What does Lidstrom have to do to be considered better than Bourque?

[CC Chiefs*]

Are we really debating unadjusted plus-minus totals on the History forum?

The Lidstrom detractors are really digging deep!

 

[danincanada]

The Lidstrom detractors are really digging deep!

It's really getting sad, especially when you can tell the detractors don't watch him play.

I've probably come across as trying to slam Bourque at times but I do realize he was an all-time great and he should be respected for his amazing career. Not only that but he was a class act and a clean player, which makes me respect him even more.

I just think that defensively Lidstrom was on another level. It has nothing to do with era or even role to me either. Bourque simply got beat a lot more often 1 on 1 and wasn't as good at being a shutdown player. Lidstrom has got a long and impressive list of victims in that regard.

 

[Bear of Bad News]

It's really getting sad, especially when you can tell the detractors don't watch him play.

Which "detractors" didn't see Lidstrom play, but saw Bourque play? And what makes them sadder than the Lidstrom supporters who cry racism (of which there were many at the start of the thread before I put a stop to it)?

And it's not like it's an insult to Lidstrom to say that Bourque was better.

 

[matnor]

How Subban is used has been answered by another poster.

Realistically................Lidstrom and other top defensemen do not play against the opposition's best every shift especially on the road where the home team has the last change.So lets temper the false praise that is not earned. Any coach worth his salary can juggle the lines to keep his star players away from a dominating defensemen. That the coaches are NOW playing their top lines against Lidstrom is another matter - shows that his skills are slowly fading.

Whether there are 30 true number one lines in the NHL is another issue altogether.

Regardless, the Canadiens are 4th in GA - despite losing Markov for most of the season and now Gorges, while the Red Wings are 18th in GA this season.The numbers are rather revealing

Lidström does indeed play primarily against the other teams' top lines as seen for instance by the quality of competition measure below. I find it extremely hard to believe it's because the other teams' coaches want it. As you can see there are several red wings on the top of the list. The reason is that Babcock more than other coaches try to get the matchups he wants. And that primarily means sending the Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Holmström line with the Lidström-Stuart pairing on defense out against the top opposition lines. I find it very unlikely that the opposition thinks this a weak unit defensively.

That being said, I think I've seen a couple of times that Lidström have made mistakes this season so I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest his defensive game is not what it used to be. But then again, he's 40.

|Player|Team|QUALCOMP
1|NICKLAS LIDSTROM|DET|0.191
2|DAVE BOLLAND|CHI|0.178
3|HENRIK ZETTERBERG|DET|0.156
4|BRENT SEABROOK|CHI|0.143
5|DAVID STECKEL|WSH|0.139
6|PAVEL DATSYUK|DET|0.138
7|PATRICK MARLEAU|S.J|0.134
8|DUNCAN KEITH|CHI|0.130
9|DANY HEATLEY|S.J|0.124
10|DAN BOYLE|S.J|0.111
11|TOMAS HOLMSTROM|DET|0.108
12|MATT HENDRICKS|WSH|0.108
13|BRAD STUART|DET|0.104
14|NICKLAS GROSSMAN|DAL|0.102
15|JONATHAN TOEWS|CHI|0.101
16|DOUGLAS MURRAY|S.J|0.097
17|JOE THORNTON|S.J|0.097
18|BRYAN BICKELL|CHI|0.096
19|STEPHANE ROBIDAS|DAL|0.095
20|NICKLAS BERGFORS|ATL|0.092
21|DEREK MORRIS|PHX|0.091
22|JORDAN EBERLE|EDM|0.088
23|JOSH GORGES|MTL|0.085
24|JASON GARRISON|FLA|0.083
25|ROMAN HAMRLIK|MTL|0.082
26|DAN GIRARDI|NYR|0.081
27|ZDENO CHARA|BOS|0.081
28|FERNANDO PISANI|CHI|0.081
29|PATRICK KANE|CHI|0.079
30|RICH PEVERLEY|ATL|0.075

