Harvey Versus Lidstrom

[RabbinsDuck]

I currently have Defensemen All-Time ranked the following:

1) Orr
2) Harvey
3) Bourque
4) Lidstrom
5) Shore
6) Potvin
7) Kelly

I am ultimately trying to get a better comparison of Lidstrom/Bourque vs. Harvey/Shore.
I previously compared Lidstrom to Shore and felt Lidstrom won out in actual defensive play and playoffs, while not being far off at all offensively. The competition argument so often used against Lidstrom from Bourque fans applies even more so to Shore, and I felt it was enough that both Lidstrom and Bourque did more than Shore, especially considering strength of their respective eras.

So I thought I would do something similar with Harvey. My apologies, as this is only an initial look, but Eagle Belfour had recently posted Harvey's Norrris shares, and I was curious how Lidstrom measured up, considering I feel they were very similar players.

Harvey Norris Share (in winning years):
55: 34.6%
56: 62.2%
57: 73.6%
58: 22.2%
60: 67.5%
61: 67.9%
62: 53.9%

Lidstrom's Norris Shares:
01: 90.3%
02: 46.7%
03: 67.7%
06: 70.5%
07: 60.8%
08: 94.7%

Frankly, I was really surprised by the results. I just figured Harvey would have run away with it, but the opposite is true - Lidstrom dominated his competition more in the 00s than Harvey did during the O6.

I'm curious what others' thoughts are on this, as I do not have the time to look too much into it, but I do believe Harvey is subject to the same 'disadvantage' Lidstrom (and Shore) has when it comes to the superior competition Bourque faced (which really no other era can match).

My contention for quite a while now is that Harvey/Bourque/Lidstrom/Shore are all extremely close in an all-time context, while I believe many here still see a large gap behind Harvey/Shore.

Click to read more...

 

[Dreakmur]

Harvey went head to head with Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby in their primes. That's some damn tough competition for votes.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Harvey went head to head with Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby in their primes. That's some damn tough competition for votes.

I believe Kelly and Gadsby represent a higher top-end degree of competition than say Pronger/Neidermayer but not by a large degree (Pronger did have a Hart year, and Kelly ceased being real competition after '56), but the sheer breadth of quality, top-level defensemen Lidstrom faced from around the world dwarfed Harvey's overall competition.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I believe Kelly and Gadsby represent a higher top-end degree of competition than say Pronger/Neidermayer but not by a large degree (Pronger did have a Hart year, and Kelly ceased being real competition after '56), but the sheer breadth of quality, top-level defensemen Lidstrom faced from around the world dwarfed Harvey's overall competition.

The man who should have been Lidstrom's main competition (Chris Pronger) was injured too often to be actual competition in most years. Pronger was the leading Norris contender in both 2001 and 2007, when he was injured.

 

[canucks4ever]

During Doug Harvey's last 4 norris wins, Red Kelly was a non-factor.

 

[Dreakmur]

I believe Kelly and Gadsby represent a higher top-end degree of competition than say Pronger/Neidermayer but not by a large degree (Pronger did have a Hart year), but the sheer breadth of quality, top-level defensemen Lidstrom faced from around the world dwarfed Harvey's overall competition.

Actually, that was just the top end I listed. Tim Horton, Bill Quackenbush, Fern Flaman, Carl Brewer, Harry Howell, Pierre Pilote, Marcel Pronovost, and the Gold Dust Twins were all around during Doug Harvey's run. That's quite a bit better than what Lidstrom has faced since 2000.

Outside of Pronger and Niedermayer, who else was good? An aging Scott Stevens. An aging Al MacInnis. An equally aging Ray Bourque. An ancient Chris Chelios. Zdeno Chara is pretty good.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Also we have no idea if the voters are using the same criteria in voting for the Norris.

The % of victory means very little at the end of the day except it shows how certain people voted.

Some of that Hart voting in the early 50's was pretty wacky, assuming the same guys voted for the Norris as well?

Both guys would be in most guys top 5 depending on criteria and how they weigh certain factors.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Actually, that was just the top end I listed. Tim Horton, Bill Quackenbush, Fern Flaman, Carl Brewer, Harry Howell, Pierre Pilote, Marcel Pronovost, and the Gold Dust Twins were all around during Doug Harvey's run. That's quite a bit better than what Lidstrom has faced since 2000.

