What makes you so certain Leetch peaked higher? His GF/GA numbers are best in '92 and '94 but Lidstrom has several seasons with similar ratios. Or were those Rangers teams also just not as stacked as Lidstrom's Wings teams?
It's give and take when it comes to offense/defense and Leetch jumped up in the play far more so of course he scored a few more points if that's the reason for you thinking his peak was higher. It also meant he got caught up ice more and needed Beukeboom with him. The famous Richter penalty shot save on Bure, for instance, happened because Leetch went deep into the Canucks zone, then turned over the puck, and had to pull down Bure. That shows a lack of awareness to me because Bure is the last guy you hand a breakaway to like that. Maybe Leetch was the right guy for that Rangers team in that era but I would still take prime Lidstrom over "peak Leetch" on those Detroit teams because they ended up building their team and system around him and with the results no one can claim another defenseman would have done it better.
Either way, I don't see ranking Leetch higher as a justifiable position if we look at full careers and I'm not sure why we wouldn't look at full careers when comparing retired players where we have the option to review their whole careers.
Rangers were down 2-1 so of course Leetch was taking some chances. Bure was probably the most dangerous player in the game at that time, no matter who was on the ice. Leetch was phenominal that playoff both ends of the ice and Pat Quinn, Canucks coach at the time, stated that not even Bobby Orr or Denis Potvin were as good at breaking up a play or steering the puck the other way. That is a far cry from your assessment of Leetch's defensive play.
GF/GA is a team statistic that's pretty irrelevant to the conversation. You're assuming that if Lidstrom were on those Ranger teams his GF wouldn't be a high but his GA would be better, when it's just as if not more than likely that his GA would be around the same as Leetch's was but his GF would be far less. During that time period, Leetch's defensive play was fantastic and his offense was signifigantly better than Lidstrom's was.
Also you saying Lidstrom played in a more "systematic" type of role only further demonstrates that he was more replaceable than a player like Leetch. He did his job well, but if you're playing within a system that's a lot easier to do than scoring 102 points in a season or scoring 34 points in one playoff year while playing great defense. Those achievements are historic. Lidstrom playing well within a system for many years is great and all, but it's not historic.
The fact is that Lidstrom never scored 102 points or 34 points in a playoff year because he couldn't. Not because he was playing within a system and just "didn't want to" as you're trying to imply. Leetch's defense at his best matched Lidstrom's but the difference is Leetch was able to also able to maintain a high octane offense at the same time. Lidstrom, as great and consistent as he was, was never able to do both at the same time on the level of prime Leetch.
But yeah, I get it. You have to keep knocking Leetch's defense because it's the only way to make a case for Lidstrom matching Leetch's peak. But there's plenty of documentation from NHL coaches and Leetch's peers from that time period though which prove that not only was Leetch's defense far from bad, it was actually very, very good. And with Leetch's insane offensive levels at that time, and it being established he played good defense too? Forget it. There really is no case for prime Lidstrom matching prime Leetch. There's no case for anyone matching Leetch's peak, aside from maybe Orr.
if you're still not convinced, ask yourself this: What would be easier? Leetch to go the Wings and play within a defensive system? Or Lidstrom to go to the Rangers and score 102 points in a season/score 34 points in one playoff year? Which one is more likely to achieve their goal? The obvious answer is it is far more likely Leetch would adapt and play well in Bowman's defensive system than it would be for Lidstrom to go to the Rangers and set records. Heck, Leetch was already playing very good defense in a
non-defensive system. So I'm sure he'd transition just fine under Bowman.
Maybe Leetch wouldn't play as well as Lidstrom in that role, but he wouldn't
need to in order for those Wing teams to still win. Lidstrom, however, would
need to reach Leetch's skill level for a team such as the 94 Rangers or the 96 Team USA squad to win. And he would not be able to. This is the main crux of the argument for people who don't rank Lidstrom as high as you do, and it's a very legitimate argument.
Lidstrom did his job very well and I give him props for a fantastic career, but he was not as irreplaceable as prime Leetch, who was an exceptionally rare talent. I know you want to believe those Wing teams wouldn't have won without Lidstrom, and yes they'd need to find a good Defenseman to replace him. But it could be done. If those Wing teams could find a Defenseman who played at 75% Lidstrom levels, they'd still win cups.
But with Leetch? There was no replacing him. You couldn't. The teams he was on that won needed every ounce of his greatness to win. There was no "just find a good Defenseman to replace him and you're all set!" because that just wouldn't cut it.
Nobody in the league at that time could fill his skates, or do what he did. Nobody.