(From behindthenet.ca)

As for the playoff argument made in this thread, it can be interesting to look at the +/- numbers a bit in context. I looked at the years 83-09 in the playoffs. During these years Bourque was a +5 whereas Lidström was +46. On the other hand, when Bourque wasn't on the ice his team was -23 whereas the wings was +76 without Lidström on the ice. I think one should be very careful before overanalyzing these numbers (for instance, Lidström probably had better teammates when he was off the ice etc) but they don't suggest that Bourque performed worse than Lidström in the playoffs.

 

[Reds4Life]

Which "detractors" didn't see Lidstrom play, but saw Bourque play? And what makes them sadder than the Lidstrom supporters who cry racism (of which there were many at the start of the thread before I put a stop to it)?

And it's not like it's an insult to Lidstrom to say that Bourque was better.

Seriously? What does racism have to do with anything? You clearly don't understand the meaning of the word. If anything, maybe a bias against Lidstrom was mentioned, certainly not racism. Especially since both Lidstrom and Bourque are caucasian.

Also, it's not an insult to Bourque to say that Lidstrom was better. I believe Lidstrom was the superior defensive defenseman, and the offensive edge Bourque has is not good enough to make up for that in my opinion.

 

[danincanada]

Which "detractors" didn't see Lidstrom play, but saw Bourque play? And what makes them sadder than the Lidstrom supporters who cry racism (of which there were many at the start of the thread before I put a stop to it)?

And it's not like it's an insult to Lidstrom to say that Bourque was better.

Do I need to name names? I was referring to Canadiens1958. His opinions could only come from someone who hasn't watched much of Lidstrom this season (or prior years for that matter). He's been grasping for negatives about Lidstrom that don't actually exist.

As far as the Canadian bias is concerned I believe it has been present at times, although I wouldn't call it racism. It's just a bias and some people like to believe only Canadians can be near the top of all-time lists in hockey. Placing Orr, Shore and Harvey at the top is silly to me since they basically played in an all-Canadian league 40+ years ago. That's just my opinion of course.

I never said it was an insult if someone believes Bourque was better. I just disagree and that's what we're discussing here.

 

[JackSlater]

Seriously? What does racism have to do with anything? You clearly don't understand the meaning of the word. If anything, maybe a bias against Lidstrom was mentioned, certainly not racism. Especially since both Lidstrom and Bourque are caucasian.

Also, it's not an insult to Bourque to say that Lidstrom was better. I believe Lidstrom was the superior defensive defenseman, and the offensive edge Bourque has is not good enough to make up for that in my opinion.

The problem is that whenever this discussion comes up, both in this thread earlier on and in most other threads regarding Lidstrom's historic place, many people who are on the "pro Lidstrom" just use ridiculous accusations of discrimination as a crutch to disregard anyone who disagrees with them. It does not matter than the vast majority of "pro Bourque" arguments are well thought out and completely reasonable, they are dismissed as prejudiced against Lidstrom because he is not from Canada.

To be honest I believe that Lidstrom is the player who benefits more from his nationality in this discussion, but really the vast majority of arguments for Lidstrom being the superior player are quite strong as well. Most of the especially biased people seem to be either fans of one of Detroit or Boston, or people who disregard previous eras and those who feel the need to defend those previous eras by putting down the current era. Ultimately the cries of prejudice against Lidstrom imply that there is not a reasonable argument for Bourque to be the equal or superior player, which is so ridiculous that I have trouble taking the arguments made by those posters seriously after the accusation has been made.

 

[Rhiessan71]

MOD: deleted.

Also, it's not an insult to Bourque to say that Lidstrom was better. I believe Lidstrom was the superior defensive defenseman, and the offensive edge Bourque has is not good enough to make up for that in my opinion.

