Lidstrom Vs. Potvin

[markrander87]

Who out of these powerhouse Defenseman have more career value?

EDIT: And yes I am aware It is Lidstrom, simple typo that is all folks. Carry on

Click to read more...

 

[unknown33]

That's even worse than 'Lindstrom'

 

[markrander87]

That's even worse than 'Lindstrom'

See above cornhole.

 

[mrhockey193195]

My personal preference is Potvin. I'm not trying to diminish Lidstrom's dominance of this past decade and all his accomplishments, but the fact remains that he won his Norris Trophies in a relatively weak era for defensemen (his best competition has been Pronger, Chara, Boyle, Gonchar, Zubov, etc.). Most of the dominant defenders of the 90s had retired or were past their prime by the time that Lidstrom started dominating the league.

Potvin, on the other hand, was competing against Park, Robinson, Savard, Lapointe, Salming, etc. Therefore, I don't like to just use the comparison of Lidstrom's six Norris Trophies to Potvin's three, or Lidstroms eight first-all-star teams versus Potvin's five. Awards don't tell the whole story.

Personally, I have Potvin as the 5th greatest defenseman of all time (behind the obvious top 4), and have Lidstrom, Robinson, and Kelly (in some order) in the 6th, 7th, and 8th spots.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

My personal preference is Potvin. I'm not trying to diminish Lidstrom's dominance of this past decade and all his accomplishments, but the fact remains that he won his Norris Trophies in a relatively weak era for defensemen (his best competition has been Pronger, Chara, Boyle, Gonchar, Zubov, etc.). Most of the dominant defenders of the 90s had retired or were past their prime by the time that Lidstrom started dominating the league.

Potvin, on the other hand, was competing against Park, Robinson, Savard, Lapointe, Salming, etc. Therefore, I don't like to just use the comparison of Lidstrom's six Norris Trophies to Potvin's three, or Lidstroms eight first-all-star teams versus Potvin's five. Awards don't tell the whole story.

Personally, I have Potvin as the 5th greatest defenseman of all time (behind the obvious top 4), and have Lidstrom, Robinson, and Kelly (in some order) in the 6th, 7th, and 8th spots.

But don't just look at defensemen then. Lidstrom is widely considered the best overall player of the past decade. Even by 2007 or 2008, many people would have considered him the best player of the decade that had just past if you took both regular season and playoffs into account. Who was he competing against for that titles? Brodeur, Jagr, Sakic, Forsberg among others. Looks a hell of a lot better than just listing the defensemen.

 

[Reds4Life]

The weak competition argument is just pure BS. They played in different eras, and they do not compete only against defensemen, but against all the players. Fact is, Lidstrom was not just the best defenseman of the decade, he was the best player.

 

[markrander87]

But don't just look at defensemen then. Lidstrom is widely considered the best overall player of the past decade. Even by 2007 or 2008, many people would have considered him the best player of the decade that had just past if you took both regular season and playoffs into account. Who was he competing against for that titles? Brodeur, Jagr, Sakic, Forsberg among others. Looks a hell of a lot better than just listing the defensemen.

So your answer is Lidstrom?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

So your answer is Lidstrom?

I lean towards Potvin for peak, mainly because the majority of people who actually saw him play say he dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom. Slight caveat though, in that it was easier to "look" dominant in that era when defensemen were much more involved in the rush than they have been since the mid 90s.

But I definitely take Lidstrom for career value by this point. In my opinion (which might be the minority still), he's a lot closer to Bourque than he is to Potvin and Kelly by now.

 

[pluppe]

if you value longevity at all I think it´s getting harder and harder to pick Potvin.

 

[markrander87]

I lean towards Potvin for peak, mainly because the majority of people who actually saw him play say he dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom. Slight caveat though, in that it was easier to "look" dominant in that era when defensemen were much more involved in the rush than they have been since the mid 90s.

But I definitely take Lidstrom for career value by this point. In my opinion (which might be the minority still), he's a lot closer to Bourque than he is to Potvin and Kelly by now.

Very Very interesting, the more I look into it the tighter it gets for me. So say in an ATD context who would you select first?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Very Very interesting, the more I look into it the tighter it gets for me. So say in an ATD context who would you select first?

