
11/12/1991 | LAK | 2 | 0 | 2 | 2
11/14/1991 | CGY | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
11/16/1991 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/19/1991 | NYR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/21/1991 | CGY | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
11/22/1991 | CGY | 1 | 0 | 1 | -1
11/26/1991 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
11/29/1991 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
TOTAL | 11 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 0

MIDSEASON REVIEWS
By midseason, Lidstrom was well in the Calder lead as the rookie scoring leader while the Wings went on a 19-3-2 tear at one point. Tony Amonte and Donald Audette were in the conversation, but virtually every source had Lidstrom winning the Calder in their midseason predictions. Bure had just begun to make some noise, with the Canucks very unexpectedly leading their division, but stayed under the radar and didn't really find his pace until mid-February. Note the anonymous coach below, who expressed doubts about whether Lidstrom would continue his high level of production in the 4th quarter of the season.

Since 1980, only two defensemen have won the Calder Trophy as the NHL's top rookie. Niklas Lidstrom of the Detroit Red Wings is making a good run at becoming the third.

The Swedish defenseman, selected by the Red Wings in the third round of the 1989 draft, had two goals and 12 assists in 20 games with Vasteras in the Swedish Elite League last season. He also led Sweden to the World Hockey Championship title in May.

The switch to the NHL has broken more than a few promising Europeans, but not Lidstrom .

" Lidstrom is one of the main reasons that Detroit is so improved," said Pierre Page, the coach of the Quebec Nordiques. "Hockey has changed, and now you need mobility on defense. That's what Lidstrom and Vladimir Konstantinov give them."

Lidstrom has done more than just give the Red Wings another shifty defenseman. After Thursday's 4-1 victory over Quebec, the 6-foot-2, 180- pounder led all rookies with 29 points, on five goals and 24 assists. And with a plus-25, he was the only rookie among the leaders in the plus-minus ratings.

Lidstrom may be just 21, but he's already talking like a veteran. He is as excited as any of his teammates about the Wings' nine-game winning streak at home, but he also is realistic about the Red Wings' recent success.

"This is only the 31st game of the season," Lidstrom said. "We can't worry about who is the best team right now, because we have a long time left to go."

Calder Trophy (rookie of the year): Detroit defenseman Niklas Lidstrom is part of the reason Bryan Murray looks so smart this season. Murray has been looking for an offensive defenseman for the power play since he got to Detroit. Lidstrom leads all rookies, even forwards, in points with 34 (6-28).

* Calder Trophy (top rookie): Niklas Lidstrom , Red Wings. The 21-year-old Swedish defenseman has taken over the point for Norris-leading Detroit and leads all rookies with 35 points.
...
"I think they're going through a very positive hot phase in a very long season. I'm still skeptical of the European players (Sergei Fedorov, Niklas Lidstrom , Vladimir Konstantinov) who are unaccustomed to an 80-game grind. Around Game 60, watch them begin to play pretty ordinary. That's when the true mettle of the Red Wings will show. Then you'll see if the Steve Yzermans and Gerard Gallants, the good veterans, are able to carry the team." [anonymous NHL coach speaking]

Actually, Audette could have 41 games left in his season if Muckler consents to let him play against Philadelphia. And, at the frantic rate Audette has scored goals, that leaves him plenty of time to make another strong run at the Calder . His main competitors appear to be Detroit defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom (six goals, 36 points, plus-26) and New York Ranger right wing Tony Amonte (15 goals, 30 points).

Rookie Of The Year: Red Wings defenseman Niklas Lidstrom already has locked up the Calder Trophy as the NHL's top rookie. Steady defensively and creative offensively, Lidstrom has had a stunning impact on the Wings.

Lidstrom , 22, might be the most exalted defenseman in Detroit since Hall of Famer Red Kelly roamed the ice more than 30 years ago.

CALDER TROPHY (ROOKIE)

1. Niklas Lidstrom , Detroit
2. Tony Amonte, Rangers
3. Pat Falloon, San Jose

1. Nicklas Lidstrom , Detroit After he wins the Calder Trophy and the plus-minus title, perhaps people will learn how to spell his first name.

