How good was Scott Niedermayer ?

[vikash1987]

Seemed like a good selection to me. He was the only player on their defense who could actually skate. In general that Canada team was slow and built around veterans and checkers. A player like him should have been welcome in that lineup.

Wasn't Niedermayer a Top-4 d-man on the '96 World Cup team for Canada? And wasn't he considered a glaring omission from the '98 Nagano team?

I don't recall there being ANY issues with him being selected to the '02 team.

 

[Big Phil]

Another thing.............who was Leetch competing against for his Norrises? He wins two of them, but he's got Chelios, Bourque, Coffey, MacInnis and Stevens fighting as well. No disrespect to Lidstrom, but that was basically Niedermayer's only competition. There is a difference there. And Leetch still beats him in Norris voting.

 

[Terry Yake]

would've been very interesting to see how niedermayer's offensive output would have turned out had he played for another team

57 was the most pts he scored with the devils in a season. then he goes to the ducks and puts up back to back 60+ pt seasons

 

[Voight]

Great career, the Duncan Keith of his day.

Easily a HHoF'er.

Some would say the Corey Perry of his day (bad joke - they both have won the 6 majors)

never seen a guy make the game look as easy as he did

best skating d-man i've ever seen and the way he made everything look so effortless made him so much fun to watch. he could've played a few more seasons too considering he retired at just 36. i'd put him behind only lidstrom and pronger in regards to being the best d-man of his generation

Gets underrated at times due to only one Norris but theres a reason literally every team he ever played on, from Kamloops to Anaheim won a championship / medal.

He could've easily played a few more seasons, he scored 48 points in 2010 so he clearly still had good offensive abilities. I guess tho after captaining his country to Gold, in his home province, he felt that there wasn't anything left to do.

I agree that Niedermayer's first half of his career left a lot to be desired, and his career standing is likely in the 30-40 range behind guys like Leetch, Stevens, Pronger, etc. Outside of 98, he really only became "elite" in my eyes after the 03 playoffs. I also think that the fact his latter half of his career was the elite half causes a bit of recency bias in how favorably we view him (in the same way that Leetch gets underrated, in my opinion, because the latter half of his career was much more pedestrian).

Question though - I don't remember there being much controversy in his selection to the 02 Olympic team, or was there? The locks on D were obviously Pronger, MacInnis, Blake. Foote was a pretty easy one, but after that there was room to maneuver. I know three RHDs are already on that team, but why wasn't Desjardins there? And by 2002, isn't Wade Redden considered as good, if not better than Niedermayer?

Not that I remember. & the thing with Desjardins is by the time Gretzky started putting together his team, you could see some regression.

 

[Sentinel]

I feel like he is underrated around these parts. His point totals were understandably low in defensive NJ. He was tremendous on both sides of the rink. Plus intangibles.

The best modern day comparison would be a far more consistent Doughty with Karlsson's skating.

 

[The Macho King]

I feel like he is underrated around these parts. His point totals were understandably low in defensive NJ. He was tremendous on both sides of the rink. Plus intangibles.

The best modern day comparison would be a far more consistent Doughty with Karlsson's skating.

Yeah this is the type of overrating that goes on. "Defensive New Jersey" was a pretty high scoring team over the DPE relative to the league. He played in a system with hyper-responsible forwards (honestly both in NJ and in Anaheim), and rarely had to be *the* guy for a team. Pumping up Niedermayer always strikes me as a roundabout way to pump up Pronger/Lidstrom versus the previous generation of D who had much higher quality of competition for Norrises/AS selections.

Niedermayer is a run of the mill "top 5 Dman" in an era-player. Good enough to peak and snag a Norris. Consistent enough to be a HHOF lock. But not on the level of truly rarefied air great.

Edit: Also - let's face it. He got the Conn Smythe because Pronger got suspended.

 

[GMR]

Another thing.............who was Leetch competing against for his Norrises? He wins two of them, but he's got Chelios, Bourque, Coffey, MacInnis and Stevens fighting as well. No disrespect to Lidstrom, but that was basically Niedermayer's only competition. There is a difference there. And Leetch still beats him in Norris voting.

