Bob McKenzie and Scotty Bowman both saw their entire careers too and I think more of their opinions than yours and they seem to pick Lidstrom over Bourque.
Scotty Bowman also seems to think Larry Robinson is the next best in Longevity after Lidstrom among defensemen(Which is just plain wrong). Clearly he thinks highly of players he has coached.
No one has addressed the fact that Bourque was a +528 in his career during the season and only +5 in his career during the playoffs. +/- isn't everything but those numbers kind of stand out to me.
+/- is highly irrelevant unless taken in context with the team you have on the ice with you. The other 5 players matter just as much to +/-. Lidstrom's +/- was certainly not hurt by having several of the best offensively + defensively gifted two way Selke players in the league on the ice with him at almost all times.
Lidstrom was better come playoff time and won a Conn Smythe, won more Norris', and most seem to agree he was better defensively. He also faced the best of the best his entire career while Bourque didn't start facing Russians until half way through his career.
I would say they were close to equal in performance come playoff time. Lidstrom certainly has a better resume, but Bourque was excellent in the playoffs and was certainly the leading Candidate for the Conn Smythe in both Bruins trips to the finals where his team had the misfortune to face the Dynasty Oilers. Particularly in the 1990 finals.
Bourque was tallied a goal or assist on 5 of Boston's 8 goals(1PP, 4 ES) in the entire series and made another goal happen with his legendary outlet pass, although he was not credited with an assist. Pretty horrendous offense from the Bruins outside of Captain Ray Bourque. Neely and Janney both held goalless for the series. When your top line scorers are being held off the sheet and the opposing team is scoring at will when you are on the bench, no matter who you are, you cannot force a win.
A grand total of 5 ES points while Bourque was on the ice, and yet despite the fact that the Oilers outscored the Bruins 20-8 in the series, 17-7 at ES, Bourque was only -1, despite playing 30+ minutes a game. As another member already said, the majority of the time when a series is going this lopsided, the guy who logs the most icetime against the opposing teams top forwards almost always has the worse +/-. In this case, it proves he was stellar defensively, and that while he was on the ice was virtually the only time his team was scoring and keeping pucks out of the net. All of the while, the Oilers primary strategy was to shut down Bourque above all other players.
His other performances were equally stunning. Particularly in his team carrying 1987-88 playoff performance(Once again running into the Dynasty Oilers),
Or in the 91 Conference finals, in which he was amazing. 2 games up on the Penguins, and then several problems struck the team at once. First being obviously Neely getting kneed by Samuelsson and thus making him ineffectual for the rest of the series(Losing a guy who has a goal per game on a team with low scoring depth hurts). Second, the fact that several members of the team caught the flu, including Moog. Third, losing Poulin to a groin pull(best forward Pker). Fourth. Stupid Coaching. Milbury decided to insert 3 goons into the lineup to get even, and in doing so, the bruins gameplan was shattered.
Bourque was a phenomenal, Conn Smythe Caliber playoff performer (Many many times)who had the misfortune to be on a far weaker, worse coached team that lacked depth. Lidstrom is a phenomenal Conn Smythe worthy player who had the fortune of playing on a team loaded with Hall of famers, Selke winners and extreme Depth, coached by some of the greatest of all time. His playoff resume may look better for it, but make no mistake at how invaluable Bourque was to the Bruins.
---------------------------------------------------
Ahh, the simple Norris counting begins again. He won more Norris trophies due to weaker competition at the position. Simple as that. For all the times people harp on how Lidstrom was robbed of a trophy here and there, there are an equal amount of times(if not more) one could say the same of Bourque getting a strange decision.
Take one of Lidstrom's best seasons and transplant it to 1983-84. At this point, the voters were voting a purely defensive genius with next to no offense to the Norris in Rod Langway, and giving the runner up to a purely offensive wizard in Paul Coffey(Although Bourque edged Coffey in All star nomination). I do not see Lidstrom in any season he ever had winning on this year. Just a few years ago, many were losing their minds over Green placing higher in voting than Lidstrom because they felt that all around play was more important.
We all know about the 1990 Fiasco where Bourque was left off 6 Ballots for the Hart. Him and Messier tied in 1st place votes for the Hart, Bourque had more second place votes. But those 6 voters who left him off even the third place vote cost him the Hart.
Or look at 1992-93, a year in which Bourque placed runner up to Chelios, despite scoring 9 more points in 6 less games and Chelios had nearly 300 minutes of Penalties(And since you like the stat, a far better +/-).
Or another Chelios Norris win in 1995-96, in which Bourque actually had more 1st place Norris votes, but lost by a teeny margin due to a few less later votes. Mind you, I think Chelios played phenomenally and deserved his Norris trophy over Bourque this season. But it shows just how close the vote was. thinking of how Chelios came extremely close to the Norris over Lidstrom in 01-02 while being less of a player than he used to be. Well, that speaks volumes.
----------------------------------
Regarding who was better defensively? Yes most would give the edge to Lidstrom. But it is
Razor close. Bourque was a wizard defensively and very close to Lidstrom in that regard. Closer than the offensive Edge Bourque possesses. A defenseman who holds the record for most times leading a team in scoring mind you. Something Lidstrom has never ever done.
-------------------
The last is irrelevant. Even After the Russians and several other countries started a stronger presence in the NHL, Bourque was still at the top of the defenseman list. His decline in top 3 Norris voting at age 37 had more to do with the absolutely terrible team around him than any other factor. Losing teams do not often get Candidates for trophies. Most telling was his sudden jump back to Norris runner up in his final season once he was on a team as good as Lidstrom's, despite Bourque being less of a player then as he was in his prime.
)
