Potvin vs Lidstrom

[pdd]

Are you asserting that Lidstrom is literally perfect on defense?

No; Lidstrom makes mistakes. It was more of an indication of the "best" defensive plays. And it also, in general, describes Lidstrom. Near-perfect defense, maybe.

Yup. http://www.hockey-reference.com/pla...val=&c4stat=&c4comp=gt&c4val=&order_by=points

True, defensemen in general put up more points when Potvin played. But giving erroneous information about Lidstrom when it is easy to verify does not help your case.

I'm generally of the "Lidstrom is as underrated by the HOH board as he is overrated on the main board" school, but nobody does their case any favors when they post stats that are easily verified as wrong.

Funny...when I do the math, Lidstrom only scored 631 points not 690.

So lets try that comparison again shall we...

Potvin 700GP 770points 1.10 points per game
VS
Lidstrom 801GP 631points 0.79 points per game

Shall we do playoff scoring over the same time frame next...

Potvin 150GP 140points .93 points per game
VS
Lidstrom 132GP 102points .77 points per game

My mistake; I accidentally included Lidstrom's 2009 year. Oh well. What's done is done.

Also... Doing a straight PPG comparison is kind of silly, isn't it? It's "Let's compare one of the best offensive defensemen from the highest scoring era of hockey, when it was much easier for defensemen to score points, to an era where it was much more difficult for defensemen to score points. Both were the preeminent offensive defensemen during their prime, Lidstrom moreso than Potvin as Lidstrom dominated the position over the period despite playing a defense-first style.

It's like comparing Steve Chiasson's years before 1992-93 in Detroit to his years in Calgary. He was probably better in Calgary - he posted similar offense even though the league in general stopped scoring. He was still strong defensively. But after his 60+ point year in 92-93, he fell off the map. It's like having a really good year (92-93 All-Star and grabbing some Norris votes), and then being better than you had been but not as good as your best year causes you to disappear. Especially in 90's Calgary...

 

[pdd]

He sure as rain is wet isn't going to come up. I'm not even sure he's a top 10 Swedish defenseman. One really good Olympic tournament and people act like he's this terribly underrated guy who never got the attention he desired. Incredibly hyped up player.

I had (am still having? haven't checked.) a discussion in a thread on the Wings board that started about Anders Eriksson where Eriksson was called "the worst Swedish defenseman to play in the NHL." So I brought up the small gap offensively between him and Jonsson, despite their large gap in play time and the fact they both played for poor teams most of their careers. I mentioned he fact that Jonsson was often considered among the better Swedish defensemen EVER, and asked if Jonsson's defensive play was THAT much of a difference maker as Eriksson played the penalty kill on pretty much every single team he spent time with.

Regardless... Kenny Jonsson and Anders Eriksson aren't really the topic of this thread.

 

[Pear Juice]

Potvin was more physical. That's all someone NEEDS.

It's like comparing Anders Eriksson to Wade Belak. One's a borderliner in skill who made a career on "intimidation"; one was a career top-4 defender before leaving for Sweden, but nobody would ever call him "intimidating". It's pretty clear who was better anyway.

Are you suggesting that Potvin was nowhere near as skilled as Lidström? That's just plain wrong.

 

[pdd]

Are you suggesting that Potvin was nowhere near as skilled as Lidström? That's just plain wrong.

The example was more about the physical game than about the skill.

If you'd prefer you can use Zdeno Chara vs. Sergei Zubov.

 

[Pear Juice]

Since you weren't willing to put your money where your mouth is, I went ahead did the research on this one.

Here's Potvin's PIM summary for the 1980-81 season, in which he had 104 PIM and 76 points in 74 games. Potvin was 27 this season, and halfway through his development from a young scorer to an older more defensive-minded type, so I arbitrarily chose this season to be representative of his career. It's worth noting that his highest-scoring season, 78-79, involved only half as many PIM.

Minors: 47
*Two were offsetting minors, one of which occurred in a late brawl.
*8 of these resulted in a PPG against
*1 GWG was scored against the Isles as a result. On 1-2-81, the Rangers scored with 5 seconds left on the PP, and about 14 minutes left in the game. The Islanders' league-leading PP had two opportunities to tie the game and failed, snapping a 10-game winning streak. Without video, it's up to our interpretation of these events to decide the extent to which Potvin was responsible for the loss.


Majors: 2
* fighting when the score was 6-2 with 5 minutes left
* part of a large brawl when the score was 9-3 with 5 minutes left

Misconducts:
None.

