Rank These Four Players

[Epsilon]

In the "choose one future Hall of Famer..." thread on the main board, Kira noted that it's hard to pick one for the Detroit Red Wings because Hasek, Lidstrom, and Chelios would are all obvious locks to make the HoF and there is little to separate the three of them. Thinking about this myself, I also find that these three players are very comparable in terms of all-time greatness. Since he just retired, I figured I'd also throw Yzerman's name into the mix.

So the question is, rank the following four players:

Dominik Hasek
Chris Chelios
Nicklas Lidstrom
Steve Yzerman

One thing: you are ranking these players based on their place among the greatest hockey players of all-time, not specifically their contributions to the Red Wings.

Click to read more...

 

[Chaos Giraffe]

Yzerman
Lidstrom
Chelios
Hasek

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Hasek
Lidstrom
Yzerman
Chelios

 

[Epsilon]

Here's my own ranking:

1. Dominik Hasek

Among the four, he is certainly the most unique player and the only one who can be argued is the greatest to ever play his position. Hasek is by any measure one of the top 5 goaltenders in hockey history. He is a legendary player both in the NHL and outside of it and one of the most dominating performers ever.

2a. Nicklas Lidstrom

It's a toss-up for me between Lidstrom and Chelios, so I went with Lidstrom if for no other reason than I like him better. Probably a top 10 defenseman in NHL history when it's all said and done, with arguments for the top 5. He's accomplished everything in his career both in the NHL and internationally.

2b. Chris Chelios

A remarkably similar resume to Lidstrom in terms of career success, which includes both personal and team glory in the NHL, and international victories. Also a top 10 defenseman of all-time. Remarkable for his longevity and endurance, in particular for being a Norris-calibre defenseman into his 40s.

4. Steve Yzerman

Some might see it as blasphemy to rank Yzerman last. But while he is unquestionably an all-time great, I don't feel he is quite as special a talent as the other three, nor would he rank as highly on the list of the greatest forwards (or even centers) as they do on their all-time positional best lists. Of course, being last among this group is hardly an insult.

 

[hockeyfan125]

1. Hasek
2. Chelios
3. Lidstrom
4. Yzerman

 

[raleh]

1. Hasek
2. Chelios
3. Lidstrom
4. Yzerman

yup. With Hasek way in front.

 

[pitseleh]

yup. With Hasek way in front.

I agree too.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

Lets face it, who on this list is the best of an era? Only one. Hasek is the definative player of the dead puck era.

 

[Wisent]

Hasek
Lidström/Yzerman
Chelios

 

[pnep]

1-Hasek
2-Lidstrom
3-Yzerman
4-Chelios

 

[God Bless Canada]

That's a great question, but I think that if there is one no-brainer, it's Hasek at No. 1. The reality of Dominik Hasek is he's one of the few players in NHL history who truly is one of a kind. I think we've seen goalies come along in recent years who are as quick and as agile as Hasek (Roman Cechmanek had Hasek's ability and Martin Brodeur's size, but just didn't have what it takes mentally to succeed long-term). But nobody was better at getting in their opponents head than Hasek. He had that presence about him that very few had. While he's had moments over the years in which he's been somewhat of a negative presence, he's a very tough nut to crack mentally. And let's face it: there are few goalies better at working the rules than Hasek. He'd throw the stick. He'd put the water bottle right up against the crossbar, making it difficult for cameras to see the puck cross the goal line in the event of a video review.

Hasek's a defining player in his generation, and one could even argue a revolutionary player. We've never seen another player like him, and for decades to come, people will be looking for the next Hasek.

I'd take Chelios ahead of Lidstrom. I'd say they're even as far as two-way play is concerned, and while Lidstrom is certainly the more pleasing individual to be around, I'd take Chelios for two reasons: the physical dimension, and the ability to carry his team on his back for extended periods of time. The latter is the one thing Lidstrom has never done in the playoffs. Chelios has. I certainly don't blame those who would take Lidstrom ahead of Chelios. I just don't agree with them.