I think the point Doc was making is that it's far more common on these boards for Lidstrom supporters to act insulted when someone places Bourque above him.
Not so much the other way around and most "perceived" negative comments towards Lidstrom only come as a result of having to defend Bourque from one bashing or another.

 

[Dark Shadows]

The. Hook. Had. Nothing. To. Do. With. My. Point, Clear?

That video of him getting caught *is* an example of how the Bruins reliance on him for offensive caused him to give up a bit of the defensive side of the game.

This is an example of what you have finally admitted.. "It worked almost all the time".

No one is saying it happened every time. No one is saying that Bourque was terrible defensively. You can proudly wear your Raymond Bourque t-shirt in public.

All I am saying is that Lidstrom, playing in a different team situation, does not have to take those risks and thus his defensive play on a risk vs. reward basis is pretty close to perfection.

How would they do in each other's shoes? Who can say for sure?

And I am saying, that clip is an extremely poor example of what you are trying to articulate. Bourque was fine until the hook.

We can go round and round on this and never agree.

People can continue to post clips of the rare times Bourque got beat, as well as that disrespectful thread someone made to post clips of Lidstrom getting beat. It does not change the fact that they were both phenomenal at what they did.

No, there isn't a vast difference if you're making a team strength argument. Either the teammates perform better or worse in either situation. Either they convert a larger percentage of those breakout passes into scoring opportunities or they don't.

Scoring and +/- are linked by definition for 3/4s of every game on average.

And I say there is a vast difference. A superstar forward(The elite kind I claim can score no matter who they are with) can gain the zone, hold the puck until a play develops, score or set up plays only an idiot can miss(See Mario Lemieux could make a fire Hydrant score 40 goals. Quote Luc Robitaille)

Whereas a defenseman making the breakout pass in his own zone is in a completely different situation, relying on the forwards he passes to to make the most out of his transition game and to gain the zone, set up the play, etc and relying on those same forwards to backcheck when the situation goes bad. +/- is far more of a team statistic than individual scoring. You need only be on the ice and might not have even touched the puck in a play and gotten a +1.

In any case, this thread has been 18 pages of an argument that has been done to death more than the Yzerman/Sakic threads and nothing but a glorified circle of repetitiveness. Consider me out of it.

 

[Hawkey Town 18]

Lidström does indeed play primarily against the other teams' top lines as seen for instance by the quality of competition measure below. I find it extremely hard to believe it's because the other teams' coaches want it. As you can see there are several red wings on the top of the list. The reason is that Babcock more than other coaches try to get the matchups he wants. And that primarily means sending the Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Holmström line with the Lidström-Stuart pairing on defense out against the top opposition lines. I find it very unlikely that the opposition thinks this a weak unit defensively.

That being said, I think I've seen a couple of times that Lidström have made mistakes this season so I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest his defensive game is not what it used to be. But then again, he's 40.

|Player|Team|QUALCOMP
1|NICKLAS LIDSTROM|DET|0.191
2|DAVE BOLLAND|CHI|0.178
3|HENRIK ZETTERBERG|DET|0.156
4|BRENT SEABROOK|CHI|0.143
5|DAVID STECKEL|WSH|0.139
6|PAVEL DATSYUK|DET|0.138
7|PATRICK MARLEAU|S.J|0.134
8|DUNCAN KEITH|CHI|0.130
9|DANY HEATLEY|S.J|0.124
10|DAN BOYLE|S.J|0.111
11|TOMAS HOLMSTROM|DET|0.108
12|MATT HENDRICKS|WSH|0.108
13|BRAD STUART|DET|0.104
14|NICKLAS GROSSMAN|DAL|0.102
15|JONATHAN TOEWS|CHI|0.101
16|DOUGLAS MURRAY|S.J|0.097
17|JOE THORNTON|S.J|0.097
18|BRYAN BICKELL|CHI|0.096
19|STEPHANE ROBIDAS|DAL|0.095
20|NICKLAS BERGFORS|ATL|0.092
21|DEREK MORRIS|PHX|0.091
22|JORDAN EBERLE|EDM|0.088
23|JOSH GORGES|MTL|0.085
24|JASON GARRISON|FLA|0.083
25|ROMAN HAMRLIK|MTL|0.082
26|DAN GIRARDI|NYR|0.081
27|ZDENO CHARA|BOS|0.081
28|FERNANDO PISANI|CHI|0.081
29|PATRICK KANE|CHI|0.079
30|RICH PEVERLEY|ATL|0.075

