How to become more highly regarded than Eddie Shore?

[seventieslord]

Do you agree that Shore's peers (and Lidström's too) are rather weak compared to the competition Harvey and Bourque had to face?

Yes. However, he was also the best player in the NHL.

 

[TheMoreYouKnow]

I think there's a bunch of guys already more highly regarded than Shore simply because so much time has passed. For people today Orr is an old-timer, Shore is a fossil. You can of course easily dismiss that as the subjectivity and ignorance of people etc. but you talk about regard and that is by default a matter of public opinion. There is after all no truly objective way of comparing a guy who played in that era to guys who played in the 70s or guys who play today, the game has changed, the player pool has changed and most importantly they never competed against each other directly.

 

[jkrx]

Yes. However, he was also the best player in the NHL.

However Bourque, Lidstrom, Orr, Harvey and Potvin played against better players.

and doesnt change the fact that Shore dropped his PPG by 45% in the playoffs while these other players dint drop at all basically.

 

[Reds4Life]

Sure he can. It's called comparing one player's dominance of his peers to that of another player. You've been in the ATD a few times, I'm not sure why right now you're claiming that players across eras can't be compared...

They can be compared, but not objectively. Peer dominance is only one of many possible ways for player comparsion
Not to mention for example Shore and Lidstrom both played different game. It can be argued who is better all time player, in terms of dominance and accomplishments, but direct comparsion (better pass, shot, skating, vision etc.) is not possible.
What I mean is this, Shore does have more awards, but on the other hand Lidstrom won 4 Cups (and being one of the best or the best player on that winning team) in a 30 team league, played 82 games a season, 27 mins a night, against much faster and stronger players, he is in much better shape than Shore ever was and was the best player of the decade. From a certain point(s) of view, Lidstrom can be easily considered a better player. Though this also works vice versa.

 

[JackSlater]

Shore also didnt play in the Sakic, Yzerman, Gretzky, Messier, Forsberg, Hull, Bourque, Chelios, Leetch, Coffey, Lindros, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Ovechkin, Crosby era.

True, but he did play in the era of Morenz, Joliat, Conacher, Jackson, Boucher, Clancy, the Cooks, Schriner, Goodfellow and the Sieberts, many of whom are superior to many players you mentioned. Shore was usually considered the best among them as well. Many of the players you mentioned were beyond their best by the time Lidstrom became the best defenceman in the NHL, so I don't really see how they would have impacted his opportunities to be considered the game's best player.

 

[Hockeynomad]

Eddie Shore was an assshole and he won more Harts than Orr because Orr's knees were shot at 28.

 

[jkrx]

True, but he did play in the era of Morenz, Joliat, Conacher, Jackson, Boucher, Clancy, the Cooks, Schriner, Goodfellow and the Sieberts, many of whom are superior to many players you mentioned. Shore was usually considered the best among them as well. Many of the players you mentioned were beyond their best by the time Lidstrom became the best defenceman in the NHL, so I don't really see how they would have impacted his opportunities to be considered the game's best player.

Lidstrom was amongst the best in the NHL long before he was acknowledged with a Norris.

 

[jkrx]

Yes. However, he was also the best player in the NHL.

Maybe.. You should take into account that there were no norris trophy and if there were he might have got norris instead of hart and hart wouldve gone to another player. Im not disputing he were amongst the best though.

 

[lextune]

I cant help but laugh when I hear Eddie Shores name Madagascar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Huh?

 

[KingGallagherXI]

Maybe.. You should take into account that there were no norris trophy and if there were he might have got norris instead of hart and hart wouldve gone to another player. Im not disputing he were amongst the best though.

No, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Shore was the undisputed best player in the league. If Norris had existed he would have won the Norris at least 7 times (7 times top 3 in Hart voting) and the Hart 4 times.

 

[jkrx]

No, you obviously don't know what you're talking about. Shore was the undisputed best player in the league. If Norris had existed he would have won the Norris at least 7 times (7 times top 3 in Hart voting) and the Hart 4 times.

Obviously, I do.

 

[KingGallagherXI]

Obviously, I do.

Obviously not if you think Shore wouldn't have won the Harts if the Norris trophy had existed.

 

[jkrx]

Obviously not if you think Shore wouldn't have won the Harts if the Norris trophy had existed.

I said "might" with implies that there is a probability which there is. You however just predicted the past because you are biased.

 

[MXD]

Not to say that Lidstrom isn't one of the greatest defencemen of all time, but he did play in a weak era for his position. If he had faced stronger competition and won 3 Norris trophies instead of 6, while playing the exact same calibre of hockey, his reputation would surely not be as great as it currently is. Shore also faced weak competition from other defencemen for first all star team positions, but he was also widely considered the best player in the NHL for years, which is something that Lidstrom cannot claim.