You know, the guys at leafscentral do read this board, right?

I don't think Lidstrom has ever been picked before Potvin in a hfboards ATD, but personally, I would probably pick him first then enjoy ranting against anti-modern bias among hockey historians.

 

[JackSlater]

I believe that Potvin at his best is better than Lidstrom at his best, but in terms of career value... I don't see how anyone could pick Potvin. Even if you think that Potvin's best seasons are better than Lidstrom's best seasons, Lidstrom has had several more elite seasons that Potvin has. He's also been far healthier. In terms of career value Lidstrom is much closer to Bourque than he is to Potvin, in my opinion at least.

 

[BraveCanadian]

I lean towards Potvin for peak, mainly because the majority of people who actually saw him play say he dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom. Slight caveat though, in that it was easier to "look" dominant in that era when defensemen were much more involved in the rush than they have been since the mid 90s.

But I definitely take Lidstrom for career value by this point. In my opinion (which might be the minority still), he's a lot closer to Bourque than he is to Potvin and Kelly by now.

I agree with you. Potvin probably did peak higher and added a physical game as well in comparison to Lidstrom.

Lidstrom has been so good for so long though the pickings for a case against him in career value are getting damn slim.

As an aside.. now that the trap has fallen out of favour a bit in the league do you guys think we'll see a return of rushing defensemen ala Mike Green?

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

I agree with you. Potvin probably did peak higher and added a physical game as well in comparison to Lidstrom.

Lidstrom has been so good for so long though the pickings for a case against him in career value are getting damn slim.

As an aside.. now that the trap has fallen out of favour a bit in the league do you guys think we'll see a return of rushing defensemen ala Mike Green?

You're going to need to see teams, or at least a team, have significant playoff success with a rushing defenseman for the league to go back that way, IMO. So far, Mike Green himself hasn't exactly provided the best model for success in the playoffs.

 

[seventieslord]

I clung staunchly to Potvin as the #5 best defenseman of all-time, probably much longer than I should have. I think Lidstrom is narrowly but clearly ahead by this point. What he's been able to do, even at ages 38-40, is just incredible.

Gee, Mark, why do you ask?

 

[redbull]

I clung staunchly to Potvin as the #5 best defenseman of all-time, probably much longer than I should have. I think Lidstrom is narrowly but clearly ahead by this point. What he's been able to do, even at ages 38-40, is just incredible.

Gee, Mark, why do you ask?

Its potvin.

The beauty of lidtrom's game is that he's superbly efficient and mistake free and you don't notice him much.

The beauty of potvin's game is that he stood out on the ice at all times, in all zones.

Potvin 'broke down' faster because he player and competed harder than nik. Indisputable. Potvin played as well or better than nik offensively and defensively but added a dimension that nik did not. Mean, dirty, tough, physical and he was a much better leader than lidtrom.

Longevity matters, for sure, but not as much as sheer ability and output at their best.

Mike gartner is not better than nike bossy.

 

[pluppe]

Its potvin.

The beauty of lidtrom's game is that he's superbly efficient and mistake free and you don't notice him much.

The beauty of potvin's game is that he stood out on the ice at all times, in all zones.

Potvin 'broke down' faster because he player and competed harder than nik. Indisputable. Potvin played as well or better than nik offensively and defensively but added a dimension that nik did not. Mean, dirty, tough, physical and he was a much better leader than lidtrom.

Longevity matters, for sure, but not as much as sheer ability and output at their best.

Mike gartner is not better than nike bossy.

that is a ridiculous comparison.

tell me for what decade Mike Gartner was considered the greatest hockey player by anyone not related to him.

 

[seventieslord]

yes, redbull, I realize what you're saying but Gartner to Bossy is a terrible comparison. If Potvin has a peak edge, it's very, very little. Lidstrom's longevity edge over just about every defenseman, ever, has become too large to ignore, especially when you consider he certainly doesn't lack a peak, with 6 Norrises and three runner-ups.

 

[Reds4Life]

Its potvin.