So the question now becomes: where do you slot Yzerman. I would put him at No. 2. Why? Leadership. Best leader to enter the league since Bobby Clarke and Phil Esposito. In terms of overall talent/performance/accomplishments, you could rate Lidstrom and Chelios ahead of Yzerman. But when you take leadership into account, it's what pushes Yzerman over the top. Watch him in the 1996 and 2002 playoffs. He put that Detroit team on his back. In 1996, pretty much the entire Red Wings team underperformed, except for Yzerman. He was brilliant, and the reason Detroit beat St. Louis in the second round, even though St. Louis was playing their back-up. In 2002 against Vancouver, he again put that Detroit team on his back, controlling the games despite his wonky knee.

 

[Transported Upstater]

In the "choose one future Hall of Famer..." thread on the main board, Kira noted that it's hard to pick one for the Detroit Red Wings because Hasek, Lidstrom, and Chelios would are all obvious locks to make the HoF and there is little to separate the three of them. Thinking about this myself, I also find that these three players are very comparable in terms of all-time greatness. Since he just retired, I figured I'd also throw Yzerman's name into the mix.

So the question is, rank the following four players:

Dominik Hasek
Chris Chelios
Nicklas Lidstrom
Steve Yzerman

One thing: you are ranking these players based on their place among the greatest hockey players of all-time, not specifically their contributions to the Red Wings.

Hasek
Chelios
Lidstrom
Yzerman

I had the same order as the way you listed them.

 

[Karamahti*]

Hasek
Yzerman
Chelios
Lidström

 

[Joe MacMillan]

Hasek
Lidström
Yzerman
Chelios

 

[mcphee]

I'd go with

Hasek
Lidstrom
Yzerman
Chelios

The only way I arrive at it is by considering whether they were ever considered the absolute best at their position or whether they rank highly in an all time list at their position.

It's a bit unfair when you consider how many alltimers played C, maybe Yzerman gets the shaft here a bit. Chelios had a great career, but I don't think he was ever clearly the best d man in the league.

 

[Nalyd Psycho]

I'd take Chelios ahead of Lidstrom. I'd say they're even as far as two-way play is concerned, and while Lidstrom is certainly the more pleasing individual to be around, I'd take Chelios for two reasons: the physical dimension, and the ability to carry his team on his back for extended periods of time. The latter is the one thing Lidstrom has never done in the playoffs. Chelios has. I certainly don't blame those who would take Lidstrom ahead of Chelios. I just don't agree with them.

I have trouble accepting that the Conn Smythe winner is the one to never carry his team through the playoffs. The problem is, Lidstrom was never in a situation where he had to.

 

[Karamahti*]

The thing is Lidstrom shouldn't have won the conn smythe. It should've went to Yzerman once again. He carried the team on one leg in 2002. In fact I also would've gave it to Hasek, Fedorov, and Hull before Lidstrom.

I agree. That conn smythe was a pity vote for Lidström.

 

[God Bless Canada]

I have trouble accepting that the Conn Smythe winner is the one to never carry his team through the playoffs. The problem is, Lidstrom was never in a situation where he had to.

Lidstrom deserved that Conn Smythe in 2002, especially for his work in the final two rounds. Yzerman was the team MVP in the first round, but Lidstrom was the best player in the conference final and league final. Problem was you had so many big contributors to Detroit in 2002. Yzerman was great. Fedorov was great. Hasek set a shutout record. Chelios was great. Shanahan and Hull scored some big goals. Larionov had that OT winner in Game 3 versus Carolina. Lidstrom was the MVP, but he never really put that team on his back at any point. And it's not really his style.

Nalyd, you're probably old enough to remember Chris Chelios' performance with Chicago in 1995 versus Vancouver. He dominated every aspect of the game in a way that Lidstrom never could.

 

[Epsilon]

SGY19 with the trolling as usual.

And no, I didn't list them in order of how much I like the players. Because I like Lidstrom a lot more than Hasek and Yzerman a lot more than Chelios. The only place where I used personal preference was putting Lidstrom slightly ahead of Chelios because I don't feel there's much to separate the two of them.

 

[mcphee]

Yzerman played in the wrong era and will never be considered great because of it. He played with the two greatest players of all-time, who also happend to both be centers. If Yzerman played in a different era he'd be ranked much higher.

I think most eras have been C dominated. He is considered great. I've never heard a hockey fan consider him less than a great player. I also consider him one of the brighter more thoughtful players I've heard speak. It's just a fine line with the other players in this particular instance. Hasek can be argues as the greatest goalie of all time, and it would be close. Lidstrom has quietly climbed up the ladder. Ranking a great C against a great d man is just subjective anyways, but that's the basis I used.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

So the question is, rank the following four players:

Dominik Hasek
Chris Chelios
Nicklas Lidstrom
Steve Yzerman

Very interesting post. I agree with the order you have here.

