What makes Erik Karlsson inferior to Niklas Lidstrom?

[bottomofthefoodchain]

Remember how good Karlsson was at the Olympics 2014? Lidström was that good for 10 seasons. His constistency is unmatched.

 

[Agent Zub]

From 1996-2011, Lidstrom had the 11th most points amongst all players. His 0.77 points per game average was the highest amongst Dmen.

So it's not Bergeron vs Crosby. It's more like Crosby with Bergeron's defensive play vs Crosby.

Where does his ppg rank? What were his league scoring finishes? How many times did he lead his team in scoring? Did he ever lead the league in assists?

0.77 pace is still impressive but the 11th most points is because he was so damn consistent and injury free.

Crosby is a better offensive player than Lidstrom. So what?

 

[Semantics]

Karlsson has never been elite defensively like Lidstrom was. He's basically like a better version of Phil Housley.

 

[NoMessi]

I've watched Lidstrom plenty. The difference in both players defensively isn't as big as you think. And Lidstrom wasn't exactly mistake-free in his 20s. He did have the benefit of a stacked roster...something Erik hasn't had.

No, you obviously haven't. Its like comparing Ovechkins goalscoring with Grabners. Sure Grabner can go hot for a small strech and give the false impression that he is an elite goalscorer, but they are MIIIIIIIILES apart.

And yes, I compare Lidstroms defense with Ovechkins goalscoring and Karlssons defense with Grabners goalscoring.

 

[NoMessi]

People who think its close are:

1. Too young to have seen Lidstrom play.
2. Stupid/Trolls
3. Havent played, or havent understood the stick work, positioning and ice awareness that made Lidstrom great.

 

[NoMessi]

If anything he should have one less.

I think he deserved his last one, but I know many thought it was close and favored Weber. (But people, hes not much different today, and look how "great" he is in Montreal).

Still should have had a couple in the late 90s and the beginning of this century, along with maybe a Norris in the lockout season (although, it wasnt a slam dunk considering his play the season before the lockout)

 

[Bustedprospect]

How many points would Karlsson have to put up to compensate for the defensive handicap he clearly has to Lidstrom? It's well over 100 points considering Lidstrom was good for 80 points. They are both amazing players but Lidstrom didn't have risk in his game.

A true #1 is one of the hardest commodities to find in hockey. They also get more valuable the longer you get in the season and playoffs. Nick and Ray simply chewed more minutes when needed as well. Players like this are worth more in the cap-era since they can play with scrubs as their pairing.

Regarding points Nick would have no trouble putting upp 75-80 points in this league. Hell a aging and washed up Nick put up 62 points which less icetime way post his best days. Ray are good for more probably atleast 85 points. Karlsson is good but the difference are not huge at all. He wouldnt stand much of a chance. Karlsson will end up as top10 d-men but he is closer to Coffey than Orr, Harvey, Ray/Nick in my opinon.

Remember how good Karlsson was at the Olympics 2014? Lidström was that good for 10 seasons. His constistency is unmatched.

He didnt achieve much when it mattered. Karlsson has never won anything in his career. Lidstrom scored the goal a whole generation had waited for. You could pair Nick with anyone Jonsson from allsvenskan was an allstar that tourney. And you are 100% Nick did this for a long time.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I've watched Lidstrom plenty. The difference in both players defensively isn't as big as you think. And Lidstrom wasn't exactly mistake-free in his 20s. He did have the benefit of a stacked roster...something Erik hasn't had.

The stacked roster excuse doesn't fly anymore.....Lidstroms defensive game is among the best of all time. EK isn't close to that...stacked or non stacked roster doesn't change that.

Anyone who actually watched him play saw how well rounded and almost perfect his game was. He was consistent AND dominant.

You clearly don't understand (or haven't watched?) Karlsson game. The better he plays defensively, the more dangerous he is offensively.

I would love for one time to not hear that ridiculous excuse as to why someone doesn't agree with outlandish statements.

Saying "You clearly don't watch EK because you don't agree with me." Is hardly a great response and it won't get anyone to take you seriously. I've watched him play plenty and I've seen greatly improve defensively. But this sudden improvement doesn't put him anywhere near the top all time....you know, where Lidstrom has cemented himself.

EK is almost a PPG player with decent defensive game, you really think a 100 point EK would be better defensively? No.

No one said he isn't good defensively, he's just not on Lidstroms level....why that seems to offend people is beyond me. It always seems to be about trying to prove a faulty point, and following it up with. "I know more than you because I'm an EK fan."

 

[GreatGonzo]

The game is extremely different from when Orr played. It was a crude version of hockey with no systems, goalies that you could beat clean, and players who couldn't skate compared to today.

If a player as good as Orr (the best of all time) played today, he wouldn't be regarded as well as Orr even though he is the same because you just can't dominate based on pure skill like you could in the 70s/80s. The game has changed too much.