GM-coach Bryan Murray uses the speed of ex-center Paul Ysebaert and Kevin Miller on the wings and the grace of rookie defenseman Niklas Lidstrom for an excellent transition game.

The 20-year-old Russian right winger with the blazing speed and balletic moves has begun to cash in on the countless chances he's been generating since he joined the Canucks 31 games ago. And with no one except Detroit Red Wings' Niklas Lidstrom - who leads all rookies with seven goals and 40 assists in 45 games - making a serious bid for rookie of the year honors, Bure's in a position to make a horse race out of it, although he'd be the dark horse.

Entering Saturday's games, Detroit's Niklas Lidstrom , a favorite for the Calder Trophy as the rookie of the year, led all rookies with 40 points and a plus-minus rating of plus 27. The New York Rangers' Tony Amonte has 39 points.

Numbers from December through February:

Lidstrom

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
12/3/1991 | CGY | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
12/6/1991 | NYR | 0 | 2 | 2 | -1
12/7/1991 | NJD | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
12/10/1991 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
12/12/1991 | QUE | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3
12/14/1991 | CGY | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
12/15/1991 | EDM | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
12/17/1991 | VAN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
12/21/1991 | LAK | 0 | 2 | 2 | -1
12/28/1991 | TOR | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0
12/29/1991 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
12/31/1991 | BOS | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
1/3/1992 | TOR | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3
1/4/1992 | STL | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
1/7/1992 | NYI | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
1/9/1992 | MNS | 1 | 0 | 1 | 5
1/11/1992 | EDM | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
1/14/1992 | NYI | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2
1/16/1992 | PIT | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
1/21/1992 | PHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
1/23/1992 | VAN | 0 | 0 | 0 | -3
1/25/1992 | NJD | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
1/29/1992 | BUF | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
1/31/1992 | NJD | 0 | 2 | 2 | -1
2/1/1992 | MTL | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
2/3/1992 | PIT | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1
2/5/1992 | WSH | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
2/7/1992 | TOR | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
2/9/1992 | NYR | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2
2/11/1992 | TOR | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
2/12/1992 | BUF | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2
2/15/1992 | SJS | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2
2/17/1992 | STL | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
2/20/1992 | TOR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
2/22/1992 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
2/23/1992 | HAR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
2/27/1992 | CHI | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
2/29/1992 | STL | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
TOTALS | 38 | 5 | 23 | 28 | 14

Bure

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
12/1/1991 | EDM | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2
12/3/1991 | QUE | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
12/4/1991 | MTL | 0 | 2 | 2 | 2
12/7/1991 | TOR | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2
12/10/1991 | EDM | 1 | 0 | 1 | -1
12/12/1991 | MNS | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
12/14/1991 | LAK | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
12/17/1991 | DET | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
12/19/1991 | WIN | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1
12/22/1991 | QUE | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
12/27/1991 | PHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
12/28/1991 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
12/31/1991 | LAK | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
1/3/1992 | WSH | 0 | 0 | 0 | -2
1/4/1992 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | -3
1/7/1992 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
1/12/1992 | PIT | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
1/14/1992 | WIN | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2
1/15/1992 | EDM | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1
1/21/1992 | QUE | 2 | 1 | 3 | 3
1/23/1992 | DET | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
1/25/1992 | STL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
1/28/1992 | EDM | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1
1/30/1992 | CHI | 0 | 2 | 2 | 0
2/1/1992 | HAR | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
2/4/1992 | MTL | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2
2/6/1992 | NYI | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1
2/10/1992 | MTL | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
2/12/1992 | NYR | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
2/13/1992 | NJD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
2/15/1992 | NYI | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
2/17/1992 | NYR | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2
2/19/1992 | BUF | 1 | 1 | 2 | -2
2/21/1992 | SJS | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1
2/23/1992 | BOS | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
2/25/1992 | LAK | 0 | 1 | 1 | -1
2/28/1992 | WIN | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1
TOTAL | 37 | 15 | 18 | 33 | -2

STRETCH RUN
Sure enough, Lidstrom began to fade around Game 60. Amonte caught him in the scoring race and was briefly a favorite, but Bure went into an unbelievable scoring tear on February 17th and was a goal-per-game player from then until the end of the season. It's hard to argue against the obvious here: Bure won the Calder with a huge late-season surge as Lidstrom struggled with having played the entire schedule.