Conclusions:
In 1980-81, Potvin was good for a PP-against every 1.5 games. Nearly all of his penalties were non-offsetting minors, as he was only involved in two late-game fights. He was never off the ice for a major penalty during significant gameplay. He drew no misconducts. Without him on the ice, the Islanders were still a respectable team on the PK, killing his penalties at an 83% rate. There was 1 game when Potvin's penalty played a direct role in the outcome, the extent of which is open to interpretation. It is impossible to know the significance of his other penalties (whether they were "good" or "bad", the effect they had on momentum, message-sending, etc) without reviewing game film which I do not have readily available.

This analysis fails to recognize that there's so much more to a penalty than the sheer results of the following power play. It not only is an instant man-down situation, but in the long run it also messes up line changes, increases fatigue and increases time spent in the defensive zone. I don't ask of you to do that as I don't think it would be possible.

 

[plusandminus]

Since you weren't willing to put your money where your mouth is, I went ahead did the research on this one.

Here's Potvin's PIM summary for the 1980-81 season, in which he had 104 PIM and 76 points in 74 games. Potvin was 27 this season, and halfway through his development from a young scorer to an older more defensive-minded type, so I arbitrarily chose this season to be representative of his career. It's worth noting that his highest-scoring season, 78-79, involved only half as many PIM.

Minors: 47
*Two were offsetting minors, one of which occurred in a late brawl.
*8 of these resulted in a PPG against
*1 GWG was scored against the Isles as a result. On 1-2-81, the Rangers scored with 5 seconds left on the PP, and about 14 minutes left in the game. The Islanders' league-leading PP had two opportunities to tie the game and failed, snapping a 10-game winning streak. Without video, it's up to our interpretation of these events to decide the extent to which Potvin was responsible for the loss.


Majors: 2
* fighting when the score was 6-2 with 5 minutes left
* part of a large brawl when the score was 9-3 with 5 minutes left

Misconducts:
None.

Conclusions:
In 1980-81, Potvin was good for a PP-against every 1.5 games. Nearly all of his penalties were non-offsetting minors, as he was only involved in two late-game fights. He was never off the ice for a major penalty during significant gameplay. He drew no misconducts. Without him on the ice, the Islanders were still a respectable team on the PK, killing his penalties at an 83% rate. There was 1 game when Potvin's penalty played a direct role in the outcome, the extent of which is open to interpretation. It is impossible to know the significance of his other penalties (whether they were "good" or "bad", the effect they had on momentum, message-sending, etc) without reviewing game film which I do not have readily available.

Interesting post. How do you know this? What is your source? How do one find these things out?
(I ask because I'm interested in analyzing such data myself. From gamelogs I can see when players get penalized and for how many minutes. But if say two players from team A gets a minor, at the same time as one player from team B, it is difficult to find out which player that caused his team to have to play PK. Not that I may matter very much.
You seem to have aggregated stats?)

 

[plusandminus]

This analysis fails to recognize that there's so much more to a penalty than the sheer results of the following power play. It not only is an instant man-down situation, but in the long run it also messes up line changes, increases fatigue and increases time spent in the defensive zone. I don't ask of you to do that as I don't think it would be possible.

On the other hand, taking penalties may have prevented opponents from getting scoring chances or score. It also partly messes up opponents' line changes (perhaps not much).

 

[danincanada]

Are you asserting that Lidstrom is literally perfect on defense?

He was as close to perfect as we've seen during his lengthy prime. Incredibly efficient positioning, always making the right play, never getting beat 1 on 1, always being the last guy back, very few penalties, playing half the game, all while avoiding injury and getting the toughest matchups.

His skill level and antipicatipation was Gretzky-like.

"He thinks two or three seconds faster than everyone else," Shanahan says.

Shanahan recalls Red Wings players made it a game in practice to try to make a pass over Lidstrom's stick.

"It was a joke, really, because he would bat everything out of the air and then give you that little smile," Shanahan says.

Bowman was the first I remember calling him perfect. It's extremely difficult to really gauge just how valuable a player like Lidstrom is. His career value is through the roof due to his consistency, endurance and ability to avoid injury. Everytime he steps on the ice there is a level of excellence and professionalism that few players reach on their very best day.

"Lidstrom is so efficient," Bowman says. "He just does exactly what he is supposed to do."

