HOH Top 60 Defensemen of All Time

[quoipourquoi]

Pronger has been the only true, consistent competition to Lidstrom

That's being generous. Pronger was never the same after his injury in 2001 (which precluded him from winning a second consecutive Norris Trophy), and only started to recapture some of his old magic for some post-lockout playoff runs and another injury season in 2006-07.

 

[Rhiessan71]

That's being generous. Pronger was never the same after his injury in 2001 (which precluded him from winning a second consecutive Norris Trophy), and only started to recapture some of his old magic for some post-lockout playoff runs and another injury season in 2006-07.

Yeah and Pronger may have been his most consistent competition in the sense that he competed against him more than most but he wasn't actually consistent at all.
No one was, not Niedermayer, not Chara and not Leetch.

It's not exactly the way I see it but I do consider Lidstrom a bit of a compiler of Norris trophies much in the same way Gartner was a compiler of goals.
I certainly don't hold his 7 in the same regard as Bourque's 5, Harvey's 7 and about even with Chelios' 3.

 

[Violent By Design]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet (not going to read through 17 pages looking for it), but does anybody else find it funny that Lidstrom is one spot behind Dennis Potvin on this list, but is one spot ahead of him on HF's top 70 players of all time? Not to mention that poll was done in 2009 where as Lidstrom has done nothing but make his career even greater.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I'm not sure if this has been brought up yet (not going to read through 17 pages looking for it), but does anybody else find it funny that Lidstrom is one spot behind Dennis Potvin on this list, but is one spot ahead of him on HF's top 70 players of all time? Not to mention that poll was done in 2009 where as Lidstrom has done nothing but make his career even greater.

Ummm...Lidstrom is exactly one spot ahead of Potvin on BOTH lists.

 

[Theokritos]

Lidstrom is one spot behind Dennis Potvin on this list, but is one spot ahead of him on HF's top 70 players of all time? Not to mention that poll was done in 2009 where as Lidstrom has done nothing but make his career even greater.

Not true, and besides: Bourque has overtaken Eddie Shore without doing anything to make his career greater. Lidström and Potvin have overtaken Red Kelly. Fetisov and Robinson have switched positions, so have Clancy and Coffey. And Sprague Cleghorn is up 3 spots. Funny? No, just changes in opinions, often due to improved availability of informations and new researches.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Not true, and besides: Bourque has overtaken Eddie Shore without doing anything to make his career greater. Lidström and Potvin have overtaken Red Kelly. Fetisov and Robinson have switched positions, so have Clancy and Coffey. And Sprague Cleghorn is up 3 spots. Funny? No, just changes in opinions, often due to improved availability of informations and new researches.

Exactly.

Bourque/Shore - Better understanding of early Hart results
Lidstrom/Potvin/Kelly - Simply that Kelly only spend half his career as a defenseman
Fetisov/Robinson - More detailed awareness of the quality of Soviet hockey
Clancy/Coffey - Not sure?
Cleghorn - Availability of digital newspapers from his era

The reshuffling isn't arbitrary. We researched and argued these things out to such an extent that minor "corrections" of the older list were bound to occur.

 

[thom]

To some on this site Scotty Bowman has serge savard ahead of Larry Robinson is error in judgement.Bowman Knows more than everyone on this site.In Hockey Magazine sold in Walmarts in Canada Bowman has savard as 20th best born canadian player and Robinson is 27th best player.If Scotty believes savard was a better player than he was

 

[Bear of Bad News]

To some on this site Scotty Bowman has serge savard ahead of Larry Robinson is error in judgement.Bowman Knows more than everyone on this site.In Hockey Magazine sold in Walmarts in Canada Bowman has savard as 20th best born canadian player and Robinson is 27th best player.If Scotty believes savard was a better player than he was

Whether that's true or not, it doesn't make every hockey opinion of his the equivalent of gospel from on high.

And if you base all of your hockey opinions on how closely you can match Scotty Bowman's opinions, then I'm not sure why you would find value in the History section to begin with.

 

[thom]

Thanks for you reply I'm not arguing that Savard is better than Robinson just saying that the coach of one of the greatest clubs in history believed Savard was ahead of Robinson.In terms of stats Robinson is ahead of savard in most stats but there are other factors involved.Is Yzerman better than Sakic.Is Lafleur better than Hull?Is Lidstrom better than Potvin?Is orr better than Gretzy?