Tony Amonte leads all NHL rookies in both goals (28) and points (54). He may run into a problem with voters.

First, he played with Messier, which will sway voters to believe his numbers were inflated. Second, just one point back is Detroit's Niklas Lidstrom , who is a defenseman.

Lidstom (sic) is plus-31, Amonte plus-16. Again, it could come down to whose team finishes higher. New Jersey's Kevin Todd, Vancouver's Pavel Bure and St. Louis' Nelson Emerson will get a few votes each.

Other Wings in the running: Defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom is getting a strong challenge from the Rangers' Tony Amonte for the Calder Trophy as the top rookie, though Lidstrom is expected to win because he plays the more difficult position

Bure, who'd likely be neck and neck with New York Rangers' Tony Amonte and Detroit's Niklas Lidstrom for rookie-of-the-year honors if he hadn't missed the first 15 games of the season, struggled the first two months while showing glimpses of game-breaking ability.

A 6-foot, 194-pound left wing, Gilbert Dionne has no real shot at the Calder Trophy, given to the rookie of the year, since he has played only half a season. Though the Rangers' Tony Amonte has moved into the rookie scoring lead, Detroit defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom should win the award.

The race for Rookie of the Year honors is shaping up. The front-runner for much of the season, Detroit's Nicklas Lidstrom , is having problems with the 80-game schedule and is fading. That's left the door open for the Rangers' Tony Amonte, but there's a late rush coming from Buffalo's Donald Audette, Vancouver's Pavel Bure and even St. Louis' Nelson Emerson and New Jersey's Kevin Todd.

* Calder (rookie) - Pavel Bure, Vancouver. The Rangers' Tony Amonte gets the headlines, but he plays with Messier. Bure grabs your attention when he's on the ice, and he has just 11 fewer points than Amonte in 15 fewer games. Runner-up - Nicklas Lidstrom , Detroit. The defenseman has 59 points and has been among the plus-minus leaders all season.

New York's Tony Amonte is the likely rookie of the year in a close race with Detroit defenseman Niklas Lidstrom . Vancouver's Pavel Bure is probably the best talent in this group, but I can't help but like Montreal's Gilbert Dionne.

Q: Who should be Rookie of the Year?

A: There's no question in my mind. I know everyone talks about (Nicklas) Lidstrom winning it, but when he hit Game 60, he hit a brick wall. This is like his third season. And I wouldn't pick (Vancouver's) Pavel Bure , either, because he's a minus hockey player. How can he be a minus hockey player when he scores 30 goals and is on a first-place team? I'll tell you how, he doesn't backcheck.

My choice would be (New York Ranger) Tony Amonte. He backchecks, he hits and he's tough. That's a hockey player to me. He's not as good a skater, but in a lot of ways he reminds me of Stevie Yzerman. He has that excitement. And I'm not being prejudiced. He's an American.

Numbers from March through April:

Lidstrom

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
3/3/1992 | WIN | 0 | 1 | 1 | -3
3/5/1992 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/7/1992 | QUE | 2 | 0 | 2 | 0
3/8/1992 | MTL | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
3/12/1992 | STL | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
3/14/1992 | MNS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/15/1992 | WIN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/17/1992 | SJS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
3/20/1992 | NYR | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
3/22/1992 | PHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/24/1992 | PIT | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0
3/28/1992 | VAN | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/29/1992 | NYI | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1
3/31/1992 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
4/12/1992 | CHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
4/14/1992 | MNS | 0 | 1 | 1 | 5
TOTAL | 16 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 2