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hock...as-lidstrom-red-wings-nhl-all-star-game_N.htm

 

[tarheelhockey]

This analysis fails to recognize that there's so much more to a penalty than the sheer results of the following power play.

I recognized that aspect in the final sentence: "It is impossible to know the significance of his other penalties (whether they were "good" or "bad", the effect they had on momentum, message-sending, etc) without reviewing game film which I do not have readily available."

Interesting post. How do you know this? What is your source? How do one find these things out?

First I went here: http://www.flyershistory.com
And selected the 81-82 Islanders season.

Then, I right-clicked on 10 games at a time, opening them in 10 new windows.

Then, I used ctrl+F and typed "Potvin" to quickly find his penalties in each game (about 5 games in, I realized that there were 2 Potvins on the team... that meant having to look more carefully at each entry). Each time I found one, I simply tallied whether it was a minor or major, and whether the other team scored.

The whole process took about 15-20 minutes.

 

[tarheelhockey]

He was as close to perfect as we've seen during his lengthy prime. Incredibly efficient positioning, always making the right play, never getting beat 1 on 1, always being the last guy back, very few penalties, playing half the game, all while avoiding injury and getting the toughest matchups.

His skill level and antipicatipation was Gretzky-like.



Bowman was the first I remember calling him perfect. It's extremely difficult to really gauge just how valuable a player like Lidstrom is. His career value is through the roof due to his consistency, endurance and ability to avoid injury. Everytime he steps on the ice there is a level of excellence and professionalism that few players reach on their very best day.

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/hock...as-lidstrom-red-wings-nhl-all-star-game_N.htm

"As close to perfect as we've seen" is probably true... I wouldn't disagree with that.

"Always making the right play, "never getting beat 1 on 1", that's an exaggeration. I've definitely seen him make wrong plays and get beat 1 on 1. It doesn't happen with extreme frequency, but it most certainly does happen.

 

[danincanada]

"As close to perfect as we've seen" is probably true... I wouldn't disagree with that.

"Always making the right play, "never getting beat 1 on 1", that's an exaggeration. I've definitely seen him make wrong plays and get beat 1 on 1. It doesn't happen with extreme frequency, but it most certainly does happen.

During his prime it was extremely rare to see Lidstrom make a mistake. You could literally watch him for a whole season and only see him make 1 or 2 bad plays all year that could be directly pinned on Lidstrom. The DRW broadcasters would always make note of the mistakes because they were so rare.

People who didn't watch him all the time can't truly understand just how special he was and how much of a calming influence he was on his team. Not only in hockey but in any walk of life it's difficult to come up with someone who has performed at such a high level and shown such flawlessness for such a long time. I'd like to hear arguments for any skater having a higher career value when it's all said and done and Lidstrom decides to hang up his skates.

 

[tarheelhockey]

During his prime it was extremely rare to see Lidstrom make a mistake. You could literally watch him for a whole season and only see him make 1 or 2 bad plays all year that could be directly pinned on Lidstrom. The DRW broadcasters would always make note of the mistakes because they were so rare.

I'm not saying it was common for him to make an egregious mistake, but "he always made the right play and never got beaten" is quite a different story than "it was extremely rare to see him make a mistake". I'm not at all convinced that he only made 1 or 2 wrong plays per season, considering I can remember at least a handful of times Forsberg alone burned him.

In a conversation like this, where we are talking about the top handful of players to ever play the position, it's not reasonable to rank a player on the basis of his being "perfect" in any aspect of his game. Nobody is perfect. Lidstrom made mistakes, perhaps at a lower rate than Potvin or even Orr, but he definitely did make them.

I'm not trying to play a semantic game, BTW. For some reason, Lidstrom threads take on a rhetoric that makes it very difficult to have a straightforward conversation about his weaknesses. Add "perfect" to the list along with "bias".

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I'd like to hear arguments for any skater having a higher career value when it's all said and done and Lidstrom decides to hang up his skates.

Wayne Gretzky? Gordie Howe?

One could certainly argue Ray Bourque who still has Lidstrom beat comfortably in number of elite seasons.

 

[danincanada]

I'm not saying it was common for him to make an egregious mistake, but "he always made the right play and never got beaten" is quite a different story than "it was extremely rare to see him make a mistake". I'm not at all convinced that he only made 1 or 2 wrong plays per season, considering I can remember at least a handful of times Forsberg alone burned him.