What about Pronger, Chara, MacInnis, and Blake?

 

[Perfect_Drug]

I think Niedermeyer is rated pretty accurately here.

General consensus in this thread seems to place him somewhere between Doughty and Karlsson, which sounds about right.


He's HHOF because of all the cups he won. Not because he was individually on the same level as Lidstrom or Bourque.

 

[The Macho King]

I think Niedermeyer is rated pretty accurately here.

General consensus in this thread seems to place him somewhere between Doughty and Karlsson, which sounds about right.


He's HHOF because of all the cups he won. Not because he was individually on the same level as Lidstrom or Bourque.

I mean - his resume is HHOF. Something like 6 top 10 Norris finishes + 1 win and a Conn Smythe, plus 4 All-Stars (interestingly - he got a 2nd team all-star the same year he finished 5th in Norris voting - kind of curious as to how that happened). That's a solid resume.

But it's just that - solid. It clears the "Is this person better than Doug Wilson" test. I don't think it does much more than that.

 

[MXD]

I feel like he is underrated around these parts. His point totals were understandably low in defensive NJ. He was tremendous on both sides of the rink. Plus intangibles.

The best modern day comparison would be a far more consistent Doughty with Karlsson's skating.

That's about what he was. For three seasons.

 

[Staniowski]

He was damn good and among the best defensemen in the League at his peak, but his peak wasn't that long.

He had longevity as a good to great defenseman, but unlike a guy like Lidstrom or Ray Bourque, he wasn't truly a world class defenseman that long. However, he was very highly regarded and perhaps overrated before he truly broke out. I think he had a similar career to a guy like Vinny Lecavalier. He always had a lot of pure talent and potential and people projected he would be great before he actually became great.

To be honest, I think for a lot of his earlier career he may have been at about the level of last year's Morgan Rielly (but with better defense and worse offense). I didn't follow him too closely toward the end of his career, but I'm guessing he may have been a bit better then than he was in the 90s and early 00s. He was excellent at his absolute best.

This is really not accurate.

However good you think Niedermayer was '04 to '07, he was just about of the same quality from '00 to '03, and prior to this too. He just wasn't playing on the PP for the 4 seasons starting in '99-'00. His even-strength play was roughly the same. If he was playing on NJ's power play, or if he were playing for any other team in the NHL, his point totals in the earlier period would have been just as high, or higher, than in the later period.

 

[Staniowski]

The 1999-2001 Devils who went to back to back finals were the best offensive team in the league. And Niedermayer was handily outscored on those teams by Rafalski, especially in the playoffs.

So while the Devils may have held his offensive totals back somewhat, it's not like they held everyone back, at least not all the time.

Niedermayer was a better scorer at even-strength than Rafalski in both of the seasons you mentioned. The difference is that Niedermayer wasn't playing much on the PP. Rafalski was very good on the PP, so there is not necessarily anything wrong with the Devils' decision to do this.

But if Niedermayer were on any other NHL team he would've outscored Rafalski.

Over the entirety of the DPE ('97-'98 to '03-'04), Niedermayer was the second highest scoring defenseman in the NHL at even-strength, one point less than Lidstrom (and Niedermayer played many fewer games than Lidstrom).

 

[Staniowski]

would've been very interesting to see how niedermayer's offensive output would have turned out had he played for another team

57 was the most pts he scored with the devils in a season. then he goes to the ducks and puts up back to back 60+ pt seasons

Those 57 points came when he scored a lot of PP points.

When he went to Anaheim, overall NHL scoring increased, plus he was getting the highest PP points of his career.

His even-strength scoring was about the same through all of these years.

Generally, when he scored a lot of PP points, he received lots of Norris Trophy votes. When he didn't, he didn't.

 

[wetcoast]

ranking modern Dmen :

Bourque
Lidstrom
Coffey
Cheli
MacInnis
Pronger
Karlsson(?)
Leetch
Stevens
Nieds
Chara
Keith
Doughty
Blake

something like that.