Hasek is ranked first because he's the only player on this list to be regarded as the clear-cut best player in the league for any sustained period of time. Hasek won two Hart trophies and placed in the top three in voting 5 times in 6 years. Beyond the voting numbers, Hasek was able to dominate a game like only a handful of players in NHL history. Furthermore, he was universally regarded as the best player in the NHL at his position, winning 6 Vezinas in 8 years (more than his nearest competition, Roy and Brodeur, combined). Finally, Hasek was a very good playoff performer who brought weak teams much farther than they really deserved to go.

Chelios is second. He was dominant in the regular season and playoffs in virtually every aspect of the game. He was named the best defenseman in the league three times and runner-up twice; a seven-time all-star. Chelios was one of the best purely defensive blueliners of all time, and complemented that with good playmaking ability in his prime. He was also a tough, intimidating opponent, and that gives him an edge that (for now) sets him apart from Lidstrom.

Lidstrom's a close third. He's subtle and efficient but is also able to control the tempo of a game. Lidstrom is excellent defensively and an outstanding powerplay quarterback. He has great playmaking skills and almost never makes a mistake defensively. Named the best defenseman in the league four times, and was runner-up three times; also a great playoff performer and has a Conn Smythe. I think Lidstrom will probably pass Chelios when he retires, but he's not quite there yet.

Yzerman is fourth. A consummate leader who sacrificed his health and stats for the good of the team. Dominant playoff performer with a Conn Smythe. Was never the best forward in the league, but if you don't count Gretzky and Lemieux, was the second best forward (after Messier) during the late 80's to early 90's. Would have had 1 Art Ross trophy, not counting Gretzky and Lemieux. Became one of the best two-way forwards in the league 7-8 years into his career.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

I completely disagree. How can you say Lidstrom "stunk" until the finals? Let's look at the first round. If it weren't for Lidstrom's goal in the last minute of play in game 3 against Vancouver, the Wings probably would have been swept in the first round. Also, Lidstrom was on the ice for almost every Naslund/Bertuzzi/Morrison shift. They scored 242 pts in 235 regular season games (1.03 ppg). However, they scored just 8 points in 18 games (0.44 ppg) with Lidstrom playing a major (though not exclusive) role in shutting them down.

In the third round against Colorado, he scored a huge goal to tie game 2 with only 5 minutes left in the third. He also assisted on the goal that became the turning point of the series--the now-infamous "Statue of Liberty" gaffe by Patrick Roy. That goal demoralized Colorado and was a big reason they blew a 3-2 series lead.

Also, Lidstrom played a huge part in shutting down Sakic--one of the greatest clutch players of all time--during the series. This is especially true in games 6 and 7, where he helped the team post back-to-back shutouts.

Lidstrom played 33 minutes per game during the playoffs, more than any player except Aucoin. This is hardly indicative of somebody who "stunk", especially when the coach had other options like Chelios and Fischer.

Finally, Detroit's coach Scotty Bowman said that Lidstrom is "just about the perfect player on the ice, very few mistakes" (in reference to the 2002 playoff run). Considering this guy coached Robinson, Chelios, Savard, Lapointe, Konstantinov and Coffey, that's pretty good praise.

I'm not saying that Lidstrom definitely deserved the Conn Smythe--Yzerman and Hasek were strong forerunners, and you could make a decent case for Hull or Chelios. But, there's no way you can say that Lidstrom had a bad playoff run in 2002.

 

[VanIslander]

1. Hasek (simply dominating for a long time)
2. Yzerman (only the two greatest centres of all time limited his hardware)
3A. Lidstrom / 3B. Chelios (different styles, equally effective, matter of taste)

You're forgetting that Messier played with Gretzky. If you don't count Gretzky then Messier's numbers would be alot less.

No. The two centres rarely played together. Sorry. No one who saw the eighties ever entertained that idea. Unless you mean Gretz won playoff games thereby giving Mess more playoff ice time opp.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

You're forgetting that Messier played with Gretzky. If you don't count Gretzky then Messier's numbers would be alot less. Yzerman would've been the best center by far in that era. Let's not forget that Yzerman played the majority of his career with a bum knee. He was told to retire in 1988 when it first happend.