(From behindthenet.ca)

Babcock and Quennville are both coaches that have reputations of really trying hard to get the line matchups they want (and being good at it). The fact that this list is filled with Wings and Hawks near the top seems to support that.

(Sidenote: Also a lot of Sharks near the top. Does McLellan have that reputation as well? I have not heard it.)

 

[Steve Kournianos]

Anybody just catch Quiz on TSN?

The question was where does Lidstrom rank all time amongst defensemen:

Peca: Second behind Orr
Dreger: Third behind Orr and Harvey
Jones: Sixth, behind Orr, Harvey Shore Potvin and Bourque (in that order)

Interesting.

 

[jcbio11]

So they just discussed this on TSN panel (I guess it's TSN, not sure, well whichever channel has Rangers vs Leafs right now) during intermission. Question was where do you rank Lidstrom all-time (dmen).

Out of three guys, just one had Bourque ahead of Lidstrom. And that one also had Lidstrom as 6th...

Peca (I think it was him, again not sure) had him 2nd, behind Orr and the second guy had him 3rd behind Orr and Harvey.

Just thought it was interesting.

 

[TheDevilMadeMe]

Interesting. I would have loved to get the opinion of someone who played against both Bourque and Lidstrom in their primes, though. (Bourque was still very good but was definitely on his way down for most of the careers of Keith Jones and Mike Peca).

 

[danincanada]

People can continue to post clips of the rare times Bourque got beat, as well as that disrespectful thread someone made to post clips of Lidstrom getting beat. It does not change the fact that they were both phenomenal at what they did.

I didn't realize anyone thought that thread was disrespectful. I certainly didn't and I'm as big a Lidstrom fan as anyone. I assumed the OP was honestly asking for evidence of Nick getting "burned" in his prime because it was so rare.

 

[Canadiens1958]

Seminal Post and the Two Questions Raised

I didn't realize anyone thought that thread was disrespectful. I certainly didn't and I'm as big a Lidstrom fan as anyone. I assumed the OP was honestly asking for evidence of Nick getting "burned" in his prime because it was so rare.

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=864660

Do not see anyone asking for evidence about Lidstrom being "burned" in the seminal post.

Another poster started a prime Lidstrom getting burned type thread previously.

Mod: deleted.

 

[JackSlater]

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=864660

Do not see anyone asking for evidence about Lidstrom being "burned" in the seminal post.

Another poster started a prime Lidstrom getting burned type thread previously.

He was actually refering to that prime Lidstrom getting burned type thread, not the first post in this thread...

 

[Gobias Industries]

So they just discussed this on TSN panel (I guess it's TSN, not sure, well whichever channel has Rangers vs Leafs right now) during intermission. Question was where do you rank Lidstrom all-time (dmen).

Out of three guys, just one had Bourque ahead of Lidstrom. And that one also had Lidstrom as 6th...

Peca (I think it was him, again not sure) had him 2nd, behind Orr and the second guy had him 3rd behind Orr and Harvey.

Just thought it was interesting.

I would love to have heard more reasoning, it would be interesting to hear the "pros" weigh-in on the discussion..

For me, I still can't get past Bourque's All-Star Team record...he was either top-2 or top-4 in the NHL in his position for eighteen years...

That type of (insane) sustained dominance is something that Bourque clearly has over Lidstrom IMO...