Pretty decent list although Coffey is too high for me.

I also think Chara looks a bit underrated on this list and both he and Nieds have arguments being as high as 5-7th really.

 

[The Macho King]

I don't see a non-nostalgic argument for Niedermayer over Keith. Keith has 2 Norris, 3 Cups, 7 top 10 Norris finishes, 3 All-Stars, a Smythe and at least one more Smythe-worthy run. I get that he's still playing which makes him de facto worse than any retired player, but Keith has the better resume.

 

[quoipourquoi]

I don't see a non-nostalgic argument for Niedermayer over Keith. Keith has 2 Norris, 3 Cups, 7 top 10 Norris finishes, 3 All-Stars, a Smythe and at least one more Smythe-worthy run. I get that he's still playing which makes him de facto worse than any retired player, but Keith has the better resume.

I’m not sure that bulletpoint list necessarily distinguishes itself from Niedermayer’s.

Niedermayer was a 4x All-Star to Keith’s 3x, including a stretch of three-straight 1st Team selections. Keith picked up an extra Norris (over Green and Doughty in 2010 and Chara and Weber in 2014) whereas Niedermayer fell short to Lidstrom twice (2006 and 2007) while beating out Chara and Pronger in 2004.

Niedermayer finished 7th (23/129 ballots; 17.8% of ballots) and 8th (19/143; 13.3%) in Hart voting in 2006 and 2007 while Keith finished 15th (3/121; 2.5%) and 15th (9/137; 6.6%) in 2010 and 2014, so it can be argued that Niedermayer had better seasons while not winning the Norris than Keith did in victory. Keith never received another Hart vote, whereas Niedermayer finished 9th (20/105; 19.0%) in 2004.

Niedermayer obviously won more Stanley Cups (so it’s kinda weird to cite the Blackhawks’ three), also has a Conn Smythe, and even led the playoffs in scoring during another championship in 2003.

Keith didn’t exactly have standout ESGA numbers in his Norris wins (81 and 71 in 2010 and 2014 respectively), whereas Niedermayer hit 60 in 2006 and 2007 and tended to hover around 50-60 pre-lockout. Even in his final season in 2010 on a non-playoff team, Niedermayer’s 77 ESGA was comparable to Norris-winning Keith’s 81, and that was the worst season Niedermayer had by the measure.

Added to that, Keith may be a player we can confidently say was not as great of a powerplay performer as Niedermayer, given his production is roughly half that of Niedermayer’s.

 

[The Macho King]

I’m not sure that bulletpoint list necessarily distinguishes itself from Niedermayer’s.

Niedermayer was a 4x All-Star to Keith’s 3x, including a stretch of three-straight 1st Team selections. Keith picked up an extra Norris (over Green and Doughty in 2010 and Chara and Weber in 2014) whereas Niedermayer fell short to Lidstrom twice (2006 and 2007) while beating out Chara and Pronger in 2004.

Niedermayer finished 7th (23/129 ballots; 17.8% of ballots) and 8th (19/143; 13.3%) in Hart voting in 2006 and 2007 while Keith finished 15th (3/121; 2.5%) and 15th (9/137; 6.6%) in 2010 and 2014, so it can be argued that Niedermayer had better seasons while not winning the Norris than Keith did in victory. Keith never received another Hart vote, whereas Niedermayer finished 9th (20/105; 19.0%) in 2004.

Niedermayer obviously won more Stanley Cups (so it’s kinda weird to cite the Blackhawks’ three), also has a Conn Smythe, and even led the playoffs in scoring during another championship in 2003.

Keith didn’t exactly have standout ESGA numbers in his Norris wins (81 and 71 in 2010 and 2014 respectively), whereas Niedermayer hit 60 in 2006 and 2007 and tended to hover around 50-60 pre-lockout. Even in his final season in 2010 on a non-playoff team, Niedermayer’s 77 ESGA was comparable to Norris-winning Keith’s 81, and that was the worst season Niedermayer had by the measure.