Orr is a generational player. Any era you would put him in, he would dominate. That's why he was seen as the greatest of all time, not the greatest of the 70s.

 

[DFC]

I've watched Lidstrom plenty. The difference in both players defensively isn't as big as you think. And Lidstrom wasn't exactly mistake-free in his 20s. He did have the benefit of a stacked roster...something Erik hasn't had.

Your third sentence proves your first one isn't true.

 

[Agent Zub]

The stacked roster excuse doesn't fly anymore.....Lidstroms defensive game is among the best of all time. EK isn't close to that...stacked or non stacked roster doesn't change that.

Anyone who actually watched him play saw how well rounded and almost perfect his game was. He was consistent AND dominant.

I would love for one time to not hear that ridiculous excuse as to why someone doesn't agree with outlandish statements.

Saying "You clearly don't watch EK because you don't agree with me." Is hardly a great response and it won't get anyone to take you seriously. I've watched him play plenty and I've seen greatly improve defensively. But this sudden improvement doesn't put him anywhere near the top all time....you know, where Lidstrom has cemented himself.

EK is almost a PPG player with decent defensive game, you really think a 100 point EK would be better defensively? No.

No one said he isn't good defensively, he's just not on Lidstroms level....why that seems to offend people is beyond me. It always seems to be about trying to prove a faulty point, and following it up with. "I know more than you because I'm an EK fan."

Lol I never said that Karlsson was a better defensive player than Lidstrom. So I don't know why you are getting offended about that.

What you don't seem to understand is that Karlsson is going to have better offensive numbers the better he plays defensively. His biggest advantage over the field is that he is the best player in the league at turning defence into offense.

If you have watched him, you simply don't understand karlssons game.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Lol I never said that Karlsson was a better defensive player than Lidstrom. So I don't know why you are getting offended about that.

What you don't seem to understand is that Karlsson is going to have better offensive numbers the better he plays defensively. His biggest advantage over the field is that he is the best player in the league at turning defence into offense.

If you have watched him, you simply don't understand karlssons game.

You clearly said you would take a 100 point EK over a 60 point Lidstrom based on this idea that EKs defense would be greater with more offense.....

Soo....

 

[Agent Zub]

You clearly said you would take a 100 point EK over a 60 point Lidstrom based on this idea that EKs defense would be greater with more offense.....

Soo....

I said that Karlsson putting up points doesn't come at the cost of his defensive game. In fact it's the opposite, he is a more dangerous offensive player when he is playing elite level defense.

 

[GreatGonzo]

I said that Karlsson putting up points doesn't come at the cost of his defensive game. In fact it's the opposite, he is a more dangerous offensive player when he is playing elite level defense.

Really? His best season with 82 points in 82 games, he was hardly one of the top defensive defensemen and not close to Lidstrom. Your saying, adding 18 more points and his defense would actually get better....how does that make sense?

EK shows some level of elite defense but it's not consistent and it's still relatively new.

You can't just assume he would be a 100 point Defenseman with elite defense when he hardly had elite defense at 82 points.

Lidstroms well rounded game has already been solidified as valuable to both a team and to himself as an individual. The gap between the two defensively would not be made up for with more offense.

 

[Claypool]

"Norris defensive play"

 

[Agent Zub]

Really? His best season with 82 points in 82 games, he was hardly one of the top defensive defensemen and not close to Lidstrom. Your saying, adding 18 more points and his defense would actually get better....how does that make sense?

EK shows some level of elite defense but it's not consistent and it's still relatively new.

You can't just assume he would be a 100 point Defenseman with elite defense when he hardly had elite defense at 82 points.

Lidstroms well rounded game has already been solidified as valuable to both a team and to himself as an individual. The gap between the two defensively would not be made up for with more offense.

Karlsson is always flirting with PPG so I don't really think a few points difference mean that much.

And it's because when Karlsson plays elite defence he has the puck more, he is driving possession more, and his team is spending more time in the other zone.

What we needs is Karlsson to stop injuring his feet. He has come back slow each time, and it seems when he gets into peak form he suffers another serious injury.

 

[GreatGonzo]

Karlsson is always flirting with PPG so I don't really think a few points difference mean that much.

And it's because when Karlsson plays elite defence he has the puck more, he is driving possession more, and his team is spending more time in the other zone.

What we needs is Karlsson to stop injuring his feet. He has come back slow each time, and it seems when he gets into peak form he suffers another serious injury.

Exactly, he's always flirting with a PPG, while playing non elite defense...and it's not just a few....it's 20-30 points....and your saying if he achieved that, he would be better defensively.

That's not elite defense, that's more of his great offensive abilities. If defense was measured by how much you have the puck, then Gretzky is the greatest defensive forward of all time.

