Was Konstantinov really a better player than Lidstrom pre-injury?

[ESH]

Nicklas Lidstrom is my favourite player of all time and also (probably) the best defensive player I've ever seen play. I never got to see Konstantinov play so I just wanted some input into how good he actually was. From 1995-1997 Konstantinov was 2nd and 4th in Norris voting and 4th and 5th in All-Star voting, while Lidstrom was 6th in both Norris and AS voting both years. Obviously Lidstrom was providing much better offense at the time, so was Konstantinov's defense really that much better to be considered the better player back then? I know Konstantinov was known as a physical force, which I'm sure was a hot commodity around that time.

I'm particularly interested to know about the 1997 playoffs. Who do you think was better/more valuable during that run? I'm pretty sure I've heard that Bowman decided to use the Lidstrom-Murphy pair to match up against the Legion of Doom rather than Fetisov-Konstantinov.

Also, what about pre-1995? They both started in Detroit the same year. I see that Lidstrom picked up trace amounts of awards voting in a couple years, but nothing really noteworthy. Who was considered the better player their first few years?

Click to read more...

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Lidstrom was more valuable in the 1997 playoffs, but that was the first time he had surpassed Vlad.

 

[Big Phil]

Vlad was right in his prime when the accident happened. Lidstrom was on the cusp of us seeing what he would do. If you didn't know any better and froze that moment in time you'd likely have figured Vladdy is the better defenseman then. But Lidstrom was still young and it was understood he hadn't quite taken off yet, because no defenseman hits his peak at 25.

 

[overg]

I thought Lidstrom was a bit better than Vlad at the time of the accident, but both brought tremendous value to the team.

As part of the Russian 5, Vlad made up 1/5 of one of the most dominant units I've ever seen in the NHL. When Bowman put them together (and he wasn't actually using them much in '97), they simply toyed with opponents. Even apart from his fellow Russians, Konstantinov was an elite defenseman, who drove the opposition completely insane (Roenick was about ready to start a holy war against him). He was as dirty and chippy as they come, always willing to lay an elbow, stick, or late hit on opponents. He wasn't a big guy, but he played like he was 6'8, 300 pounds. He threw some monstrous checks (Dale Hawerchuk's last shift was being positively destroyed by a Vlad open ice hit), and was insane enough to take runs at guys like Lindros who were much, much bigger than him.

But the one thing Vlad was, which Lidstrom definitely was not, was reckless. He'd not infrequently get himself out of position to make a hit, or take a bad penalty, or blow a great scoring chance trying to shoot the puck a million miles an hour and missing the net by 15 feet. He was by far a net positive for the Wings, but every so often he'd actually hurt them. Lidstrom almost never did.

Lidstrom was also at least a couple steps up offensively, especially on the power play, where he was quite a bit better quarterback or trigger-man from the point.

Now, Lidstrom hadn't quite reached his peak defensive form (although it would take until the '97 finals for many to realize just how good he was), so they were about as close to a 1-A and 1-B tandem as you could get, and their different playstyles offered Bowman a massive gift of choosing the manner he wanted to shut down the opposition. But at least in my opinion (at the time, and now) Lidstrom was the slightly better of the two.

 

[Wings4Life]

Lidstrom was more valuable in the 1997 playoffs, but that was the first time he had surpassed Vlad.

As a Wings fan, this is spot on. Lidstrom hit his prime right around the start of the 1996-97 season. Vlad was better in the '95 and '96 playoffs. In the 1997 run things were very close, both guys at their peak, but the edge went to Nick for his offensive skills.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Not too many players can be tasked with replacing both Paul Coffey offensively and Vladimir Konstantinov defensively, but that’s basically what was asked of Lidstrom in the gap between 1997 and the Chelios trade. Wouldn’t say Lidstrom was reaching the defensive heights of Konstantinov at the end of his career - outside of 2007-08, Lidstrom was pretty consistently seeing ~50-75% more ES-GA than Konstantinov did in his final two seasons and he didn’t have the physicality that had been key in their matchups (hence Chelios) - but he had such a great offensive arsenal that even when he got really conservative about utilizing it, he was still getting numbers from excellent powerplay production.