Added to that, Keith may be a player we can confidently say was not as great of a powerplay performer as Niedermayer, given his production is roughly half that of Niedermayer’s.

A few things scatter shot because I should be working.

First - ESGA numbers for Keith aren't exactly telling me a lot because his goaltending during those years isn't what we would call good. Niedermayer meanwhile had Brodeur and a non-awful Giguere in 2006-2008 (top ten in Vezina each season).

Hart voting in 2006 was also weird - in that it was very top heavy and then you have guys like Brindamor finishing 10th with 70 points. Generally I don't find low Hart (or Norris, frankly) votes important in a qualitative set beyond identifying whether someone was a generally elite player in their prime (as in - finishing 8th in Hart voting doesn't mean much more than finishing 15th to me). Whether that's unfair? Eh - Niedermayer certainly had a reputation by that time with the triple gold nonsense so if you're going to throw a fifth place vote at a player you might throw it that way (especially on a Ducks team that didn't have a standout forward and Pronger missed almost 20 games).

And frankly - three straight times first team all-star *sounds* good, but this was a period of flux in the quality of defenders. Old guard were out (Bourque, Chelios as an elite defender, MacInnis, etc.), and the new guard hadn't taken over (Chara, Keith, etc.). There were a bare handful of guys whose peak straddled the lockout - Lidstrom, Pronger, and Niedermayer (and I guess to an extent Zubov). The ~2002 - 2008 period was probably the weakest era for defenders since expansion. Niedermayer finishing second to Lidstrom can be pointed at as a mark in his favor, or it could be a mark against him because third was Zubov and fourth was a still giraffe-like Chara and fifth was Wade Redden.

Lidstrom, Chara, Thornton, and Jagr all benefit from this nostalgia of being stars in the DPE and post-lockout (to an extent others do too, but this is not a well-thought out post).

Niedermayer is absolutely an HHOF defenseman. He was never the best defender in the league (by consensus, not Norris votes). Hell - he was never even second. For a brief period he was third, and admittedly part of that is being behind an all-time great in Lidstrom. But what everyone seems to ignore is after him there was a dearth of talent. As much as everyone likes to poo poo whoever is playing now - the quality of Dmen in the league now is far better than it was immediately post lockout.

 

[Wrath]

The main distinction for me between Keith and Niedermayer was that Keith was the obvious #1 defenseman on the Blackhawks for all of their 3 cups. Seabrook was a great 2nd defenseman but I don't think there was any doubt that there was a noticeable gap between the two.

I think Niedermayer was very possibly better for longer, but had some of his brilliance masked by the NJD system and Scott Stevens, but if Niedermayer were the #1D on a NHL team from 1993-2004 what are the odds that he wins even 1 cup, much less 3?

Honestly I think this is less an issue of how Niedermayer is ranked (at least on HoH) and probably moreso that Keith hasn't retired so he doesn't get the rose-tinted glasses yet.

 

[Sentinel]

Yeah this is the type of overrating that goes on. "Defensive New Jersey" was a pretty high scoring team over the DPE relative to the league. He played in a system with hyper-responsible forwards (honestly both in NJ and in Anaheim), and rarely had to be *the* guy for a team. Pumping up Niedermayer always strikes me as a roundabout way to pump up Pronger/Lidstrom versus the previous generation of D who had much higher quality of competition for Norrises/AS selections.

Niedermayer is a run of the mill "top 5 Dman" in an era-player. Good enough to peak and snag a Norris. Consistent enough to be a HHOF lock. But not on the level of truly rarefied air great.

Edit: Also - let's face it. He got the Conn Smythe because Pronger got suspended.

NJ did not become offensive until Robinson (and Ftorek). Before they were the prototype trap team.

I am fine with calling Nieds "a top five D" of his era. The thing is: the other "four" would be the "top 10 D of all time": Lidstrom, Chelios, Bourque, peak Leetch and Pronger.

The most common excuse for Canada in 06 was that "Neidermeyer wasn't there." That has to count for something.