Bure

Date | Opp | G | A | PTS | +/-
3/1/1992 | CGY | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1
3/2/1992 | STL | 1 | 0 | 1 | -2
3/5/1992 | BOS | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1
3/7/1992 | HAR | 2 | 0 | 2 | 3
3/8/1992 | PHI | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
3/12/1992 | NJD | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1
3/14/1992 | CGY | 1 | 1 | 2 | 0
3/18/1992 | HAR | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1
3/20/1992 | WIN | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
3/22/1992 | WIN | 0 | 0 | 0 | -1
3/24/1992 | MNS | 2 | 1 | 3 | 2
3/26/1992 | PIT | 1 | 0 | 1 | -1
3/28/1992 | DET | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0
3/29/1992 | WSH | 1 | 1 | 2 | -3
4/12/1992 | LAK | 1 | 0 | 1 | -2
4/14/1992 | LAK | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0
4/16/1992 | CGY | 1 | 1 | 2 | 3
TOTAL | 17 | 15 | 7 | 22 | 2

POST-VOTING AND RUN-UP TO THE AWARDS
Neither player was incredible in the playoffs, though Bure did more to acquit himself with a hat trick and a 4-point game. Opinions seem to have been split three ways at this point, some writers remaining impressed with Lidstrom's early season, others leaning toward Bure's late surge, and still others preferring Amonte.

[playoff team previews]
Weaknesses: Prone to taking violent, unnecessary penalties. Struggled to play .500 after taking control of Norris early in season. Rookie D Nicklas Lidstrom has faded after brilliant start.

Defenseman Nicklas Lidstrom , among the rookie scoring leaders, seems a cinch to win the Calder Trophy as the league's rookie of the year.

Calder Trophy 1. Vancouver's Pavel Bure; 2. Rangers' Tony Amonte; 3. Detroit's Nicklas Lidstrom

Brian Burke answers an inquiry about rookie of the year candidates by posing a devil's advocate question to the general managers of the New York Rangers and Detroit Red Wings.

``Just ask (Rangers') Neil Smith or (Red Wings') Bryan Murray if they would trade Tony Amonte or Niklas Lidstrom straight up for Pavel Bure ,'' jokes the Vancouver Canucks director of hockey operations. ``They'd break their fingers trying to dial the phone so quickly.

``Nothing against (Amonte), but if you prorate Bure 's stats, he had a better year. You can make a good case for Lidstrom .''

Tony Amonte probably is going to win the Calder Trophy as the NHL's top rookie, but ask any NHL scout and he'll likely tell you that Vancouver's swift skating Pavel Bure is the better of the two players. Certainly he is the more exciting of the two. ""He's absolutely electric,'' one scout said of Bure . ""When that kid touches the puck, everybody in the building moves to the edge of their seat.'' Bure had a slow start in the Canucks' first-round playoff series against Winnipeg, but after Coach Pat Quinn added bruising left winger Sergio Momesso to his line, the ""Russian Rocket'' took off and accumulated seven points (three goals) over two games to help Vancouver force its deciding seventh game.

``Early in the season, he just killed us,'' St. Louis Blues general manager Ron Caron said.

Lidstrom has given the Red Wings the offensive presence on the blue line they've lacked for several seasons.

``I don't think of him as a rookie,'' coach Bryan Murray said. ``If people don't recognize he's a stud, there's something wrong.''

CALDER TROPHY: The finalists for this award as rookies of the year are Tony Amonte, Pavel Bure and Niklas Lidstrom .

Three months ago, the New York Rangers' Amonte appeared to be a lock for the award, but Vancouver's Bure went on a goal-a-game scoring binge.

Amonte had the benefit of playing on a line with Mark Messier and Adam Graves, and wound up scoring 60 points, nine more than Bure , but he played in 14 more games.

Bure , who led all rookies with three short-handed goals and tied for the lead among rookies with six game-winning goals, missed 15 games because his NHL eligibility was held up in litigation. Blame can be placed on the courts, the Russian Federation and NHL system, but not on Bure , who should win the award.

Lidstrom , a defenseman, led all rookies in plus-minus with a plus-36 rating, placing him third overall in the league. He was one of two rookies to appear in all 80 games; New Jersey's Kevin Todd was the other. But Lidstrom is a defenseman and will be one of the runnersup.

Rookie Candidate Vancouver's Pavel Bure hopes to become the second player from the former Soviet Union to win the NHL's Rookie of the Year Award in the last three years.