First, see VanIslander's post. I'd say Gretzky and Messier played together less than 10% of the time, if that much. As time passed, they played less together.

Also, more importantly, Gretzky was traded to LA after the 1987-88 season. So, all of Messier's numbers from 1989 and beyond were NOT affected in any way by Gretzky.

Finally, Messier and Yzerman's prime basically coincided. During that time, Messier won two Hart trophies, and Yzerman had none. That's a pretty big point in Messier's favor.

One more thing I forgot to point out. In 2002, Yzerman on one leg outplayed the Red Wings "Great 8 HOFers" (Hasek, Hull, Chelios, Lidstrom, Shanny, Fedorov, Robitaille, and Larionov).

Debatable. Lidstrom, Hasek and Yzerman were the top three performers, but you can't say that Yzerman was definitely the best.

Without Lidstrom the results would've been exactly the same.

I completely disagree. I've already posted a lot of evidence showing that Lidstrom was great. Do you honestly think Detroit would've been the same team without the best defenseman in the league? Would Detroit win 4 straight games? Without Lidstrom, they're one period away from being down 3-0.

Actually Yzerman played against Sakic during the Colorado series. He had more to do with Sakic being shutdown than Lidstrom. Yzerman was the one that scored the statue of liberty goal.

Of course Yzerman played against Sakic, but that in no way changes my point. Did having the league's best defenseman out against (debatebly) best forward help or hurt Detroit?

As for Lidstrom playing the most minutes, Scotty didn't have a choice. Fischer was young and inexperienced and Chelios was having knee problems.

So the Wings were good enough to win the Cup, but bad enough that they had to play a crappy defenseman 33 minutes per game?

As for Scotty praising Lidstrom, I think it was just a case of trying to win over some fan support for Lidstrom. Just like the conn smythe.

"You think" Bowman was just trying to win over fans? Sorry, but I have to assume Bowman was being truthful and direct (like he always is) unless you have compelling evidence to indicate otherwise.

====

Also, for the record, I think Yzerman was great during 2002 (and throughout his whole career). Personally, I don't think it's wise to trash-talk one legend in order to make another look better. Maybe that's just me.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

No, it wasn't debatable. It was obvious that Yzerman was the Red Wings best player. It's funny but Dave Lewis has coached all these guys, so why did he say Yzerman was the best player that he ever coached?

1. Scotty Bowman said Lidstrom is the best player he's ever coached (link). That comes from a guy who's coached Lafleur, Robison, Dryden, Lemieux, Yzerman, and many other players. Who's word do we take, Bowman or Lewis?
2. Maybe I should accuse Dave Lewis of lying, just like you accused Scotty Bowman of lying.

Without Yzerman the Red Wings also would've been down 3-0. He was by far and away the Wings best player in that game. I honestly think the Red Wings would've beat Vancouver without Lidstrom and maybe St. Louis.

Again, I'm not disagreeing that Yzerman was amazing during 2002. Don't waste your time trying to "convinve" me about how great Yzerman was, I'm already on your side!

I don't see how a team that was so close to elimination in the first round could win without the best defenseman in the league.

It didn't help nor hurt having Lidstrom out there.

OK. Having the Norris and Conn Smythe winning defenseman doesn't help or hurt your team. Good to know.

I never said that. They just didn't have anyone else to play those minutes.

Well, you said he "stunk" for 3 of 4 rounds. Again, how likely is it that Detroit is good enough to win the Cup, but bad enough to play a "stinky" defenseman for 33 minutes per game?

Who knows what Bowman was thinking. It was an odd comment to make at the time when it was obviously not the case.

You basically accused Scotty Bowman, easily one of the most respected individuals in hockey history, of lying to appease the crowd. It was not "obviously not the case", Lidstrom was (again, debatedly) the best player on the ice.

I'm not trashing talking Lidstrom anymore than anyone else is trashing talking Yzerman in this thread. I'm just stating my point.

I'm saying that Yzerman had an excellent playoff run in 2002, but Lidstrom was slightly better. You're saying that Yzerman had an excellent playoff run in 2002, but Lidstrom "stunk" for three-quarters of it. Either you and I watched different games, or you're trash-talking Lidstrom.