 

[MXD]

Konstantinov was clearly the better player then, with Lidstrom catching up (and possibly catching him up by these playoffs).

 

[danincanada]

I don't remember Konstantinov actually being any better. I loved Vladdy but he got a little overrated due to his physical play and gaudy +/- numbers. The +/- numbers got inflated somewhat from playing with the Russian 5. Especially in '96 when those 5 Russians lead the team.

To me it's an example of how Lidstrom flew under the radar during those seasons. He may not have quite been in his prime yet but he was still very strong defensively and produced much more than Konstantinov.

 

[danincanada]

As a Wings fan, this is spot on. Lidstrom hit his prime right around the start of the 1996-97 season. Vlad was better in the '95 and '96 playoffs. In the 1997 run things were very close, both guys at their peak, but the edge went to Nick for his offensive skills.

I'm not sure how one can justify Vladdy being better in those playoffs. Then, or in hindsight. The offensive edge always went to Lidstrom.

'95:
Lidstrom 16 points in 18 games, +4
Konstantinov 2 points in 18 games, +6

'96:
Lidstrom 14 points in 19 games, +2
Konstantinov 9 points in 19 games, +4

 

[Michael Farkas]

I know Lidstrom was a little slower to catch on...but Konstantinov wasn't some shining beacon to the Lord...when you go back and watch some of those games...he's a reckless defenseman. He made a hit or he made a mistake. He surprised a lot of guys by jumping way up to the blueline like he did, but he wasn't very tidy about it...he constantly jumped into the play, but didn't have a lot of production to show for it because it was pretty adventurous...

I think the gap between him and Lidstrom would have grown considerably in the coming years...as both Konstantinov would have worn down from his belligerent, taxing style and that teams would have probably game planned better for his style as the years went on.

Started to show in the postseason in terms of reliability...led NHL in plus/minus in 1996, was a marginal plus player in the playoffs. 1997, led the entire team in plus/minus by a handsome margin only to be the lone minus d-man in the playoffs...

Production nearly halved in the playoffs vs. regular season. Buoyed largely by a 9-point playoff in 1996, but other than that just a point here and there...

Not the case for Lidstrom in the same time period...0.1 points per game difference...then as soon as he's not with Konstantinov he breaks loose for a playoff career high in goals, assists and points and leads the entire playoffs at +12 in 1998.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Started to show in the postseason in terms of reliability...led NHL in plus/minus in 1996, was a marginal plus player in the playoffs. 1997, led the entire team in plus/minus by a handsome margin only to be the lone minus d-man in the playoffs...

Production nearly halved in the playoffs vs. regular season. Buoyed largely by a 9-point playoff in 1996, but other than that just a point here and there...

Not the case for Lidstrom in the same time period...0.1 points per game difference...then as soon as he's not with Konstantinov he breaks loose for a playoff career high in goals, assists and points and leads the entire playoffs at +12 in 1998.

Don’t know that this is telling the whole story. Despite being a minus player in the 1997 playoffs, Konstantinov was on the ice for fewer ES goals than he was in the 1996 playoffs.

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	14	12	11	6
1995-96 (19 GP)	21	15	16	11
1996-97 (20 GP)	14	9	19	10

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Compare to Lidstrom:

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	33	15	14	11
1995-96 (19 GP)	27	15	21	13
1996-97 (20 GP)	32	21	19	9
1997-98 (22 GP)	43	28	26	16

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Lidstrom’s +12 in 1998 wasn’t from goal suppression (it’s the worst number of this sample from either player), but from the team scoring a lot at even-strength.

 

[Boxscore]

I can't remember a time that I would have called Konstantinov "better" than Lidstrom. Different animals altogether. In a few ways, Konstantinov could have been more valuable, but overall, I would have always taken Lidstrom.