 

[Bear of Bad News]

Thanks for you reply I'm not arguing that Savard is better than Robinson

Actually, these were your exact words:

"If Scotty believes savard was a better player than he was".

 

[Mister Hockey]

This seems to be the big one.

Top defensemen = Best career? Best player when at his peak? Longest prime?

I'm a peak guy. How good a player was when he was able to perform at his peak.

Still, I don't know how Orr gets such high marks from everyone (including people who value career). Then again, I never put Lindros or Forsberg in my top 40 all-time either.

Not an exact science, is it?

Orr, I consider the second best ever
after Mario. Dave Burrows should be on this list.

 

[The Tourist]

Zubov should definitely be on the list. His whole career he got overlooked because he played the majority of it in Dallas and it looks like he's still getting overlooked.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Zubov should definitely be on the list. His whole career he got overlooked because he played the majority of it in Dallas and it looks like he's still getting overlooked.

I've asked this before and not really gotten a good answer. If Zubov got overlooked because he played for Dallas, whey didn't Derian Hatcher get overlooked? When the two of them played together, Hatcher got more recognition than any other pure defensive defenseman in the league other than Scott Stevens and Chris Chelios.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Dpe

I've asked this before and not really gotten a good answer. If Zubov got overlooked because he played for Dallas, whey didn't Derian Hatcher get overlooked? When the two of them played together, Hatcher got more recognition than any other pure defensive defenseman in the league other than Scott Stevens and Chris Chelios.

Derian Hatcher was recognized within the context of hockey as it was played during the DPE. Likewise Zubov. Viewed from the standpoint of a post 2005 perspective their ranking may be reversed by some.

 

[Hardyvan123]

Zubov should definitely be on the list. His whole career he got overlooked because he played the majority of it in Dallas and it looks like he's still getting overlooked.

Zubov probably got over looked because he was in the NHL, when all the worlds best players were in the NHL. If he had stayed in Russia perhaps he would have had a resume much like the guy at 25 on the list Valeri Vasiliev (or if Vasiliev had played in the NHL and competed with the other NHL Dmen on the top 60 list at that time.

Zubov also had a reputation from earlier in his career that stuck, he was better defensively later in his career than some people give him credit for.

He is in a lot of ways a slightly lesser Russian version of Nieds.

For his career Zubov was 2nd in points among all Dmen with 771 from 93-09 only behind Lidstrom and ahead of Leetch and Nieds, the top Canadian who was 4th during that time overall.

It's not like Zubov was anything near like Housley in his back end either as his TOI in Dallas indicates.

Guy averaged 26:10 MPG from age 28-39 from when Hockey reference tracks TOI.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Zubov probably got over looked because he was in the NHL, when all the worlds best players were in the NHL. If he had stayed in Russia perhaps he would have had a resume much like the guy at 25 on the list Valeri Vasiliev (or if Vasiliev had played in the NHL and competed with the other NHL Dmen on the top 60 list at that time.

Zubov also had a reputation from earlier in his career that stuck, he was better defensively later in his career than some people give him credit for.

He is in a lot of ways a slightly lesser Russian version of Nieds.

For his career Zubov was 2nd in points among all Dmen with 771 from 93-09 only behind Lidstrom and ahead of Leetch and Nieds, the top Canadian who was 4th during that time overall.

It's not like Zubov was anything near like Housley in his back end either as his TOI in Dallas indicates.

Guy averaged 26:10 MPG from age 28-39 from when Hockey reference tracks TOI.

But only 7th in points per game during that span behind , in this order, Bourque, Brown, MacInnis, Coffey, Leetch and Lidstrom.

 

[Hardyvan123]

But only 7th in points per game during that span behind , in this order, Bourque, Brown, MacInnis, Coffey, Leetch and Lidstrom.

Which would be the more important of the two, the larger sample one of his entire career and counting stats or PPG?

Each player has his record agasitn his peers over teh elngth of his career and his peak and prime as well.

Both are part of the picture but anyone being 2nd in points over the length of his career is simply quite outstanding given his overall defense being pretty good too.