At least a handful? That's an exaggeration. People remember Forsberg tucking the puck between Lidstrom's legs in '96 after Coffey gave the puck away but other than that I don't recall Forsberg burning Lidstrom. Even if he did Lidstrom usually got the best of Forsberg overall. Forsberg often terrorized the rest of the Red Wings though.

In a conversation like this, where we are talking about the top handful of players to ever play the position, it's not reasonable to rank a player on the basis of his being "perfect" in any aspect of his game. Nobody is perfect. Lidstrom made mistakes, perhaps at a lower rate than Potvin or even Orr, but he definitely did make them.

As great and dominant as Orr was vs. his peers he was not mistake free on the level Lidstrom has been. Just watch game 2 from '71 against the Canadiens and you can see Orr had a lot of bad habits defensively such as getting caught up ice, not covering his man in front of the net, etc. Stuff he could usually get away with during the season against weak teams burned him badly when up against a strong playoff team. Maybe that's one of the reasons why he didn't win more Cups in his short but dominant career?

I'm not trying to play a semantic game, BTW. For some reason, Lidstrom threads take on a rhetoric that makes it very difficult to have a straightforward conversation about his weaknesses. Add "perfect" to the list along with "bias".

It doesn't sound like Bowman saw many weaknesses in Lidstrom's game.

"Lidstrom is so efficient," Bowman says. "He just does exactly what he is supposed to do."

 

[Rhiessan71]

No; Lidstrom makes mistakes. It was more of an indication of the "best" defensive plays. And it also, in general, describes Lidstrom. Near-perfect defense, maybe.




My mistake; I accidentally included Lidstrom's 2009 year. Oh well. What's done is done.

Also... Doing a straight PPG comparison is kind of silly, isn't it? It's "Let's compare one of the best offensive defensemen from the highest scoring era of hockey, when it was much easier for defensemen to score points, to an era where it was much more difficult for defensemen to score points. Both were the preeminent offensive defensemen during their prime, Lidstrom moreso than Potvin as Lidstrom dominated the position over the period despite playing a defense-first style.

Except we have a player that went up directly against both of them, Ray Bourque.
Potvin out scored Bourque and Bourque out scored Lidstrom.

Also, this offensive dominance you speak of from Lidstrom only happened AFTER Bourque, Leetch and MacInnis retired and even Zubov kept up to him before he retired as well.
His offensive dominance the last 7-8 years has come from lack of competition, not because his offense is any higher than it was in '96.


Oh and just for the record...YOU brought up the direct comparison, not I.
No take backs just because your incorrect numbers didn't work out like you wanted my friend.
Silly indeed.


...and I still haven't seen a single response to Potvin's multiple top 10 LEAGUE scoring finishes.
In fact, the best offensive D-men over the last 40 years all have a minimum of at least 1 top 10 league finish. Every one of them...well...except for Lidstrom of course
Orr
Coffey
Potvin
Bourque
MacInnis
Leetch

 

[danincanada]

Except we have a player that went up directly against both of them, Ray Bourque.
Potvin out scored Bourque and Bourque out scored Lidstrom.

While in the league together Bourque actually out scored Potvin during regular season play.

Bourque had 695 pts in 658 games while Potvin had 549 points in 593 games.

 

[tarheelhockey]

At least a handful? That's an exaggeration. People remember Forsberg tucking the puck between Lidstrom's legs in '96 after Coffey gave the puck away but other than that I don't recall Forsberg burning Lidstrom.

@ 1:50


@ 1:11


Those are two playoff goals by Forsberg in which he exploits Lidstrom's over-dependence on finesse defense. Pretty specific parameters, and that's just what came up on tired old Youtube highlight reels. A full season of game tapes would surely reveal other instances.

In the process of finding those clips, I also found:

@ 1:42




http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20052006,2,1091&fr=false
http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20102011,2,390&fr=false


edit: I don't want this to be taken as "let me find a handful of YT clips and apply it to his whole career". I realize there were not typical Lidstrom plays. The point here is simply to show that this idea that he NEVER made 1-on-1 mistakes is a bit of hero-worship that was not true at all. Lidstrom was a VERY good defender but he made mistakes at a human pace just like everyone else.

Or to make things even simpler, NHL.com has 340 giveaways on record for Lidstrom since 2002-03 (and missing the 2003-04 season for some reason). That would be averaging slightly more than 1-2 mistakes per year.