 

[overpass]

Lidström does indeed play primarily against the other teams' top lines as seen for instance by the quality of competition measure below. I find it extremely hard to believe it's because the other teams' coaches want it. As you can see there are several red wings on the top of the list. The reason is that Babcock more than other coaches try to get the matchups he wants. And that primarily means sending the Zetterberg-Datsyuk-Holmström line with the Lidström-Stuart pairing on defense out against the top opposition lines. I find it very unlikely that the opposition thinks this a weak unit defensively.

That being said, I think I've seen a couple of times that Lidström have made mistakes this season so I don't think it's unreasonable to suggest his defensive game is not what it used to be. But then again, he's 40.

|Player|Team|QUALCOMP
1|NICKLAS LIDSTROM|DET|0.191
2|DAVE BOLLAND|CHI|0.178
3|HENRIK ZETTERBERG|DET|0.156
4|BRENT SEABROOK|CHI|0.143
5|DAVID STECKEL|WSH|0.139
6|PAVEL DATSYUK|DET|0.138
7|PATRICK MARLEAU|S.J|0.134
8|DUNCAN KEITH|CHI|0.130
9|DANY HEATLEY|S.J|0.124
10|DAN BOYLE|S.J|0.111
11|TOMAS HOLMSTROM|DET|0.108
12|MATT HENDRICKS|WSH|0.108
13|BRAD STUART|DET|0.104
14|NICKLAS GROSSMAN|DAL|0.102
15|JONATHAN TOEWS|CHI|0.101
16|DOUGLAS MURRAY|S.J|0.097
17|JOE THORNTON|S.J|0.097
18|BRYAN BICKELL|CHI|0.096
19|STEPHANE ROBIDAS|DAL|0.095
20|NICKLAS BERGFORS|ATL|0.092
21|DEREK MORRIS|PHX|0.091
22|JORDAN EBERLE|EDM|0.088
23|JOSH GORGES|MTL|0.085
24|JASON GARRISON|FLA|0.083
25|ROMAN HAMRLIK|MTL|0.082
26|DAN GIRARDI|NYR|0.081
27|ZDENO CHARA|BOS|0.081
28|FERNANDO PISANI|CHI|0.081
29|PATRICK KANE|CHI|0.079
30|RICH PEVERLEY|ATL|0.075

(From behindthenet.ca)

If we're posting numbers from behindthenet.ca, here are Lidstrom's Corsi numbers for the last four seasons.

(Corsi is the shot differential per 60 minutes when a player is on the ice, counting all shots directed at net. It's an indicator of puck possession and, because of the much larger numbers involved, less subject to random variation or isolated mistakes by teammates than plus-minus).

2007-08: +20.0
2008-09: +18.1
2009-10: +15.6
2010-11: +3.6

And his Corsi number relative to his teammates (Corsi ON - Corsi OFF):

2007-08: +4.4
2008-09: +4.4
2009-10: +10.6
2010-11: -5.9

In an absolute sense, these numbers underrate Lidstrom because of the high quality of competition he has faced. I agree that Lidstrom has not been a liability at even strength in any way, his coach still relies upon him heavily in a defensive role. But the trend is clear: Lidstrom isn't driving puck possession and scoring chances this season as he has in previous season. His -3 is not entirely unearned.

That doesn't take away from what he has accomplished in previous seasons, of course, and he is still one of the best defencemen in the league. But if he wins the Norris trophy this season, it will be because there is a historically weak field of candidates. When Bourque was 40, he finished second to Nicklas Lidstrom in his prime, who was playing 29 minutes a game. There are no great defencemen in their primes right now.

 

[Budddy]

Anybody just catch Quiz on TSN?

The question was where does Lidstrom rank all time amongst defensemen:

Peca: Second behind Orr
Dreger: Third behind Orr and Harvey
Jones: Sixth, behind Orr, Harvey Shore Potvin and Bourque (in that order)

Interesting.

clearly bias against canadians...