And he didn't win Conn Smythe because Pronger was suspended. He won the Smythe because his team won both games when Pronger was suspended.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Another thing.............who was Leetch competing against for his Norrises? He wins two of them, but he's got Chelios, Bourque, Coffey, MacInnis and Stevens fighting as well. No disrespect to Lidstrom, but that was basically Niedermayer's only competition. There is a difference there. And Leetch still beats him in Norris voting.

i don't think that's especially fair. or at least, i don't think leetch's victory over bourque in '92 or in '97 against a shallow field really say what you're trying to say here.

'92 leetch to me has always been a farce. if we accept that '91 macinnis and '94 stevens deserved to finish behind peak bourque by the slim margins they did, then there is no way '92 leetch should have won, especially not be the landslide he won by.

as for '97, the norris finalists were konstantinov and ozolinsh. 4th was chelios having just fallen off a huge offensive cliff, 5th was scott stevens well into the 20-odd point phase of his career, 6th was lidstrom when nobody cared about him, 7th was darryl sydor, 8th was ray bourque missing 20 games.

i'm not arguing that leetch wasn't better than niedermayer, because he was. but for several predictable reasons, he got awards consideration bumps that his peers, and niedermayer, didn't.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

his career rankings in points for a defenceman—

1993: 38th in ESP, 41st in PPP, 37th overall
1994: 14th in ESP, 47th in PPP, 24th overall
1995: 44th in ESP, 31st in PPP, 38th overall
1996: 62nd in ESP, 31st in PPP, 35h overall
1997: 45th in ESP, 17th in PPP, 25th overall
1998: 2nd in ESP, 6th in PPP, 2nd overall
1999: 4th in ESP, 14th in PPP, 12th overall
2000: 7th in ESP, 54th in PPP, 21st overal
2001: 12th in ESP, 51st in PPP, 25th overall (in 57 games, on pace for 2nd in ESP, 11th in total points)
2002: 9th in ESP, 49th in PPP, 29th overall
2003: 4th in ESP, 45th in PPP, 20th overall
2004: 3rd in ESP, 9th in PPP, 2nd overall
2006: 9th in ESP, 7th in PPP, 6th overall
2007: 2nd in ESP, 6th in PPP, 1st overall
2008: 145th in ESP, 32nd in PPP, 58th overall (in 48 games, on pace for 12th in PPP, 14th in total points)
2009: 22nd in ESP, 4th in PPP, 3rd overall
2010: 43rd in ESP, 5th in PPP, 11th overall


i think what we glean here is that in his prime, he was always a very good ES point producing defenceman. other than the year he missed the first two months in a contract dispute, he was always in the top ten in ES points between 1998 and 2007. that's a decade-long offensive prime. but what fluctuates (wildly) is his PP production. basically, the years he was top ten in PP scoring in his prime, he was a post-season all-star.

and then, like a lot of older guys, he started to rely on PP scoring after he came back from his mini-retirement.

my question, because honestly i don't remember, is what do we know about his '98 season? what accounts for that offensive spike? and was he really a deserving top 5 norris guy that year, or was it just based on looking at scoring stats?

because i could see it clear as day that the niedermayer i watched in the early 2000s was not the same player that flipped a switch in the 2003 playoffs and was a top three defenceman in the league from then until he retired the first time.

 

[Big Phil]

What about Pronger, Chara, MacInnis, and Blake?

Niedermayer and MacInnis may have overlapped their careers for a decade, but neither were Norris contenders at the same time. MacInnis was in 2003, his last full year. He finished 2nd that year. Niedermayer was not on the radar, well, he finished 13th. But it wasn't as if he was finishing 3rd or 4th and just had a tough field in front of him year after year. Kaberle and Foote finished higher than him in 2003. Blake had his best years when Niedermayer wasn't getting the votes yet. Pronger and perhaps Chara are the only two other than Lidstrom that you could possibly name. Pronger was injured a lot, which hurt some of his chances. Chara was starting to come around by 2004, right around the time of Niedermayer. But either way, even with these guys it still isn't as deep as a field Leetch dealt with in the late 1980s to mid 1990s.

i don't think that's especially fair. or at least, i don't think leetch's victory over bourque in '92 or in '97 against a shallow field really say what you're trying to say here.

