Why Ray Bourque should be ranked ahead of Nicklas Lidstrom
(Note that this is an update-of-an-update-of-an-update, so please let me know if you see any errors here, I'll be glad to correct as necessary).
Hart trophy voting
Player|First|Second|Third|Fourth|Fifth|Total
Bourque
|0|2|0|1|2|5
Lidstrom|0|0|0|1|0|1
Bourque was a Hart finalist five times, and was runner-up to Gretzky ('87) and Messier ('90). That's right, Bourque almost certainly would have won the Hart in 1987 if not for Gretzky's 183 point season -- he was far ahead of the players in 3rd and 4th. Bourque has a massive 5-1 lead in this category.
I've noticed that Lidstrom supporters often say that it's hard for a defenseman to get nominated for the Hart playing on a good team, but that's not true. When Bourque was runner-up in 1990, the Bruins won the President's Trophy. When Pronger won the Hart in 2000, the Blues won the President's Trophy.
Norris trophy voting
Player|First|Second|Third|Fourth|Fifth|Total
Bourque
|5|6|4|4|0|19
Lidstrom|7|3|1|1|0|12
Despite winning one fewer Norris, Bourque has has a massive 19-12 edge in seasons as Norris finalist. Bourque has a stunning
fifteen seasons where he finished in the top three in Norris voting -- no other defenseman in history has more than eleven. Lidstrom won 2 additional Norris trophies, and that's a point in his favour, but I would gladly trade that for Bourque's additional
seven years of being a Norris-calibre defensemen.
To put it another way: Bourque basically matches Lidstrom's Norris trophy voting record
and adds on Scott Stevens' or Borje Salming's.
All-star selections
Player|1st team|2nd team|Total
Bourque
|13|6|19
Lidstrom|10|2|12
Again, Bourque has a huge edge here. Aside from Gordie Howe, Bourque was the most consistently elite player in NHL history. He was a 1st-team all-star as a rookie (1980), in the year of his retirement (proving he could adapt to the modern NHL at age 41, in 2001), and seventeen times in between.
I think this indicates, pretty clearly, that Bourque had more individual success than Lidstrom. (So far, anyway). Obviously we should look at the context (did one player face tough competition? were the voters biased against one of them?) but this is a pretty decent case that Bourque was the more individually accomplished.
Data sources:
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=545921,
http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=550541
Offense, adjusted to peer groups
Somebody once said "It's no secret that the years Ray was in his prime offense was way higher than today"... I agree with this position and, frankly, it's impossible to deny it. The key point is, even after accounting for the fact that Bourque played in a higher scoring era, he's still ahead of Lidstrom, statistically.
A good way of looking at this is: how did they compare to their peer groups? I'm comparing Lidstrom (during his first nineteen full seasons, from 1992-2011) and Bourque (during his first seventeen seasons, 1980-98). Yes, scoring was higher during Bourque's era, but that
doesn't matter because both players are compared against their peer groups here.
Player|Rank in games|Rank in goals|Rank in assists|Rank in points|Rank in Pts per GP
Bourque
|4th|35th|3rd|6th|36th
Lidstrom|1st|72nd|2nd|8th|72nd
- Link to Bourque data
- Link to Lidstrom data
Again, the fact that Bourque played in a higher-scoring era is irrelevant since both players are compared directly to their peers. Lidstrom ranked 8th in points over the span of his career, which is extremely impressive (he's behind Jagr, Sakic, Recchi, Selanne, Sundin, Modano and Shanahan).
However, Bourque was even more dominant offensively - he ranked 6th in scoring, behind only Gretzky, Messier, Lemieux, Coffey and Francis. Even before we take into account the fact that Bourque competed against the two freaks of nature (#99 and #66), he ranks higher than Lidstrom.
Defense
I give the edge to Lidstrom, but it's by a smaller margin than most people think. Lidstrom was better at even-strength as he played more conservatively than Bourque, but I think Bourque was superior on the penalty kill because he was stronger & more aggressive than Lidstrom and was thus better able to clear opponents away from the crease on the PK. I've watched hundreds of games from both and I think it would be tough to make an argument that either player is significantly better than the other here.
There aren't too many coach or player surveys from Bourque's era, but it's worth mentioning that he was named the best defensive defenseman in the league in 1994 (with more votes than Chelios and Stevens combined!) -
link. He was also named second best to Chelios in 1993 -
link.
I don't think that plus/minus is a good indicator of defensive play for many reasons but it's worth mentioning that Bourque has a better plus/minus despite spending most of his career on a weaker team.
Discipline
The conventional argument is that Bourque's physical play gives him an edge over Lidstrom. While I agree that it's an advantage, Bourque's marginally more reckless style also means that he spends more time in the penalty box.
Over the span of their careers, Lidstrom had 486 PIM in 1,494 games (average per 82 games = 27 PIM per year). This excludes 2012. Bourque had 1,141 PIM in 1,612 games (average per 82 games = 58 PIM). That works out to an extra 15 minor penalties per year... assuming an 80% PK rate, Bourque's penalties cost his team an extra 3 goals per year. That's a small advantage for Lidstrom, but it's worth considering.
Playoffs
I want to emphasize that Bourque was a dominant playoff performer. Bourque lost twice in the Stanley Cup finals to the dynasty Edmonton Oilers -- and although I don't like to go into hypotheticals too much, I personally don't think that any team from the past decade, including Lidstrom's Wings, could have defeated the dynasty Oilers. Bourque had "bad timing" since he peaked when the NHL's last true dynasty peaked.
Bourque had multiple Smythe-calibre performances (as did Lidstrom, who indeed won the trophy once). In 1988 Bourque must have played 35 min per game, finished 7th overall and 1st among defensemen in playoff scoring, and at +16 he was the only player on his team in the dougle digits. Though on the losing team, as an individual effort, this was at least as good as Lidstrom's performance in 2002.
In 1991, Bourque again played around 35 min per game, and finished 6th overall and 1st among defensemen in PO scoring. His worst PO run in Boston, when he went to the SC finals, was in 1990, when he was still 1st in PO scoring among defensemen (12th overall) and had a higher plus/minus rating than any player not on the Oilers. Bourque was also great in 1983 (Bruins lost in conference finals to the dynasty Islanders) despite Bourque's 23 pts in 17 games.
Bourque really only played on a stacked team twice in his career and in those two years, he won 1 Cup and went to the conference finals the other time. I don't deny that Lidstrom has had more team playoff success, but based on the strength of their individual playoff performances, I see them as nearly equal.
Bourque scored 0.84 points per game in the playoffs and Lidstrom scored 0.71 points per game - a 19% advantage for Bourque. I estimate that around 12% of this advantage is due to era, so Bourque "actually" outscored Lidstrom by about 7% per game in the playoffs. Lidstrom is a bit better defensively than Bourque, but it's by a small amount. Overall, I think their playoff performance are about even (unless you're simply counting the number of Stanley Cups won).
Durability
Through 19 seasons, Lidstrom played in 1,494 of a possible 1,526 games (97.9% availability). Through his first 19 seasons, Bourque played in 1,372 of a possible 1,502 games (91.3% availability). Assuming an 82-game schedule, this means that Lidstrom is available to play in an extra 5 games per year.
Overall
Bourque has the edge in Hart voting, Norris voting, all-star voting, offense (relative to peer groups), and physical play. Defense and playoff performances are too close to call. Lidstrom has the Smythe and the edge in durability and discipline.
Overall, Bourque has a slightly higher peak, and was better for longer. Lidstrom might pass Bourque before he retires, but I'm comfortable saying that he hasn't done so yet.