TSN has always been a huge supporter of Lidstrom...thats why I always laughed at the Lidstrom supporters saying supporting Bourque means a Canadian bias...

the whole point of this thread says it all...what does Lidstrom have to do to be considered better than Bourque? that statement alone indicates general opinion is that Bourque was better...jeez...lets close this thread...same arguments over and over...

 

[jkrx]

Which "detractors" didn't see Lidstrom play, but saw Bourque play? And what makes them sadder than the Lidstrom supporters who cry racism (of which there were many at the start of the thread before I put a stop to it)?

And it's not like it's an insult to Lidstrom to say that Bourque was better.

You obviously have no idea of what racism is.

 

[jcbio11]

I don't think anyone is really (knowingly) accusing anyone else of racism in this thread.
I'd call it being biased based on your nationality, which is a perfectly normal thing. So I don't know why it's so hard for some canadiens to admit that they might prefer Bourque over Lidstrom because he is their fellow countryman. Or at least that the fact that he is canadien is the tiebreaker for them.

I'll be the first to admit, that anytime there is a discussion about any Slovak's claim for Hall of Fame, whether it is Bondra, Chara or Hossa, I am biased.

 

[Infinite Vision*]

I don't think anyone is really (knowingly) accusing anyone else of racism in this thread.
I'd call it being biased based on your nationality, which is a perfectly normal thing. So I don't know why it's so hard for some canadiens to admit that they might prefer Bourque over Lidstrom because he is their fellow countryman. Or at least that the fact that he is canadien is the tiebreaker for them.

I'll be the first to admit, that anytime there is a discussion about any Slovak's claim for Hall of Fame, whether it is Bondra, Chara or Hossa, I am biased.

I don't really think that applies to anyone here. The way I see it is Bourque has had a better prime, and better longevity so far.

I've seen more Canadian's who prefer Lidstrom than the other way around.

 

[Gobias Industries]

I don't really think that applies to anyone here. The way I see it is Bourque has had a better prime, and better longevity so far.

I've seen more Canadian's who prefer Lidstrom than the other way around.

My issue with this whole "bias" debate is it's potential for being used as a catch-all for any Canadian who prefers Bourque, despite absolutely no evidence to support the claim..

I watched both play, I prefer Bourque...many have stated reasons, I have my own, and none of it has anything to do with nationality..

One of my favourite players ever is Forsberg, I love David Krecji with the passion of a thousand suicide bombers, I'm quite sure that where a player was born has no bearing on my ranking of them...

 

[Canadiens1958]

Bias

The claims of NA bias are rather interesting.

Consider the Kharlamov Trophy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kharlamov_Trophy.

The Viking Award:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viking_Award

actually the Viking Award is a classic because if you are a Viking Award counter then players like Markus Naslund, Mats Sundin, Peter Forsberg should be ranked higher than Nicklas Lidstrom.

NA voters recognize Lidstrom's talents by awarding him significantly more Norris Trophy honours and other honours than the Swedes have YET at the slightest hint of a negative critical comment supported by data about Nicklas Lidstrom the NA bias chorus chimes in. Conveniently ignoring that North Americans have no say in the Viking and have praised Nicklas Lidstrom significantly more than the Swedes.

 

[HangFromRafts]

Babcock and Quennville are both coaches that have reputations of really trying hard to get the line matchups they want (and being good at it). The fact that this list is filled with Wings and Hawks near the top seems to support that.

(Sidenote: Also a lot of Sharks near the top. Does McLellan have that reputation as well? I have not heard it.)

Perhaps slightly off topic...
Re McLellan, he comes from the Babcock camp as he played the role of assistant coach in Detroit for a number of years before getting his spot in SJ. I believe he is quite open in that his coaching strategy is similar to Babcock's (puck possession). I don't think there is a direct quote but tough not to imagine that he pursues the match up game ala Babcock