'92 leetch to me has always been a farce. if we accept that '91 macinnis and '94 stevens deserved to finish behind peak bourque by the slim margins they did, then there is no way '92 leetch should have won, especially not be the landslide he won by.

as for '97, the norris finalists were konstantinov and ozolinsh. 4th was chelios having just fallen off a huge offensive cliff, 5th was scott stevens well into the 20-odd point phase of his career, 6th was lidstrom when nobody cared about him, 7th was darryl sydor, 8th was ray bourque missing 20 games.

i'm not arguing that leetch wasn't better than niedermayer, because he was. but for several predictable reasons, he got awards consideration bumps that his peers, and niedermayer, didn't.

I don't see a season Niedermayer has that tops Leetch in 1992 or 1997 to be honest. Or 1996. Maybe not even 1991 or 1994. The bottom line is Leetch has several years that are better than Niedermayer at his best. To compare them:

Norris voting:
Leetch - 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11
Niedermayer - 1, 2, 2, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13

That's a noticeable difference right there. Leetch also has the stiffer competition on a yearly basis. I don't know how someone puts Niedermayer ahead of him unless they are romanticizing that he was the reason for all of those Cups. It is nice what Nieds did by winning everywhere he went, but that was Scott Stevens' team, not his. Heck, Brian Rafalski had at least as big of an impact on the Cup wins he was on as Nieds did.

As far as falling off a cliff, look at what happened to the 1993 Rangers when Leetch missed most of the season. That was no accident. Leetch was dominant at times. He could carry a lot of the load on a team.

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

Niedermayer and MacInnis may have overlapped their careers for a decade, but neither were Norris contenders at the same time. MacInnis was in 2003, his last full year. He finished 2nd that year. Niedermayer was not on the radar, well, he finished 13th. But it wasn't as if he was finishing 3rd or 4th and just had a tough field in front of him year after year. Kaberle and Foote finished higher than him in 2003. Blake had his best years when Niedermayer wasn't getting the votes yet. Pronger and perhaps Chara are the only two other than Lidstrom that you could possibly name. Pronger was injured a lot, which hurt some of his chances. Chara was starting to come around by 2004, right around the time of Niedermayer. But either way, even with these guys it still isn't as deep as a field Leetch dealt with in the late 1980s to mid 1990s.



I don't see a season Niedermayer has that tops Leetch in 1992 or 1997 to be honest. Or 1996. Maybe not even 1991 or 1994. The bottom line is Leetch has several years that are better than Niedermayer at his best. To compare them:

Norris voting:
Leetch - 1, 1, 3, 4, 5, 5, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11, 11
Niedermayer - 1, 2, 2, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13

That's a noticeable difference right there. Leetch also has the stiffer competition on a yearly basis. I don't know how someone puts Niedermayer ahead of him unless they are romanticizing that he was the reason for all of those Cups. It is nice what Nieds did by winning everywhere he went, but that was Scott Stevens' team, not his. Heck, Brian Rafalski had at least as big of an impact on the Cup wins he was on as Nieds did.

As far as falling off a cliff, look at what happened to the 1993 Rangers when Leetch missed most of the season. That was no accident. Leetch was dominant at times. He could carry a lot of the load on a team.

i totally agree with you, re: leetch > niedermayer. i just don't think norris voting is the way to prove it because leetch was always overvalued in that respect.

i will say, however, that i don't have 2003 niedermayer nearly as far behind '94 leetch as most people do. the dump in > brodeur to niedermayer > niedermayer skates it from hash mark to faceoff dot > short pass up the ice while the other team is still practically forechecking was unstoppable and seemed to happen 30 times a game. it didn't get him 35 points like leetch but i've rarely ever seen a performance as dialed in, efficient, and clockworky as that. and the discipline to stay within the system and not force the long coffey pass or not to try this



even though you probably could, knowing that if you keep grinding away the right way you'll outscore the other team in the end.