Outside of Pronger and Niedermayer, who else was good? An aging Scott Stevens. An aging Al MacInnis. An equally aging Ray Bourque. An ancient Chris Chelios. Zdeno Chara is pretty good.

The collective best from Canada in the 50s was not more deep than the collective best from Canada, the USA, Sweden, Russia and other countries in the 00s.

 

[canucks4ever]

Actually, that was just the top end I listed. Tim Horton, Bill Quackenbush, Fern Flaman, Carl Brewer, Harry Howell, Pierre Pilote, Marcel Pronovost, and the Gold Dust Twins were all around during Doug Harvey's run. That's quite a bit better than what Lidstrom has faced since 2000.

Outside of Pronger and Niedermayer, who else was good? An aging Scott Stevens. An aging Al MacInnis. An equally aging Ray Bourque. An ancient Chris Chelios. Zdeno Chara is pretty good.

Alot of these guys you mentioned racked up all star team selections in either the late 40's or the early to mid 60's, two of the weakest eras ever for defenseman. Flaman, brewer and howell are not any better than a rob blake and he probably had the best peak between them.

Chris Pronger gets held back due to injuries, if he was healthy i'm sure he would have been ranked above tim horton and gadsby, these guys get overrated reputations. Tim Horton couldnt win 1 norris trophy in an era that saw tom johnson and howell win.

 

[nik jr]

Actually, that was just the top end I listed. Tim Horton, Bill Quackenbush, Fern Flaman, Carl Brewer, Harry Howell, Pierre Pilote, Marcel Pronovost, and the Gold Dust Twins were all around during Doug Harvey's run. That's quite a bit better than what Lidstrom has faced since 2000.

Outside of Pronger and Niedermayer, who else was good? An aging Scott Stevens. An aging Al MacInnis. An equally aging Ray Bourque. An ancient Chris Chelios. Zdeno Chara is pretty good.

could you explain how those players are better?

 

[RabbinsDuck]

How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition? It's worth considering, IMO, especially when you start bringing up Horton, Quackenbush, Pronovost, Flaman, Brewer, Howell and Pilote.

 

[Rhiessan71]

How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition? It's worth considering, IMO, especially when you start bringing up Horton, Quackenbush, Pronovost, Flaman, Brewer, Howell and Pilote.

Not to derail you here but Leetch is American.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Not to derail you here but Leetch is American

Duh, sorry!

 

[Dreakmur]

How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition? It's worth considering, IMO, especially when you start bringing up Horton, Quackenbush, Pronovost, Flaman, Brewer, Howell and Pilote.

Bourque, MacInnis, and Leetch were all basically done when Lidstrom started racking up Norris Trophies.

That leaves Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Rob Blake, and Zdeno Chara as his main competition.

Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby are both completely out of all of their leagues, so there's no point even discussing them. Tim Hortin and Chris Pronger are the next best. I think Horton's slightly better, but we can call it even. That leaves Bill Quackenbush, who's definately way better than Blake, and he's better than Chara and Niedermayer too.

 

[nik jr]

Bourque, MacInnis, and Leetch were all basically done when Lidstrom started racking up Norris Trophies.

leetch's defensive game was too weak by that point, and NYR were a dysfunctional team, but bourque and macinnis were still very good. macinnis was better defensively later and was a norris finalist multiple times later in his career.

most of the great d-men were older. i agree with many other posters that there was a lack of great d-men.

chelios was not as good as in the '90s, but was still very strong defensively, and played smarter than he did earlier, imo. i think stevens was also better later in his career.


but thomson, mortson and quackenbush were all closer to done when harvey started winning norris than bourque, macinnis and leetch were.
thomson's last AS was '51. quackenbush's last AS was '53. mortson's only AS was '50.

That leaves Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Rob Blake, and Zdeno Chara as his main competition.

Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby are both completely out of all of their leagues, so there's no point even discussing them. Tim Hortin and Chris Pronger are the next best. I think Horton's slightly better, but we can call it even. That leaves Bill Quackenbush, who's definately way better than Blake, and he's better than Chara and Niedermayer too.

i don't mind at all if harvey is considered better than lidstrom. based on what i have seen of him and read, it seems likely that harvey was better.

but i don't speak with certainty about players i have seen very little or none of, and i don't know why you do. your certainty about these things is my problem here. saying there is no point in discussing them is completely ridiculous.

you say things like vasiliev > bourque defensively, and that there was better competition among defensive d-men in the PCHA in 1920s than in the NHL in 1971.

slightly more than 1 year ago, you were arguing that orr and lidstrom were never elite defensively, and that players like bouwmeester, robidas and nick schultz are better defensively than lidstrom.
so you can see why i don't value your opinion on d-men much, even contemporary d-men that are on TV regularly.


from what i have seen and read, gadsby was more of a solid, physical d-man who was very good on PP with bathgate than a great defensive player, though he was not at all bad defensively. i have only seen video of him in the '60s. i have read several things that say gadsby was at his best defensively in the '60s, when he was no longer much of a scorer.

how is quackenbush definitely way better than blake? how are kelly and gadsby completely out of pronger's league?

i think pronger has been considerably better than his norris/AS results suggest, but here are his norris results if american and european players are removed.

'98: 2nd
'99: 3rd
'00: 1st
'01: injured (imo, probably would have won if healthy)
'02: 2nd
'03: injured
'04: 2nd
'06: 3rd (imo, should have been higher, but oilers had bad goaltending)
'07: 2nd (imo, would have won if healthy)
'08: 4th (hilarious that phaneuf was 2nd, 1st without lidstrom)
'09: --
'10: 3rd (imo, should have been 2nd to keith)

pronger also had multiple playoffs worthy of the smythe ('06, '07, '10) and, imo, should have won in 2006.

 

[kmad]

That leaves Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Rob Blake, and Zdeno Chara as his main competition.

Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby are both completely out of all of their leagues, so there's no point even discussing them.

Gadsby and Pronger are close.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition? It's worth considering, IMO, especially when you start bringing up Horton, Quackenbush, Pronovost, Flaman, Brewer, Howell and Pilote.

Then you must considered them playing in a 6 team league.

Take out the Americans and Euros and make a 6 team league out of Canadians from the 90s or 00's. The competition would be pretty good.

 

[Reds4Life]

Then you must considered them playing in a 6 team league.

Take out the Americans and Euros and make a 6 team league out of Canadians from the 90s or 00's. The competition would be pretty good.

How's that? The top competition would be the same.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

How's that? The top competition would be the same.

"How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition?"

My point is that they may not look much better if they are playing against only 5 different teams of Canadians only. I would say their numbers would be lower than what they actually put up.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

"How much better would Bourque, Leetch, MacInnis, Pronger, Blake, Neidermayer, Keith and even Green look without US and Euro competition?"

My point is that they may not look much better if they are playing against only 5 different teams of Canadians only. I would say their numbers would be lower than what they actually put up.

Their numbers would definitely be down, but I was more referring to their Norris placements.

 

[seventieslord]

Bourque, MacInnis, and Leetch were all basically done when Lidstrom started racking up Norris Trophies.

That leaves Chris Pronger, Scott Niedermayer, Rob Blake, and Zdeno Chara as his main competition.

Red Kelly and Bill Gadsby are both completely out of all of their leagues, so there's no point even discussing them. Tim Hortin and Chris Pronger are the next best. I think Horton's slightly better, but we can call it even. That leaves Bill Quackenbush, who's definately way better than Blake, and he's better than Chara and Niedermayer too.

Sorry if I'm misunderstanding, but did you just imply that Horton is not as good as Gadsby?

 

[CarlWinslow]

The collective best from Canada in the 50s was not more deep than the collective best from Canada, the USA, Sweden, Russia and other countries in the 00s.

The 30 best Canadian defensemen in the 50s were better than the 30 best in the world now.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

The 30 best Canadian defensemen in the 50s were better than the 30 best in the world now.

I'm not in the "newer is always better" crowd but that thinking seems naive.
You must think Canadian hockey has taken a nose dive if that is the case.

 

[CarlWinslow]

I'm not in the "newer is always better" crowd but that thinking seems naive.
You must think Canadian hockey has taken a nose dive if that is the case.

Okay. How about we agree on this since it is a more modest statement?

The top 5 Canadian defensemen from the 50s were better than the top 5 defensemen in the world now?

Only the top 3 or 5 guys compete for the Norris anyway.

 

[seventieslord]

I'm not in the "newer is always better" crowd but that thinking seems naive.
You must think Canadian hockey has taken a nose dive if that is the case.

Yeah, I'm not sure what he's trying to get at here...