EKs offense seems to blind people to how much he actually lacks defensively. And it isn't black and white, he isn't bad defensively, but when comparing to Lidstrom, people will always point to EKs offense to make a point. Defensively, they aren't close....at all.

 

[Rabid Ranger]

I wish this propaganda that he's great in his own zone would just stop. He's not. He's "better'" than he used to be but is merely average in that regard. He reminds me so much of my all-time favorite player-Brian Leetch. Great puck-mover, skater, passer, and all-around offensive architect but just okay in his own zone. He'd get involved, lift the odd stick here and there, etc. but nothing more. EK is very much in the same mold.

 

[Agent Zub]

Exactly, he's always flirting with a PPG, while playing non elite defense...and it's not just a few....it's 20-30 points....and your saying if he achieved that, he would be better defensively.

That's not elite defense, that's more of his great offensive abilities. If defense was measured by how much you have the puck, then Gretzky is the greatest defensive forward of all time.

EKs offense seems to blind people to how much he actually lacks defensively. And it isn't black and white, he isn't bad defensively, but when comparing to Lidstrom, people will always point to EKs offense to make a point. Defensively, they aren't close....at all.

He is ppg when he is playing elite defence as well. he's just a really consistent offensive player.

I think the issue with EK is that he is an inconsistent defensive player.

He's gonna have a stretch where he will be a human eraser on defence and the proponents will use that as evidence. but he can also have a stretch where it seems like the focus isnt there, and the detractors will use that as evidence.

It's of my opinion that if Karlsson strings some healthy seasons and plays on a true contender where he doesn't have to be the defensive and offensive player every game. The inconsistencies in his defensive game would vanish.

 

[Sentinel]

Where does his ppg rank? What were his league scoring finishes? How many times did he lead his team in scoring? Did he ever lead the league in assists?

0.77 pace is still impressive but the 11th most points is because he was so damn consistent and

On a team with Yzerman, Fedorov, and Shanahan, Karlsson would lead his team in points exactly zero times.

 

[BM14]

People who think its close are:

1. Too young to have seen Lidstrom play.
2. Stupid/Trolls
3. Havent played, or havent understood the stick work, positioning and ice awareness that made Lidstrom great.

Well done.

 

[PenguinSpeed]

Interesting thread idea. Both are great players and 2 of the best defense men ever.

-The Pens have played against both of them in the playoffs, a long with Ray Bourque from Boston and Chris Chelios from Chicago, and beat all 4 at one point or another.

-I still hated playing against Scott Stevens from NJ the most, the nastiest hitter in NHL history, by far the most. Although all are great players.

 

[GreatGonzo]

He is ppg when he is playing elite defence as well. he's just a really consistent offensive player.

I think the issue with EK is that he is an inconsistent defensive player.

He's gonna have a stretch where he will be a human eraser on defence and the proponents will use that as evidence. but he can also have a stretch where it seems like the focus isnt there, and the detractors will use that as evidence.

It's of my opinion that if Karlsson strings some healthy seasons and plays on a true contender where he doesn't have to be the defensive and offensive player every game. The inconsistencies in his defensive game would vanish.

Maybe in stretches, but not as a whole. His offense is his go to and what makes him a distinguished Defenseman....just because he has amazing high level offense for a Defenseman doesn't mean that being "ok" defensively is suddenly warranted to compare him to Lidstrom.

That's all I'm saying. I know your not saying that, but your logic is 100 vs 60 and thinking the more offense, means the better defensively he will be is confusing.

 

[ozzie]

Wings fans were lucky enough to have such a great player like Lidstrom, he adapted and altered his offensive game as needed for the Wings. He was so stable and his hockey IQ was elite, he was a rock and played almost error free on most nights. Lidstrom was the modern day Bourque, Karlsson is the modern day Coffey, maybe? Coffey was never this well balanced.

However, I think people are missing the point. Karlsson no matter how you view his defensive play, controls the game and helps his team in his own way, at least to the same level as Lidstrom; if not more. Karlsson is a gem and like I said, impacts the game far greater than most players. As a long time Wings fan, I can say Lidstrom had a lot more to work with and played for some pretty good coaches and players. I would love to have seen what a prime Karlsson would have done with the Wings.

There is definitely a gap defensively between the two, but Karlsson more than makes up for it, or at least he did pre-injuries. To me it is all about impact and Karlsson brings that in spades. Karlsson should probably have at least another Norris. Part of me hopes he leaves Ottawa and plays for a cap team and not a budget team.

We all sit here debating, but people should appreciate EK, because he is simply amazing and his defensive play has improved, look at last years playoffs, injuries and all. One of the all-time greats, or at least well on his way.

I hesitate to use the word generational, so I will just go with Legendary.

 

[OmniSens]

A solid pairing partner(s).