On the whole you can make a pretty decent case for him over Vaseliev or Savard right?

 

[Rhiessan71]

Which would be the more important of the two, the larger sample one of his entire career and counting stats or PPG?

Each player has his record agasitn his peers over teh elngth of his career and his peak and prime as well.

Both are part of the picture but anyone being 2nd in points over the length of his career is simply quite outstanding given his overall defense being pretty good too.

On the whole you can make a pretty decent case for him over Vaseliev or Savard right?

Hey I like Zubov, I always thought he was better offensively than Lidstrom was but whether I can make a case for him over Vaseliev or Savard...
Savard I would say a hard no to, he was a pretty impressive D-man. Vaseliev I'm more open to entertaining arguments as his sample size for playing against the best, or at a fair amount of the best is pretty limited.

And also in regards to Zubov, he was a lot better defensively later in his career but I would hardly call him a stalwart in that department and was very certainly a very, very poor man's shut down guy.

 

[Dennis Bonvie]

Zubov probably got over looked because he was in the NHL, when all the worlds best players were in the NHL. If he had stayed in Russia perhaps he would have had a resume much like the guy at 25 on the list Valeri Vasiliev (or if Vasiliev had played in the NHL and competed with the other NHL Dmen on the top 60 list at that time.

Zubov also had a reputation from earlier in his career that stuck, he was better defensively later in his career than some people give him credit for.

He is in a lot of ways a slightly lesser Russian version of Nieds.

For his career Zubov was 2nd in points among all Dmen with 771 from 93-09 only behind Lidstrom and ahead of Leetch and Nieds, the top Canadian who was 4th during that time overall.

It's not like Zubov was anything near like Housley in his back end either as his TOI in Dallas indicates.

Guy averaged 26:10 MPG from age 28-39 from when Hockey reference tracks TOI.

If the Wall didn't fall, where do you think Bure, Federov and Mogilny would rank all-time, playing maybe 12 years together like the KLM line?

 

[Epsilon]

For his career Zubov was 2nd in points among all Dmen with 771 from 93-09 only behind Lidstrom and ahead of Leetch and Nieds, the top Canadian who was 4th during that time overall.

The problem with this sort of analysis is that it's heavily biased towards whichever player is being looked at, because most of the other players involved are missing at least some years of their careers (obviously not so with all of them).

For instance, Doug Wilson (who's near the bottom of the Top 60 list) is 4th overall in points over his career (77/78-93/93), behind only Bourque, Coffey, and Murphy. Given the offensive-minded era he played in one could easily say that's more impressive than Zubov being 2nd to Lidstrom.

For an example of someone who did not make the list, Gary Suter is 7th over the length of his career (85/86-00/01) behind heavy offensive producers Bourque, MacInnis, Coffey, Housley, Leetch, and Murphy. There's plenty of defensemen underneath him on that list who most would agree were better offensive players.

 

[Hardyvan123]

The problem with this sort of analysis is that it's heavily biased towards whichever player is being looked at, because most of the other players involved are missing at least some years of their careers (obviously not so with all of them).

For instance, Doug Wilson (who's near the bottom of the Top 60 list) is 4th overall in points over his career (77/78-93/93), behind only Bourque, Coffey, and Murphy. Given the offensive-minded era he played in one could easily say that's more impressive than Zubov being 2nd to Lidstrom.

For an example of someone who did not make the list, Gary Suter is 7th over the length of his career (85/86-00/01) behind heavy offensive producers Bourque, MacInnis, Coffey, Housley, Leetch, and Murphy. There's plenty of defensemen underneath him on that list who most would agree were better offensive players.

Sure every "system" or single type of analysis has its drawbacks and benefits but to see how his career really fits in with his peers the one I put up there does tell that story.

To be 2nd over the length of an entire career in scoring among ones peers is just plain excellent no matter how one draws it up. My method is just part of the picture I look at, I try to look at each and every player in as many ways as possible.

If one does that with Zubov, it's pretty clear that he has a case with the two guys I mentioned and I gave one possible reason why he fell.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Sure every "system" or single type of analysis has its drawbacks and benefits but to see how his career really fits in with his peers the one I put up there does tell that story.