 

[Big Phil]

i totally agree with you, re: leetch > niedermayer. i just don't think norris voting is the way to prove it because leetch was always overvalued in that respect.

i will say, however, that i don't have 2003 niedermayer nearly as far behind '94 leetch as most people do. the dump in > brodeur to niedermayer > niedermayer skates it from hash mark to faceoff dot > short pass up the ice while the other team is still practically forechecking was unstoppable and seemed to happen 30 times a game. it didn't get him 35 points like leetch but i've rarely ever seen a performance as dialed in, efficient, and clockworky as that. and the discipline to stay within the system and not force the long coffey pass or not to try this



even though you probably could, knowing that if you keep grinding away the right way you'll outscore the other team in the end.

See, that goal right there, plus the one against Sweden in the 1996 World Cup, that was the Niedermayer we could have had if they let him or if he let himself. Look at that skating.

 

[quoipourquoi]

A few things scatter shot because I should be working.

First - ESGA numbers for Keith aren't exactly telling me a lot because his goaltending during those years isn't what we would call good. Niedermayer meanwhile had Brodeur and a non-awful Giguere in 2006-2008 (top ten in Vezina each season).

True, but Chicago in 2010 ranked 5th in GA while the 2006 and 2007 Ducks ranked 7th in GA, so it does seem like a healthy portion of the Blackhawks’ low GA totals were specifically while Keith was on the ice at even-strength.

Hart voting in 2006 was also weird - in that it was very top heavy and then you have guys like Brindamor finishing 10th with 70 points. Generally I don't find low Hart (or Norris, frankly) votes important in a qualitative set beyond identifying whether someone was a generally elite player in their prime (as in - finishing 8th in Hart voting doesn't mean much more than finishing 15th to me). Whether that's unfair? Eh - Niedermayer certainly had a reputation by that time with the triple gold nonsense so if you're going to throw a fifth place vote at a player you might throw it that way (especially on a Ducks team that didn't have a standout forward and Pronger missed almost 20 games).

I do think there is a difference in taking a spot on 13.3%, 17.8%, and 19.0% of ballots in consecutive seasons and just 2.5% and 6.6% of ballots four years apart.

And frankly - three straight times first team all-star *sounds* good, but this was a period of flux in the quality of defenders.

Which may be why looking at his placement among all positions in Hart voting is indicative of his standing in 2004-2007 relative to Keith’s in 2010 and 2014 regardless of the quality of defensemen specifically.

Niedermayer finishing second to Lidstrom can be pointed at as a mark in his favor, or it could be a mark against him because third was Zubov and fourth was a still giraffe-like Chara and fifth was Wade Redden.

I’m not sure why that would be a “mark against him” any more than Mike Green finishing 2nd for the Norris in 2010 would be a mark against Keith. 86 of 129 Norris votes had Niedermayer 1st or 2nd in 2006, so he wasn’t just finishing marginally ahead of the field; a healthy majority saw him and Lidstrom clear above the field.

Assuming for Chara, in the four seasons Niedermayer was a 1st/2nd Team All-Star, the Norris nominees were consistently all HOFers. It’s not the worst competition.

Niedermayer is absolutely an HHOF defenseman. He was never the best defender in the league (by consensus, not Norris votes). Hell - he was never even second. For a brief period he was third, and admittedly part of that is being behind an all-time great in Lidstrom.

Whereas I would suggest that three-consecutive 1st Team selections (each of them seeing him collect a majority vote) is the basis for a strong argument that he was viewed by many as the second-best defenseman. Especially when it’s bookended by Stanley Cups where he is the leading playoff scorer and the MVP.

Keith, on the other hand, has the playoff success, but with gaps of 2-3 seasons between each of his All-Star selections, he seems to not have such support - even without the obstacle of Lidstrom having a concurrent peak.