 

[ESH]

Not too many players can be tasked with replacing both Paul Coffey offensively and Vladimir Konstantinov defensively, but that’s basically what was asked of Lidstrom in the gap between 1997 and the Chelios trade. Wouldn’t say Lidstrom was reaching the defensive heights of Konstantinov at the end of his career - outside of 2007-08, Lidstrom was pretty consistently seeing ~50-75% more ES-GA than Konstantinov did in his final two seasons and he didn’t have the physicality that had been key in their matchups (hence Chelios) - but he had such a great offensive arsenal that even when he got really conservative about utilizing it, he was still getting numbers from excellent powerplay production.

Interesting! Are you saying that you think peak Konstantinov was better defensively than peak Lidstrom?

 

[Michael Farkas]

Don’t know that this is telling the whole story. Despite being a minus player in the 1997 playoffs, Konstantinov was on the ice for fewer ES goals than he was in the 1996 playoffs.

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	14	12	11	6
1995-96 (19 GP)	21	15	16	11
1996-97 (20 GP)	14	9	19	10

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Compare to Lidstrom:

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	33	15	14	11
1995-96 (19 GP)	27	15	21	13
1996-97 (20 GP)	32	21	19	9
1997-98 (22 GP)	43	28	26	16

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Lidstrom’s +12 in 1998 wasn’t from goal suppression (it’s the worst number of this sample from either player), but from the team scoring a lot at even-strength.

I'm strong enough to ignore this...


EDIT: Though a better answer might be a matter of use and direction. Lidstrom no longer had to babysit for Konstantinov, he was free to explore a little. Konstantinov was probably told to dial it back a little in the playoffs (a la Stevens coming to NJ, for instance) so that he wasn't far flung out of position. VK wasn't a scrub or anything...but he almost played that old school Eddie Shore way: either you're getting hit or you're free to go. Seemed like both of them got the hit more often than not, but it wasn't the most reliable thing I've ever seen...

 

[vadim sharifijanov]

konstantinov was an elite version of yushkevich, with the best parts of kasparaitis and tanev. is that an insane thing to say? it feels insane to type.

 

[Pominville Knows]

Do you think it is likely that Konstantinov after age 30 could have continued getting a few AST2's? The guys that came to occupy some of those positions were Stevens, Desjardins(x2), Hatcher.
How about the weak 1998 Norris race? Pronger before breaking into his own(As in still having Konstantinov-like scoring numbers) finished a somewhat close third to Blake. Obviously Lidström sandwished himself in there and perhaps should have gotten it, but i digress(Besides possible vote splitting problems for Konstantinov).

 

[Michael Farkas]

It took a lot for me not to say that he was the much improved evolutionary step on Kasparaitis or Ulanov myself...but Yushkevich is a better answer...in fact, I'm not sure peak/later Yushkevich wasn't a better positional player and shot blocker...though not as dynamic...

 

[danincanada]

EDIT: Though a better answer might be a matter of use and direction. Lidstrom no longer had to babysit for Konstantinov, he was free to explore a little. Konstantinov was probably told to dial it back a little in the playoffs (a la Stevens coming to NJ, for instance) so that he wasn't far flung out of position. VK wasn't a scrub or anything...but he almost played that old school Eddie Shore way: either you're getting hit or you're free to go. Seemed like both of them got the hit more often than not, but it wasn't the most reliable thing I've ever seen...

I think you're underrating Konstantinov quite a lot here. I don't remember him being as undisciplined as you suggest. He had a real skill for open ice hits but he didn't do them all the time. It was more about him being in opponents faces all the time, similar to Chelios in his prime. Both he and Chelios were very strong positionally and at defending, which made them both so effective. Sure Konstantinov looked reckless compared to Lidstrom but so did the whole league. I don't think anyone had to babysit Vladdy either and he and Lidstrom were only paired together on the PK and during critical defensive situations like at the end of the game when protecting a lead.

Being a rich mans Yushkevich isn't a poor comparison though.

 

[danincanada]

Don’t know that this is telling the whole story. Despite being a minus player in the 1997 playoffs, Konstantinov was on the ice for fewer ES goals than he was in the 1996 playoffs.