The beauty of lidtrom's game is that he's superbly efficient and mistake free and you don't notice him much.

The beauty of potvin's game is that he stood out on the ice at all times, in all zones.

Potvin 'broke down' faster because he player and competed harder than nik. Indisputable. Potvin played as well or better than nik offensively and defensively but added a dimension that nik did not. Mean, dirty, tough, physical and he was a much better leader than lidtrom.

Longevity matters, for sure, but not as much as sheer ability and output at their best.

Mike gartner is not better than nike bossy.

Did you spill something on your keyboard? I mean WTF.
Anyways, dirty, mean, physical = more PIMs, so it is not all nice and dandy, you are not gonna help your team from penalty box.

Better leader? How come? How do you determine who is a better leader? Locker room speeches and hits are not everything. Potvin better defensively? No way. Offensively, yes, for sure. Still, peak is very close and overall career is easily Lidstrom.

 

[cupcrazyman]

Potvin.

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Peak: Debateable. Potvin was better offensively, Lidstrom defensively. I happen to weigh defense from defensemen higher.

Prime and Career: Definitely Lidstrom

 

[Dissonance]

Potvin's peak looks shorter than it actually was. He was consistently either the best defenseman or, at worst, top 3 in the league from 1975-84. The main reasons he didn't win more Norris awards were injuries (in '80, '82, '83, all years he was the best defenseman around when healthy) and weird voter preferences (he was certainly better than Carlyle in '81 and arguably better than Langway in '84, although Bourque probably deserved it here).

If not for about 80 games worth of injuries, Potvin would've easily had ten straight all-star nominations, compared with 12 for Lidstrom. And, to be honest, I'm surprised he didn't get an all-star berth in '85—he was better than Wilson or Langway that year. Plus of course Potvin was always in full force when it mattered, in the playoffs.

Not to take anything away from Lidstrom, who did (and continues to do) amazing things for a ridiculously long amount of time. I just think the longevity gap is smaller than it looks at first glance.

 

[Rhiessan71]

I lean towards Potvin for peak, mainly because the majority of people who actually saw him play say he dominated the game to a greater extent than Lidstrom. Slight caveat though, in that it was easier to "look" dominant in that era when defensemen were much more involved in the rush than they have been since the mid 90s.

But I definitely take Lidstrom for career value by this point. In my opinion (which might be the minority still), he's a lot closer to Bourque than he is to Potvin and Kelly by now.

Very good post imo.
To me, Potvin was the best Dman behind Orr in his era and Lidstrom was the best behind Bourque in his era.
Potvin's peak over about a 3-4 year period was higher than what Bourque or Lidstrom reached but both Bourque and Lidstrom's peaks were like 10-12 years long which is both ridiculous and rare.

My personal top 10 all-time Dmen are
#1 Orr
#2 Harvey
#3 Shore
#4 Bourque
#5 Lidstrom
#6 Potvin
#7 Robinson
#8 Chelios
#9 Coffey
#10 Park

(I don't have Kelly listed in my top 10 for Dmen simply because quite frankly, it's not really known just how much he actually did at that position.)

 

[RabbinsDuck]

Very good post imo.
To me, Potvin was the best Dman behind Orr in his era and Lidstrom was the best behind Bourque in his era.
Potvin's peak over about a 3-4 year period was higher than what Bourque or Lidstrom reached but both Bourque and Lidstrom's peaks were like 10-12 years long which is both ridiculous and rare.

My personal top 10 all-time Dmen are
#1 Orr
#2 Harvey
#3 Shore
#4 Bourque
#5 Lidstrom
#6 Potvin
#7 Robinson
#8 Chelios
#9 Coffey
#10 Park

(I don't have Kelly listed in my top 10 for Dmen simply because quite frankly, it's not really known just how much he actually did at that position.)

Kelly played 26 games as a forward in the 55-56 season, which was the only time he played for Detroit at that position other than to fill in for injuries for a couple games.

 

[Briere Up There*]

Lidstrom IMO, but this let's be honest, he's the best player of the past decade by default. Stars like Forsberg, Jagr and Sakic faded after the first half (for the most part), while Crosby and Ovechkin only played the latter half.