Calgary's Sergei Makarov took the Calder Trophy in 1990 and the Hawks' Ed Belfour claimed it last year. During a recent stretch, Bure had compiled 12 goals in 12 games.

It will be difficult for Bure to beat out New York Ranger Tony Amonte, who has the vast publicity machine of the East Coast news media behind him. But it should be noted that while Amonte has 33 goals in 72 games, Bure has 26 goals in 56 games. He didn't start with the Canucks until Nov. 5.

Final voting:

Player | 1st place votes | 2nd place votes | 3rd place votes | Total points
Pavel Bure | 26 | 27 | 11 | 222
Nicklas Lidstrom | 23 | 16 |20 | 183
Tony Amonte | 18 | 22 | 27 | 183
Pat Falloon | 1 | 4 | 3 | 20
Kevin Todd | 1 | 0 | 4 | 9
Donald Audette | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2
Benoit Brunet | 0 | 0 | 0 |1
Derian Hatcher | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1

A possible explanation of the final result is that the Amonte voters preferred Bure to Lidstrom by a significant margin.

CONCLUSION: The historical record shows a few things quite clearly. Lidstrom and Bure entered the league with roughly the same level of hype. Lidstrom had a significant Calder advantage in that he had no contract issues, attended camp and preseason with his team and played in a Bure-less league for over a month. Even better, Lidstrom was the first rookie to stand out and the most consistently strong over the first few months. At midseason, Lidstrom was considered the easy Calder favorite with few even noting Bure's presence. Around Game 60, Lidstrom faded and Bure stepped up with a monster scoring streak that vaulted him past his competition. In the end, the two had a similar number of 1st-place votes but 83% of voters considered Bure either #1 or #2, giving him the Calder.

One noteworthy question that lingers: did Bure actually benefit from playing a shortened season? He clearly had an adjustment phase right in the middle of the NHL season, which Lidstrom experienced in the preseason, but he hit his stride around the 3/4ths mark of the season at the same time Lidstrom hit that 60-game wall. Would the story have been different if Bure had come in during the preseason, hit that hot streak around December, and then had to play through the rest of the schedule? Could be.

 

[tombombadil]

haha, fantastic work, Tarheel

 

[Rhiessan71]

Yep, very nice job Tarheel. Pretty much the way I remember it.

The best thing though, is that it was Bure that won so we don't have to listen to any North American bias crap over it.
Thank god!

Overpass mentioned revisionist history earlier and I couldn't agree more. In a previous Lidstrom related thread there were a whack of newspaper articles found written by the Wing's own reporters and suffice to say, none of them were overly impressed with Lidstrom's defensive game in the mid 90's either. Some of them going so far as to putting him and Coffey in the same breath defensively. I don't agree with that characterization but the implication, that Lidstrom was no where as strong defensively then as he would later be, should not be ignored.
If you can't even win over your own reporters, how in the hell are you going to win over the rest of them?
Lidstrom definitely and obviously improved his defensive game after that but it's also quite obvious that it took some time to do so.
It's pure revisionism IMO to say that Lidstrom's game in the mid 90's, when he wasn't winning any Norris, was as good as his game in the early 2000's when he was.
Assuming facts not in evidence big time.

 

[BraveCanadian]

Nice work on the post.

Interesting that you found some articles talking up Lidstrom a bit before the season because I don't remember Lidstrom being hyped much before his arrival. That could just be that I didn't read a lot of US material before the interwebs.

So yeah, Lidstrom tires a bit and slows down the last month while Bure is on a tear - and Bure won. That is pretty much what I recall too. Well, what I actually recall was basically "Bure" "Bure" "Bure" at the time except for Don Cherry who I do remember was hyping Amonte even on hockey night.

I still don't think it had anything to do with Lidstrom's goal scoring specifically, though. Although 8 points in the final 16 games was fading from his first 3/4s of the season, it is more than respectable for a rookie defenseman.

 

[chckie]

Read some of the first pages then skipped to the last so sorry if this has been said: a lot of people talking about points and how having great players around you help.