As great and dominant as Orr was vs. his peers he was not mistake free on the level Lidstrom has been. Just watch game 2 from '71 against the Canadiens and you can see Orr had a lot of bad habits defensively such as getting caught up ice, not covering his man in front of the net, etc. Stuff he could usually get away with during the season against weak teams burned him badly when up against a strong playoff team. Maybe that's one of the reasons why he didn't win more Cups in his short but dominant career?

Maybe, but Orr was also being asked to do a lot more in all three zones than Lidstrom ever was. If Orr's directive had been to play a conservative, risk-free, error-free game... I am inclined to think he could have accomplished that objective. If Lidstrom had been asked to lead the league in scoring, I don't think that he could have done it even at the sacrifice of his defensive play. It's not enough to simply conclude that Lidstrom was a better defender because he made errors at a lesser rate.

It doesn't sound like Bowman saw many weaknesses in Lidstrom's game.

"Lidstrom is so efficient," Bowman says. "He just does exactly what he is supposed to do."

Bowman's not exactly an objective source. Nor is anyone arguing that there were a lot of weaknesses in Lidstrom's game.

 

[Rhiessan71]

While in the league together Bourque actually out scored Potvin during regular season play.

Bourque had 695 pts in 658 games while Potvin had 549 points in 593 games.

The argument throughout this thread has never been which player has more longevity or a longer producing prime.
It has been over Potvin's short but extremely high peak.

Over a 6 year stretch Potvin had 490 points in just 416 games, 1.18 PPG including a whopping 145 goals, 0.35 GPG.
Even Bourque's best 6 year stretch of 496 points in 441 games, 1.12 PPG only yielded 128 goals, 0.29 GPG.

The eye test from back then yields the same results. Potvin was the more dominant player, even if for only a half a dozen years.

 

[danincanada]

@ 1:50


@ 1:11


Those are two playoff goals by Forsberg in which he exploits Lidstrom's over-dependence on finesse defense. Pretty specific parameters, and that's just what came up on tired old Youtube highlight reels. A full season of game tapes would surely reveal other instances.

In the process of finding those clips, I also found:

@ 1:42




http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20052006,2,1091&fr=false
http://video.nhl.com/videocenter/console?hlg=20102011,2,390&fr=false.

Lidstrom's over-dependence on finesse defense? Haha, sure. That over-dependence has made him one of, if not the greatest defender ever.

The second clip with Forsberg was the one I was referring to in '96.

The Bure clip is from before Lidstrom's prime and most wouldn't have harassed the speedy Bure as much as Lidstrom did. There are a few clips where Bure leaves Bourque in the dust so much that Bourque doesn't even attempt to stop him and just lets him walk in on the goalie scott free.

The Umberger goal is from a game in February when the 1st place Red Wings laid an egg against the last place Flyers. It was a strange afternoon and it's funny how many times people try to post this video in an effort to show that Lidstrom wasn't perfect. Joey MacDonald absolutely should have stopped that near side shot into his pads.

Bowman's not exactly an objective source. Nor is anyone arguing that there were a lot of weaknesses in Lidstrom's game.

Bowman said this while receiving his paycheck from the Blackhawks. He's not biased or just trying to be nice, he actually believes what he said.


Of course Lidstrom was not literally perfect. He's just the closest to perfection that we've seen. One thing I'm sure about is that you really can't stand Lidstrom. You constantly try to put him down and you sure put a lot of effort into it. What's the deal there anyways? It seemes a lot of Hurricane's fans have hated the Red Wings since '02. Are you one of those? I've always wondered what your motivation was to diminish Lidstrom.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Bowman said this while receiving his paycheck from the Blackhawks. He's not biased or just trying to be nice, he actually believes what he said.

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.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Lidstrom's over-dependence on finesse defense? Haha, sure. That over-dependence has made him one of, if not the greatest defender ever.

It is what it is. A good body check would have neutralized both of those scoring chances. Lidstrom played the puck and got burned. It happens.

The Bure clip is from before Lidstrom's prime and most wouldn't have harassed the speedy Bure as much as Lidstrom did. ...
The Umberger goal is from a game in February when the 1st place Red Wings laid an egg against the last place Flyers. It was a strange afternoon and it's funny how many times people try to post this video in an effort to show that Lidstrom wasn't perfect. Joey MacDonald absolutely should have stopped that near side shot into his pads.

I'm sorry, this is just excuse-making. Lidstrom occasionally got beaten one on one. It's ok to say that.

One thing I'm sure about is that you really can't stand Lidstrom. You constantly try to put him down and you sure put a lot of effort into it. What's the deal there anyways? It seemes a lot of Hurricane's fans have hated the Red Wings since '02. Are you one of those? I've always wondered what your motivation was to diminish Lidstrom.

