Duncan Keith vs Scott Niedermayer

[Filthy Dangles]

Who was the better defenseman in their prime?

Click to read more...

 

[TwoPiece]

This is a good one. Very comparable players and styles.

I have to say Scott Niedermayer.

 

[ohheyhemsky]

Considering they're actually quite close, I'll take the guy who has won everything.

I know the question is who was better in their prime, and to me that's still Niedermayer.

 

[The Macho King]

Nieds but close. These two are about as close as you can get.

Considering they're actually quite close, I'll take the guy who has won everything.

I know the question is who was better in their prime, and to me that's still Niedermayer.

Ermmm... Both have won pretty much everything.

 

[A1LeafNation]

One had a longer prime. I took that guy.

 

[Plural]

Voted for Nieds and immediately I regret it.

 

[Puckstuff]

Keith's peak was quite insane; among the best peak's maybe ever. Maybe top 5. Niedermayer had a longer prime. Very close; can't decide. I'll go with Scott; but there isn't a wrong choice here imo

 

[Jtown]

duncan keith was the best player on a modern dynasty. 2x norris winner. conn smythe. An awesome career.

 

[Critical13]

In their primes, I will take Keith. Career wise it's a no brainer, though. Neids was excellent from day one until retirement.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Niedermayer has become overrated. In his first decade in the NHL, he had one great season (1998). He only played at his peak level from the 2003 playoffs until 2007 - but since that was pretty late in his career, many people project backwards and assume he had been at that level his entire career.

During his first decade in the NHL, he got less consideration for the Norris trophy than Eric Desjardins and Sandis Ozolinsh, and only slightly more than Teppo Numminen. Not that Norris voting is a perfect measure, but in this case I think it accurately shows that he didn't become an elite performer until very late into his twenties.

 

[triggrman]

Nieds

 

[ohheyhemsky]

Nieds but close. These two are about as close as you can get.


Ermmm... Both have won pretty much everything.

Okay.

But one has literally won everything.

 

[The Macho King]

Okay.

But one has literally won everything.

What does that mean?

 

[The Macho King]

Niedermayer has become overrated. In his first decade in the NHL, he had one great season (1998). He only played at his peak level from the 2003 playoffs until 2007 - but since that was pretty late in his career, many people project backwards and assume he had been at that level his entire career.

During his first decade in the NHL, he got less consideration for the Norris trophy than Eric Desjardins and Sandis Ozolinsh, and only slightly more than Teppo Numminen. Not that Norris voting is a perfect measure, but in this case I think it accurately shows that he didn't become an elite performer until very late into his twenties.

Agreed that Nieds is overrated generally, but I think Keith is a pretty good comparable all the same. Both have 6 top 10 Norris finishes, with their top finishes being 1, 2, 2 for Nieds and 1, 1, 4 for Keith. Keith has 3 postseason All-Stars versus 4 for Nieds (1, 1, 1, 2, versus 1, 1, 2 for Keith). Both have a Smythe. Keith has 3 Cups, Nieds has 4. Both have 2 gold medals in the Olympics.

Nieds has one in the WCs but I don't think that shifts the argument at all. Neither does World Cup or World Juniors - those are irrelevant in the comparison.

 

[ohheyhemsky]

What does that mean?

LMGTFY

 

[The Macho King]

LMGTFY

This is just asinine.

 

[Hockey Outsider]

Agreed that Nieds is overrated generally, but I think Keith is a pretty good comparable all the same. Both have 6 top 10 Norris finishes, with their top finishes being 1, 2, 2 for Nieds and 1, 1, 4 for Keith. Keith has 3 postseason All-Stars versus 4 for Nieds (1, 1, 1, 2, versus 1, 1, 2 for Keith). Both have a Smythe. Keith has 3 Cups, Nieds has 4. Both have 2 gold medals in the Olympics.

Nieds has one in the WCs but I don't think that shifts the argument at all. Neither does World Cup or World Juniors - those are irrelevant in the comparison.

Good summary. For the record, I agree that they're very similar in terms of style, accomplishments, and where they should be ranked all-time.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

I picked Keith. Not a whole lot of reason or separation.

Just I kinda feel Nieds had another Norris calibre player to play with in Stevens and Pronger, and a nearly Norris guy in Rafalski, and one of the best goalies in history backstopping him.

Just seems like Keith did it alone.. playing 40mins a game.


I don't necessarily believe that makes him BETTER, but I think he accomplished a lot of the same things with lesser players.

 

[The Macho King]

I picked Keith. Not a whole lot of reason or separation.

Just I kinda feel Nieds had another Norris winner to play with in Stevens, and a nearly Norris guy in Rafalski, and one of the best goalies in history backstopping him.

Even in Anaheim he had Pronger there.

Just seems like Keith did it alone.. playing 40mins a game.


I don't necessarily believe that makes him BETTER, but I think he accomplished a lot of the same things with lesser players.

Buckle up...

Spoiler

Scott Stevens never won the Norris. 16 top 10 finishes but zero wins.

 

[Perfect_Drug]

Buckle up...

Spoiler

Scott Stevens never won the Norris. 16 top 10 finishes but zero wins.

Edited. Hehe

 

[Lights911]

Kieth

 

[JaegerDice]

Peak/prime I take Keith, overall career I take Niedermayer.

It took Keith several years to hit his stride and become elite, in fact he was actually quite poor his first few years in the league. Nieds was great almost immediately and was consistent until he retired.

 

[The Macho King]

I picked Keith. Not a whole lot of reason or separation.

Just I kinda feel Nieds had another Norris calibre player to play with in Stevens and Pronger, and a nearly Norris guy in Rafalski, and one of the best goalies in history backstopping him.

Just seems like Keith did it alone.. playing 40mins a game.


I don't necessarily believe that makes him BETTER, but I think he accomplished a lot of the same things with lesser players.

I think that's a fair take (although I don't know if Niedermayer ever had the forward talent to rack up points that Keith had either). Honestly, these two are just eerily similar players all around.

 

[SotasicA]

Okay.

But one has literally won everything.

How do you literally win everything?

Neither Keith nor Niedermayer for instance have won our beer league title, ever.

 

[Ivan13]

Keith comfortably.