During his years in Detroit Lidström has played with the following selke winners: Datsyuk, fedorov, yzerman and draper. Zetterberg is and was a beast of a 2-way player as well. Other players around for defensive help: konstantinov, fetisov, Chelios, larionov etc. Coaching them was one S. Bowman, regarded as the best all time. After 05 Babcock, regarded as the best the last 10 years or so?

How much does playing with those guys, with those coaches and in the detroit system benefit Lidström? Quite a lot I would say. Not been that good for the national team, was not better than Kenny Jönsson in the olympics and was pretty poor in some earlier tournaments.

Sorry if poorly written, typing on my ipad and from sweden.

Edit: wanted to say something about how defense is depending on team as well. I would say that no defender has had a better team to be able to shine in defense through a career than Lidström.

 

[tombombadil]

Read some of the first pages then skipped to the last so sorry if this has been said: a lot of people talking about points and how having great players around you help.

During his years in Detroit Lidström has played with the following selke winners: Datsyuk, fedorov, yzerman and draper. Zetterberg is and was a beast of a 2-way player as well. Other players around for defensive help: konstantinov, fetisov, Chelios, larionov etc. Coaching them was one S. Bowman, regarded as the best all time. After 05 Babcock, regarded as the best the last 10 years or so?

How much does playing with those guys, with those coaches and in the detroit system benefit Lidström? Quite a lot I would say. Not been that good for the national team, was not better than Kenny Jönsson in the olympics and was pretty poor in some earlier tournaments.

Sorry if poorly written, typing on my ipad and from sweden.

Edit: wanted to say something about how defense is depending on team as well. I would say that no defender has had a better team to be able to shine in defense through a career than Lidström.

true. But he, and the Wings, also had to keep pucks from getting past Osgood for a lot of years! Seriously, it might look like I'm joking, but there have been years where Nik and the gang had to keep other teams from wristing it from the point, whereas some great defensive teams do it around the foundation of someone like Brodeur. Throughout, Detroit has been a great defensive team, and for the last 10 years, he's been that foundational element.

 

[tombombadil]

Yep, very nice job Tarheel. Pretty much the way I remember it.

The best thing though, is that it was Bure that won so we don't have to listen to any North American bias crap over it.
Thank god!



Good point. I'm kinda new here, but i'm starting to see that card played quite a bit. I'm a Canadian who feels that there is a dinosaur element in our media that just won't give up on stereotypes that haven't made sense for 15 years - however, i feel that many in our media have caught up with the times, and I have never felt that the voting on trophies was in any way biased. Possibly because there are so many American voters involved, and they seem to embrace foreign athletes more easily than we do... but that's another topic.

Anyways, good call on Bure, lol

 

[OrrNumber4]

Read some of the first pages then skipped to the last so sorry if this has been said: a lot of people talking about points and how having great players around you help.

During his years in Detroit Lidström has played with the following selke winners: Datsyuk, fedorov, yzerman and draper. Zetterberg is and was a beast of a 2-way player as well. Other players around for defensive help: konstantinov, fetisov, Chelios, larionov etc. Coaching them was one S. Bowman, regarded as the best all time. After 05 Babcock, regarded as the best the last 10 years or so?

How much does playing with those guys, with those coaches and in the detroit system benefit Lidström? Quite a lot I would say. Not been that good for the national team, was not better than Kenny Jönsson in the olympics and was pretty poor in some earlier tournaments.

Sorry if poorly written, typing on my ipad and from sweden.

Edit: wanted to say something about how defense is depending on team as well. I would say that no defender has had a better team to be able to shine in defense through a career than Lidström.

I think you can play this game any way. So many people argue that if Lidstrom was on a team with less talent, he would have shone more brightly. Given more responsbility, he could have contributed more offensively, like Bourque. He didn't take off offensively because he didn't have to....etc. etc.

 

[OrrNumber4]

The whole bias thing is really silly.

Just look on these forums; it is the European posters who are the most biased. What it really comes down to; people who are biased think that everyone else is biased because they themselves are biased! They know that deep down they may favor a player based on his nationality and just assume that Canadians must do the same.