Wow, now we're going to go with the ad-hom route? How about you address my points instead of making this a personal issue?

But if it makes you feel better, my ballot in the top-60 defensemen vote:

1. Orr
2. Bourque
3. Harvey
4. Shore
5. Lidstrom
6. Potvin

So obviously I don't "hate" the guy as much as you seem to think. I simply reject the exaggeration of his ability, particularly when it involves words like "perfect".

 

[tombombadil]

I'm a West Coast guy, and didn't get into the Wings until about 5+ years ago. I remember making a point of watching the Calgary-Detroit playoff series (don't know which year) one year, because of the massive hype that was surrounding Nik at the time. I'm guessing Nik was about 35, and had a handful of recent Norris' under his belt. I remember going into it thinking, "ok, everyone says how good this guy defensively, but there is no way he can deal with Iginla's skill and strength" That is the first time I focused on Lidstrom, more than the game, just Lidstrom - it absolutely blew my mind. He made Iginla look bad so many times. I mean, he made him look stupid, clumsy, slow, etc. Which he isn't.

I became Lidstrom fan, and eventually a Red Wings fan - although i am not overly passionate about pro teams, I think that maybe I just respect the organization, and having grown up hearing about the weak, flashy, selfish Europeans, I cheer for guys like Datsyuk and Zetterberg out of spite and a feeling of injustice.

Anyways, Nik makes way more mistakes nowadays than he did then, but when Detroit gets bounced in the playoffs, and I end up watching other teams, I again appreciate how good he still is. Weber, Chara, and every Canuck defenseman got burned more, that i saw, in last years playoffs. (side note - Ohlund still looks really good defensively)

Now maybe I watched the wrong games, and also I am FAR from an authority on hockey - but, i guess my point is - I agree with the guys who are saying you had to watch him consistently to appreciate just how good he was. Like I said, I don't always know what's going on out there from a technical sense, but I don't know if I EVER saw him get burned, and when you saw #5 out there in a close game, your worry level went way, way down. I always expected him to takle the puck, and make a good first pass out - and am still only occassionally disappointed. I remember one big disappointment was in Game 6 in the second Penguins series, I saw #5, breathed a sigh of relief, and then somehow the Penguin beat him to the puck, fed a pass, and it was in the net. I think it was Cooke and Kunitz or Malone. Anyways, it was a blatant hook away from the puck that allowed it to happen. I honestly remember the times Nik has looked bad, and I might be up to 100 games watched by now. He has looked bad fairly often the last two years, i must admit.

 

[danincanada]

Wow, now we're going to go with the ad-hom route? How about you address my points instead of making this a personal issue?

But if it makes you feel better, my ballot in the top-60 defensemen vote:

1. Orr
2. Bourque
3. Harvey
4. Shore
5. Lidstrom
6. Potvin

So obviously I don't "hate" the guy as much as you seem to think. I simply reject the exaggeration of his ability, particularly when it involves words like "perfect".

Don't take it personal, I was just wondering why you are so passionate and always on the opposite side of any Lidstrom debate. R71 and C1958 are always there with you, trying to diminish his career any chance you can. Everyone's got an agenda and you 3 are no different. It's very transparant.

It's funny that you and R71 bring up your voting yet never have a positive thing to say about Lidstrom. It's almost as if you voted him higher than you really think just so you can stand behind that all the time as if to show you aren't biased.

 

[plusandminus]

First I went here: http://www.flyershistory.com
And selected the 81-82 Islanders season.

Then, I right-clicked on 10 games at a time, opening them in 10 new windows.

Then, I used ctrl+F and typed "Potvin" to quickly find his penalties in each game (about 5 games in, I realized that there were 2 Potvins on the team... that meant having to look more carefully at each entry). Each time I found one, I simply tallied whether it was a minor or major, and whether the other team scored.

The whole process took about 15-20 minutes.

Oh, that page. I haven't yet learnt how to navigate on it.
How do I choose "select then 81-82 Islanders season"?
There is a listbox where I can select season, but that does not seem to be the right place to click, or?

 

[tarheelhockey]

Oh, that page. I haven't yet learnt how to navigate on it.
How do I choose "select then 81-82 Islanders season"?
There is a listbox where I can select season, but that does not seem to be the right place to click, or?

Sorry, I gave you the wrong link: http://hsp.flyershistory.com/