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	14	12	11	6
1995-96 (19 GP)	21	15	16	11
1996-97 (20 GP)	14	9	19	10

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Compare to Lidstrom:

	GF	ES GF	GA	ES GA
1994-95 (18 GP)	33	15	14	11
1995-96 (19 GP)	27	15	21	13
1996-97 (20 GP)	32	21	19	9
1997-98 (22 GP)	43	28	26	16

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

Lidstrom’s +12 in 1998 wasn’t from goal suppression (it’s the worst number of this sample from either player), but from the team scoring a lot at even-strength.

What I've been interested in lately is looking at total GF/GA. It should point more to total value than only regular +/- stats, although this is a good example of where one has to question if Konstantinov is being treated unfairly because he didn't get much, if any, time on the top PP unit. He did see some PP time but he simply wasn't as effective as Lidstrom even though he used to be a forward. Konstantinov would actually jump into the play more, and in some ways showed more offensive ability and instincts such as his ability to deke goalies the few times he had breakaways.

On the other side, Lidstrom earned his PP time from Bowman because he was so effective so doesn't that mean the following numbers make him more valuable overall?

Konstantinov:
'95 playoffs he was a total +3
'96 playoffs he was a total +5
'97 playoffs he was a total -5

Lidstrom:
'95 playoffs he was a total +19
'96 playoffs he was a total +6
'97 playoffs he was a total +13
*'98 playoffs he was a total +17

 

[Johnny Engine]

It took a lot for me not to say that he was the much improved evolutionary step on Kasparaitis or Ulanov myself...but Yushkevich is a better answer...in fact, I'm not sure peak/later Yushkevich wasn't a better positional player and shot blocker...though not as dynamic...

It's definitely worth noting that most of Yushkevich's time as the Leafs de facto #1 guy came at an older age than Konstantinov ever got to play at. It's also interesting that Yushkevich started getting his **** together at the same age as Konstantinov's first all-star season (and second last year in the league), after some pretty rough years in the mid/late-90s.

 

[JackSlater]

I would definitely take Lidstrom by the 1995-96 season. I do think that Konstantinov had a defensive edge at the time (though neither was as good defensively at the time as they are often made out to be 20 years later) but Lidstrom was a much better offensive player. More versatile as well.

 

[Wings4Life]

I'm not sure how one can justify Vladdy being better in those playoffs. Then, or in hindsight. The offensive edge always went to Lidstrom.

'95:
Lidstrom 16 points in 18 games, +4
Konstantinov 2 points in 18 games, +6

'96:
Lidstrom 14 points in 19 games, +2
Konstantinov 9 points in 19 games, +4

Paul Coffey: 14 points in 17 games, 96 playoffs. Run out of town by Bowman that summer.

Konstantinov was more reliable, Nick was still a ironing some flaws out of his game in those runs.

 

[danincanada]

Paul Coffey: 14 points in 17 games, 96 playoffs. Run out of town by Bowman that summer.

Konstantinov was more reliable, Nick was still a ironing some flaws out of his game in those runs.

Lidstrom was never a risk taker though and even though he wasn't at his peak defensively he was still not far off from Konstantinov. Lidstrom didn't just suddenly learn to defend in the '97 playoffs and his offensive advantage over Vladdy was greater than any defensive advantage Konstantinov may have had.

Coffey couldn't stop himself from taking risks, and that's probably why Bowman decided having him around wasn't good for where he wanted the team to go, which was defense-first and suppression of scoring chances. Coffey's age certainty didn't help either. Getting an elite goal scoring power forward in return was an easy move to make in hindsight.

 

[brachyrynchos]

How much do you think experience factors in? Both Lidstrom and Konstantinov came into the league the same time, Lidstrom had 3 yrs with Vasteras in Sweden and Konstantinov had 7 playing against men with CSKA Moscow. I think in '91-92 Konstantinov was better defensively and physically but Lidstrom pretty much polished his game more over the years where I'd put him slightly ahead of Vlad prior to the injury. Both were defensively sound, it's just that one leaned towards playing the body more and taking a few more risks while the other brought more offense and was a bit more cerebral, at least that's how I saw it. Both really good, similar but different.

 

[tony d]

To me, Lidstrom took some to grow his game, having Konstantinov to learn from really helped him turn into one of the best defenseman ever.