To be 2nd over the length of an entire career in scoring among ones peers is just plain excellent no matter how one draws it up. My method is just part of the picture I look at, I try to look at each and every player in as many ways as possible.

If one does that with Zubov, it's pretty clear that he has a case with the two guys I mentioned and I gave one possible reason why he fell.

So let me get this straight, for you, a guy like Lidstrom ranks so high not just based on points but mainly based on his defensive play which really is somewhat hard to accurately reflect with stats.
Now you want to move Zubov above a guy like Savard solely based on points? Even though it's pretty universially accepted that Zubov was below average defensively for a chunk of his career and above average at best the rest.
Savard, who was no slouch offensively I might add, was extremely good defensively.

You'll have to excuse me if I'm once again having a little trouble following the logic behind your methods of evaluating players.
Anyone seen those goalposts? I coulda swore they were here a second ago

 

[Hardyvan123]

So let me get this straight, for you, a guy like Lidstrom ranks so high not just based on points but mainly based on his defensive play which really is somewhat hard to accurately reflect with stats.
Now you want to move Zubov above a guy like Savard solely based on points? Even though it's pretty universially accepted that Zubov was below average defensively for a chunk of his career and above average at best the rest.
Savard, who was no slouch offensively I might add, was extremely good defensively.

You'll have to excuse me if I'm once again having a little trouble following the logic behind your methods of evaluating players.
Anyone seen those goalposts? I coulda swore they were here a second ago

Sure Zubov wasn't a shutdown D but calling him simply above average isn't true either.

Savard was better defensively but offesnively he never wowed anyone consistently, part due to injury and part due to team amakeup perhaps.

But alot of his praise is because of his team as well so it cuts both ways.

Both guys never won a Norris and I think it's fair to say that they are pretty comparable.

Even in the higher svoring 70's how many times does Savard break into the top 5 Dman scoring? Top 10?

Even with less teams and the disparity between the rich and the poor in the early 70's, Zubov offense blows Savard out of the water.

IMO one guy gets way easier treatment than the other guy and he isn't the only one in the 70's either.

 

[Rhiessan71]

Sure Zubov wasn't a shutdown D but calling him simply above average isn't true either.

Savard was better defensively but offesnively he never wowed anyone consistently, part due to injury and part due to team amakeup perhaps.

But alot of his praise is because of his team as well so it cuts both ways.

Both guys never won a Norris and I think it's fair to say that they are pretty comparable.

Even in the higher svoring 70's how many times does Savard break into the top 5 Dman scoring? Top 10?

Even with less teams and the disparity between the rich and the poor in the early 70's, Zubov offense blows Savard out of the water.

IMO one guy gets way easier treatment than the other guy and he isn't the only one in the 70's either.

First off, Savards offense was closer to Zubovs offense than Zubovs defense was to Savards defense.
Second, I don‘t know what Zubov you are talking about but the one I saw was poor defensively to start, improved later on to not be considered a liability and ended up a little better than that in his last couple of year.
Average to above average at best defensively is stating the last half or so of his career perfectly IMO.

 

[Hardyvan123]

First off, Savards offense was closer to Zubovs offense than Zubovs defense was to Savards defense.
Second, I don‘t know what Zubov you are talking about but the one I saw was poor defensively to start, improved later on to not be considered a liability and ended up a little better than that in his last couple of year.
Average to above average at best defensively is stating the last half or so of his career perfectly IMO.

Maybe it's a perception thing but Zubov was under Hitch in his 4th full year in the NHL at age 26.

He was better later in his career for sure but the early part of his pre Hitch carer is short and his offense is way better than Savards do we need to pull up the actual numbers here?

Here it's easy, Zubov is a 0.72 PPG player in his career, Savard .42 and I won't even begin to bring in the era thing.


.30 PPG over 100 games is quite a gap.

That's a huge offensive difference. Zubov isn't Phil Housley on the back end.

They both have exactly 1 2nd team all star selection.

Zubov has a legit Norris argument the year 06 he was a 2nd team guy while Savards was more of a reward for an aging vet in 79.

Even with the Conn Smythe it's pretty hard to argue that there is a huge gap in their playoff resume and impact.