Well, King Clancy and Earl Seibert are two guys that are arguably Top-15 of all-time on D...

Not to mention guys like Cook and Conacher to beat for the Hart - both in Yzerman and Sakic's vincity.

 

[MXD]

Shore also didnt play in the Sakic, Yzerman, Gretzky, Messier, Forsberg, Hull, Bourque, Chelios, Leetch, Coffey, Lindros, Hasek, Roy, Jagr, Ovechkin, Crosby era.

I fail to see what Brian Leetch is doing in this list.

 

[jkrx]

I fail to see what Brian Leetch is doing in this list.

He used to play in the NHL, defenseman. He won two norris during the 90s. Was rated above Lidstrom by most sports writers during this time.

 

[canucks4ever]

Well, King Clancy and Earl Seibert are two guys that are arguably Top-15 of all-time on D...

Not to mention guys like Cook and Conacher to beat for the Hart - both in Yzerman and Sakic's vincity.

I would say king clancy and earl siebert are underrated, they dominated thier era more than Larry Robinson dominated his. He just gets the benefit of the doubt because he's modern.

 

[MXD]

He used to play in the NHL, defenseman. He won two norris during the 90s. Was rated above Lidstrom by most sports writers during this time.

Well.. yes. And then?
Leetch is barely a Top-100 guy, if he's a Top-100 at all.

All the other guys you named have a case for Top-50 status.

 

[jkrx]

Well.. yes. And then?
Leetch is barely a Top-100 guy, if he's a Top-100 at all.

All the other guys you named have a case for Top-50 status.

My point were that Lidstrom has always been behind either because of people being the best of the best ie. Gretzky and Lemieux or because biased sports writers who favoured american or canadian players. Just look at Hockey News top 100 all-time players. It's embarrassing.

 

[JackSlater]

Well, King Clancy and Earl Seibert are two guys that are arguably Top-15 of all-time on D...

Not to mention guys like Cook and Conacher to beat for the Hart - both in Yzerman and Sakic's vincity.

I mentioned some of Shore's competition in post #30 and I agree that it is comparable to the competition Lidstrom faced. The defencemen that Shore had to face for 1st all star team spots were probably better than those that Lidstrom faced during the last decade.

 

[jkrx]

I mentioned some of Shore's competition in post #30 and I agree that it is comparable to the competition Lidstrom faced. The defencemen that Shore had to face for 1st all star team spots were probably better than those that Lidstrom faced during the last decade.

Yeah the likes of Zubov, Gonchar, Pronger, Niedermeyer, Blake are really miles and miles beyond Lidstrom and the defensemen Shore competed against

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Yeah the likes of Zubov, Gonchar, Pronger, Niedermeyer, Blake are really miles and miles beyond Lidstrom and the defensemen Shore competed against

What are Zubov and Gonchar doing on this list?

 

[JackSlater]

Yeah the likes of Zubov, Gonchar, Pronger, Niedermeyer, Blake are really miles and miles beyond Lidstrom and the defensemen Shore competed against

Exactly. Zubov was a barely ever a top 5 defenceman in his career. Gonchar had years where he was very good offensively but always below average defensively. Pronger had potential to be a truly great defenceman but was too inconsistent/injured to reach that potential. Niedermayer is not really as great as people make him out to be... three great years but nothing exceptional apart from them. Blake was hardly significant in the last decade other than the first three seasons, and even then he was past his best. These players weren't miles and miles behind, but they were weak compared to most other decades.

 

[Blades of Glory]

Yeah the likes of Zubov, Gonchar, Pronger, Niedermeyer, Blake are really miles and miles beyond Lidstrom and the defensemen Shore competed against

Competition entails that certain defensemen are actually competing for Norris votes. Sergei Gonchar did not compete for Norris votes. Ever. Sergei Zubov, outside of 2007, did not really factor in Norris races either, outside of getting 4th and 5th place votes, which is not factoring in the race.

I don't know much about the competition Shore faced in his prime. But the competition Lidstrom has won 6 Norris Trophies against is pretty mediocre compared to what most of the other top ten defensemen of all-time faced, and terrible compared to what the consensus top five or six defensemen of all-time, which is what Lidstrom is, went up against. I'm not saying it takes away from his legacy, because it doesn't. However, the fact is that Lidstrom didn't win a Norris Trophy until Ray Bourque and Chris Chelios were both 40 years old. From age 22-30, despite winning 2 Stanley Cups in that period, Lidstrom never won the Norris, and only came close in 1998 and 2000.

It's a similar situation to the competition Martin Brodeur has won all his Vezina Trophies against. Martin Brodeur didn't win a Vezina until Patrick Roy and Dominik Hasek were either retired or in their final season.

 

[Ogopogo*]

Eddie Shore however, is on many people's top 5 if not top 10 list in defenseman ranking all-time.

More like top 2.