Some clown claims Lidstrom better than Orr?

[quoipourquoi]

I stopped reading when I saw #5 - Paul Coffey. This is a guy who had to be introduced to his goalie at the end of the game.

Don't get me wrong, fantastic skater and offensive player, but quite suspect on the defensive side.

Absolute shit defenseman... but I still think he's one of the best players of the past few decades. Offensively, I can't name too many guys outside of Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jagr that were better in his time.

Seriously, people are still sucking Yzerman's cock for 155 points, while Coffey had 138 in his day, and he had to skate 20 extra feet for each one. :p

 

[KennyBanyeah]

I don't think Scott Mellanby and Pavel Bure is a good comparison. One is a likely Hall of Famer and one has no shot at the Hall. Lidstrom and Orr are both HOFers.

I think JulianSteed has a good point in that if you said to a GM would you rather have a top 3 D-man who will play for 9 years or a Top 10 D-man who will play for two decades, you'd have a hard choice to make.

I never saw Orr play, so I really can't have an opinion. I think trying to compare guys across different eras is always very difficult and people tend to associate a certain mythology to the legends of old. Maybe Orr was greater easily, but he never had to face the speed and skill of players today and the best of Europe/Russia like Lidstrom has. In the end, it's impossible to know, but I thin Steed has a good point.

I agree that the Mellanby - Bure comparison doesn't work, but I've got one for you.

Mike Gartner vs. Mike Bossy.

I'd say that Bossy was the better player by leaps and bounds. By the author's logic, however, Gartner would be ahead of Bossy on a list of all-time snipers. Doesn't fly.

Lidstrom is a top 5 all-time D-man on anyone who knows anything about hockey's all-time list, but he has never had ONE SINGLE SEASON where he compared to Orr's FIVE best seasons. Peak performance carries a lot of weight, IMO.

Lidstrom should not have won the Norris this year over Weber. He should not be considered a better player than Bobby Orr.

 

[quoipourquoi]

Lidstrom is a top 5 all-time D-man on anyone who knows anything about hockey's all-time list

 

[Eddie_Shack]

Didn't read the article, didn't read the thread, and I'm a huge kool-aid drinking Nick homer. But no, just no. Top five? Yes. Top three? Arguably. Second greatest of all time? Possibly, arguably, maybe, depending on who you ask. But no one was/is greater than Orr.

 

[Eddie_Shack]

Absolute shit defenseman... but I still think he's one of the best players of the past few decades. Offensively, I can't name too many guys outside of Gretzky, Lemieux, and Jagr that were better in his time.

Seriously, people are still sucking Yzerman's cock for 155 points, while Coffey had 138 in his day, and he had to skate 20 extra feet for each one. :p

The only reason Coffey ever had to skate an extra 20 feet is if he started behind the opposing goalie's net and had to double back...

 

[KennyBanyeah]

Personally I'd take Orr and Bourque over Lidstrom. I never saw Harvey play. Potvin I'd take over Lidstrom one day and vice versa the next.

Other than those four Lidstrom is clearly a step above every one else.

 

[Automattic]

I still don't think Lidstrom should have won the Norris THIS year. I'm sorry, but -2 is -2, no matter how you want to slice it.

Thank god he played the Bruins twice. That +5 in two games makes it look waaaay better.

 

[sabresfaninthesouth]

I think longevity is only a valid thing to consider if it's related to peak performance. Not when it's the result of injuries.

Had Orr played like he did for as long as he did but then played another 10 mediocre seasons, it would be a valid comparison.

But when the injury problems set in at the height of his game (OK, maybe one could argue that the '74-'75 season was only his 2nd or 3rd best ever), it's not really valid.

And the guy won 8 consecutive Norris Trophies. How can you argue with that?